​Technology Contributor Content

To say that artificial intelligence (AI) has become vital to business workflows might be an understatement. Many companies today rely on AI to create marketing copy, draft emails, create reports, and more, taking advantage of its speed and efficiency. Given the degree to which businesses lean on AI, the question lingers: Can AI truly grasp the nuances of communication?

Elizabeth “Liz” Danziger, founder and president of Worktalk Communications Consulting, argues that AI hasn’t completely solved businesses’ writing problems. Yes, it’s undeniable that this technology excels at surface-level tasks such as proofreading or generating ideas. However, it can’t replicate human intuition or strategic thinking. Acknowledging this, she applies her framework called “The Three P’s” to help professionals improve their business communication.

Statistics reveal how AI adoption in business communication is accelerating. Approximately 70% of companies are using or experimenting with AI for primary use cases such as customer communication. Many use ChatGPT or Jasper AI to produce output rapidly at reduced costs. The benefits are vast; this is why Liz believes businesses can leverage AI as a tool. However, she emphasizes that individuals must continue developing skills that AI can’t replicate. If they don’t, organizations are likely to struggle when competing against businesses that continue to develop their human edge.

Liz can attest to this, as she has helped numerous businesses and professional service firms improve their written communication. After pursuing a bachelor’s degree in Philosophy from Pomona College in Claremont, California, she started her career as a freelance writer. She later attended UCLA’s Anderson School of business. Now, Liz is a highly acclaimed author of four books, including Get to the Point!, a business writing guide originally published by Random House. In addition, she serves as a columnist for Inc.com. Her articles have also appeared in Harvard Business Review.

This extensive writing experience differentiates Liz from others in the field, who mostly have a background in organizational development. Moreover, it has given her an all-encompassing perspective on the challenges of written communication. Through a unique lens, she assists clients in increasing their productivity, building their brand, and boosting their sales.

Nearly forty years of being a communication expert has enabled Liz to identify three essential writing tasks that AI can’t perform. First, AI can’t determine the intentions behind a document. AI is a tool: it needs a human to set it on its course. That means that even companies that rely on AI need staff members who are skilled communicators. Liz stresses that writing begins with understanding the purpose of your communication. What a piece of writing is for, what it’s meant to accomplish, is something only a human being can choose.

Secondly, although AI can mimic styles, it produces writing that feels unnatural. “AI will never give you a consistent, authentic voice, at least for now,” Liz emphasizes. This can damage customer relationships. Lastly, AI can’t predict objections and comprehend context. “Writing is more than just stringing words together,” she says. “It’s the thought and strategy behind a text that makes writing effective.”

Liz developed the Three P’s framework (Purpose, Person, and Point) to help individuals fill the gaps AI can’t. Purpose reflects the intention of the message. It guides the writing process toward a specific objective. In business documents, the goal is usually to inform, request, or persuade.

The founder encourages writers to begin with the end in mind, inspired by the second habit author Stephen Covey discussed in his book, The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. She urges them to ask themselves: “What should the reader do after reading this? Is the document intended to prompt action or simply provide information?”

Person pertains to understanding the audience. Liz believes that a writer must comprehend the audience’s needs, questions, and emotional triggers to communicate effectively. This means tailoring language to the reader’s expertise level and interests. For example, it’s best to use technical terms when addressing a chief technology officer. When talking to a chief executive officer, however, using words that focus on outcomes might work better.

Point, the third aspect, is the essential message the document conveys. The audience may struggle to understand the writer’s intent without it. Liz shares an analogy: “If the Purpose sets the direction and the target is the Person, the Point is the arrow itself.”

Overall, effective communication hinges on authenticity. Writers who communicate with sincerity and purpose build stronger connections with their audience. “Authenticity is what creates trust between the writer and the reader. Now that we live in an age where AI-generated content risks breaking this trust, authenticity is what gives businesses a competitive advantage,” Liz remarks.

AI-generated content might appear adequate at first. It’s fluent and functional, after all. “But it doesn’t make a business win,” says Liz. She argues that allowing AI to fully take over writing tasks can normalize mediocrity.

Liz frequently hears from business leaders who trust their AI tools to handle communication tasks because they’re confident that their language models (LMs) are well-trained. She warns that overly relying on AI can dilute a company’s brand and damage its credibility—a valid claim, given that AI tends to create generic, impersonal communication that doesn’t resonate with customers and stakeholders.

Poor writing costs businesses nearly $400 billion annually. What are the repercussions? Unclear internal communication leads to employee disengagement and turnover. It also affects productivity, sales, and relationships. A single customer service email that lacks clarity and empathy can drive customers away. In high-risk industries like transportation or healthcare, vague instructions can lead to accidents and liability issues.

“AI can be a helpful intermediate step, especially for those who have limited writing skills, but it should never be the final word,” Liz notes. The expert shares an instance when she trained a company’s customer service team and reviewed their writing samples. A customer reported receiving the wrong merchandise, and instead of addressing the problem empathetically, the representative responded with a terse email containing only a new order number. In this instance, AI might have generated a more polished response. But only a human’s oversight could ensure that the tone was appropriate.

Danziger established Worktalk to help businesses improve their written communication. The company offers customized training programs, webinars, and coaching services that cover business writing, email effectiveness, technical writing, persuasive writing, leadership communication, and more. Today, in a team-driven environment, soft skills such as communication are the lifeblood of organizational effectiveness. Good writers elevate organizations by creating clear, empathetic, and purpose-driven messages.

Ultimately, writing with clarity, strategy, and authenticity is even more crucial today than in previous decades. AI can streamline tasks and offer valuable assistance, but it can’t replace the nuanced human judgment needed for meaningful communication. Elizabeth Danziger’s insights, as well as her Three P’s framework, provide businesses an edge in building trust, enhancing reputation, and strengthening connections with their employees and customers.

The post The Human Advantage: Improving Business Writing in the Age of AI appeared first on Worktalk.

When we can type at lightning speed and send messages in a nanosecond, who needs handwriting? As it turns out, we all do. Handwriting shows people we care about them, makes us think more carefully about what we write, and proves that AI didn’t compose our letter. Moreover, brain research shows that handwriting builds connections in the brain that cannot be accessed by typing.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the first personal letter on record was written by a man called Arrianus to his brother 2,000 years ago under Roman rule. The content would be familiar to us today – comments on friends and family, inquiries about his brother’s wellbeing, and topical chat. From that ancient beginning, the art of letter-writing bloomed, reaching its apex in the 18th century, when gentlemen and ladies penned long, thoughtful letters to one another (think Jane Austen).

With the advent of the typewriter, handwritten letters became less common, although many people still wrote social and personal letters by hand. Fast forward to the 21st century, when handwriting began to seem like an anachronism. Schools’ recent abandonment of cursive writing signals the establishment’s assumption that typing is the way of the future.

However, there are benefits to writing by hand, especially when writing to someone we feel close to – or someone with whom we seek a closer relationship. Research and common sense indicate that we should rethink capitulating to the allure of nimble-fingered digital communication.

Here are three reasons why, the next time you want to convey a personalized, important message, you dig your fountain pen out of the box it’s been sitting in since high school, pull out a notecard or clean piece of paper, and start writing.

​
​Writing by hand shows that you care.

Handwriting requires more time and effort than typing. Your readers know this; they appreciate that you cared enough to put the extra effort into reaching out to them. I recently sent a handwritten holiday card to an important client. A week later, I received a beautiful handwritten card from her, and she said how much she appreciated receiving a handwritten card. That card cemented me into her memory in a way that a holiday greeting by email could never do.

2. Handwriting makes you think more about what you write.

Who among us has not dashed off an email to a key business contact, only to read it later and rue our rush? When you write by hand, you have to slow down. You see every word as it emerges from your pen. You may even write out a full draft before you copy it into your card. While handwriting will not entirely protect you from writing something you’ll regret, it makes you more conscious of your words.

3. Handwriting proves your message was not written by AI.

AI-composed writing is everywhere. When we read emails and articles today, we might be hard-pressed to know whether the document was written by a human or a machine. When you write by hand, your reader knows the message came from a living, breathing human, who put the effort into communicating, rather than outsourcing your relationship to an algorithm.

All these reasons speak in favor of writing by hand, but there is more. When we write with a pen or pencil, our brains process information more effectively. Research indicates that students who take notes by hand understand and retain lessons better than their iPad-toting peers. Writing by hand truly engages us in the communication process – something many of us rarely experience.

So if you’re thinking of sending a Valentine or love letter, write it by hand. If you want to show a customer you appreciate their business, send a handwritten thank you.

The rarity of handwritten letters makes them stand out from the email onslaught that barrages people every day.

P.S. This Writamin was written by hand with a favorite fountain pen while sitting in a cafe in Venice, California. Ah, the bliss of being away from a computer.

​
​

The post Show You Care: Write By Hand appeared first on Worktalk.

Interruptions plague today’s business readers more than ever before. Between notifications, emails, text messages, voicemails, and physical interruptions, most people find it challenging to sit down and read through a written message. Research indicates that our brains carom off in another direction about every 44 to 50 seconds when we are engaged with a screen.

Yet as business writers, we want our readers to read through our messages and comprehend them. An important project may depend on everyone reading a report. A major sale may hinge on the prospect reading our proposal.

To defeat digital distraction, we need to understand it and work around it when we write.

How is Digitally Distracted Reading Different?

Dr. Anastasia Dedyukhina (www.consciously-digital.com) studies digital distraction and its effects on learning and productivity. She notes that leaping from stimulus to stimulus without pausing to process what we’ve learned is contrary to the brain’s evolutionary path for retaining information.

Dashing from email to email or text to text short-circuits the organic process of integrating information. Modern readers may lack the time or will to pause and incorporate the information you are sharing with them. Even worse, they may fail to absorb key parts of your message.

So what can a manager, salesperson, or team member do to increase their chances of breaking through the noise?

Adapting Our Writing to Deal With the Distracted Mind

When I asked Dr. Dedyukhina how the reality of distraction squares with the need to write at work, she replied, “People are spreading their attention very thinly, so accept that they are not reading closely. They are skimming.”

She notes that writers need to compose with these conditions in mind, making their language accessible and allowing places for the reader to look away from the text and easily return to it.

Here are five ways to increase your chances of being understood by the digitally distracted reader.

1. Put your main point first.

People are paying the most attention at the beginning of your message.

Deliver the main message within the first 40 words to ensure it is received. In a short text, this is easy. In an email, don’t start with the back story: Cut to the chase.

2. Use clear, simple, language.

• Aim for a reading level of around eighth grade. I promise you, if you write for a twelfth-grade level, your readers will either skip your message or save it for “later”, which may never happen. Use MSWord’s Check Readability Statistics function to determine your document’s grade level.

• Clean up your word choice. Write use instead of utilize, and before instead of prior to.

3. Be concise.

• No one has patience for roundabout language.

• Purge quaint phrases and buzzwords. Don’t write at the end of the day; instead, write, in the end, or ultimately. Shun low-hanging fruit: embrace opportunities

• Avoid unnecessary words in phrases like personal belief, plain fact, or advance reservation. Instead, write belief, fact, or reservation.

4. Simplify your sentences.

• Long sentences bore people. Maintain an average sentence length of around 20 words as measured by MSWord’s Check Readability Statistics function.

• Include a maximum of two clauses beginning with that, which, or who.

• Don’t glue together two word gobs with and or but and imagine that your readers will follow your train of thought. They won’t.

5. Break up the text.

Subheads, bulleted lists, and blank spaces all add to your readability. By varying the visual format of your message, you make it easier for readers to skim and look for keywords.

Digital distractions are here to stay. As writers, we must be mindful of our readers’ world. By being concise and clear and by formatting for readability, we help our readers break free of the hamster wheel of diversion and focus on our message.

Did you make it to the end of this column? Congratulations on overcoming the allure of digital distraction!

The post 5 Ways to Cut Through the Noise and Write to Distracted Readers appeared first on Worktalk.

We live in an age of great sensitivity to language–some might even say hyper-sensitivity. While being too “politically correct” might cause some people to roll their eyes, you ignore individual sensitivities at your peril. Words referring to gender, race, creed, sexual orientation, physical ability, mental health, gender identity, and the like have the potential to make some people feel excluded–and that is the last thing we should want to do.

Everyone wants to feel included and respected. Using language inclusively has proven benefits to morale and competitive advantage. And companies are paying increased attention to the importance of using inclusive language–terms and pronouns that show respect to all and do not stereotype certain groups–in all printed or digital materials.

Communicating inclusively is more than a good idea: It promotes engagement, reduces stress, improves morale, and contributes to the sparking of creative ideas. A 2017 McKinsey report, Delivering Through Diversity, showed that ethnic and cultural diversity correlated with a statistically significant 33 percent likelihood of outperformance on EBIT margin. How do inclusive communicators draw in their readers and keep them engaged?

Choose your words carefully

No one can write a list of words you can and cannot use because each audience has its own sensitivities. Nevertheless, here are a few principles to remember.

• Avoid mentioning gender when it is not relevant. There is no need to write female executive or lady boss. An executive is an executive, regardless of their gender. Similarly, words like chairman can be shortened to the gender-neutral term chair.
• Don’t make assumptions about gender. Despite the proliferation of woman managers, many people tend to think of managers as men. Sensitize yourself to see the snap judgments you make about which gender or group is likely to work in specific jobs. Then work to overcome your biases.
• Avoid gendered or racial slang. In emails and texts, do not write gals or girls when referring to women. The phrase you guys is problematic on many fronts; it is very casual, for one, and it includes women under the masculine word guys. Avoid it. And of course, referring to a group of people as you people is out. The phrase “You people” seems to pit the “other” against you. Similarly, be careful of using boy or boys unless referring to males under the age of 16.
• Be cautious about metaphors. Some metaphors can be triggering. Many years ago, I was composing an email to a manager at a large utility company. The woman herself was very large. She had a responsible position and was very busy. I found myself writing, “I know you have a lot on your plate …” And then, fortunately, I stopped and asked myself whether she might consider the phrase a roundabout comment on her appearance. I quickly changed it to “I know you are very busy.” In addition, saying things like, “That’s a crazy idea,” or “He’s so manic!” can be off-putting to those who suffer from mental illness.
• Use technical tools. Microsoft has released a helpful guide to avoiding biased language. In addition, Google Drive now includes prompts to reduce gendered language such as policeman for police officer. Grammarly also gives feedback on unnecessarily gendered language. In general, if you are wondering whether it’s appropriate to use a word or phrase, don’t use it.

Be authentic

As the proverb says, “What comes from the heart, enters the heart.” As a business leader, communicating sincerely and authentically will build your audience’s trust. Cultivate an attitude of respect for differences of all kinds, and you will find that inclusive language flows more naturally.

Communication is the process of conveying our thoughts and ideas into the minds and hearts of others. When we respect our audience, consider their sensitivities, and use words they feel comfortable with, we can build a company culture in which all team members feel included.

The post Inclusive Communication Builds Both People and Profits appeared first on Worktalk.

Seventy-three seconds after liftoff, the O-ring seals in the solid rocket booster (SRB) failed, and the shuttle broke apart. The Challenger plunged back to Earth, killing everyone aboard.

Even decades later, the tragedy is heartbreaking, especially since it was eminently preventable. Engineers at Morton Thiokol, which manufactured the SRB, knew that the O-rings could fail catastrophically. They knew that the cold January weather increased the danger. And they tried to communicate their concerns to their managers and NASA. But the flight took off anyway. 

Senior Engineer Tries to Sound the Alarm
One of the strongest voices to warn about the O-ring problem was a senior engineer named R.M. Boisjoly. On July 31, 1985, six months before the Challenger launch, Boisjoly wrote a memo to R.K. Lund, the vice-president of engineering at Morton Thiokol. In the memo, Boisjoly clearly states that the O-ring problem could lead to a catastrophic loss of life. However, this statement shows up in the middle of the memo, not at the point of maximum impact, which is at the beginning.

The Challenger launch decision was complex and deeply rooted in NASA’s culture. Boisjoly’s memo was the opening salvo in the struggle that lasted until the moment the shuttle took off.

How Did the Warning Memo Start?
For this Writamin,  I want to focus on Boisjoly’s subject line and opening sentence to see if he might have had more impact.  Here’s what he wrote:

SUBJECT: SRM O-Ring Erosion/Potential Failure Criticality

This letter is written to insure that management is fully aware of the seriousness of the current O-ring erosion problem in the SRM joints from an engineering standpoint.

Did the Subject Line Capture the Urgency?
Boisjoly wrote about criticality; he did not lead with its consequences. “Failure criticality” sounds serious, but it is abstract. It lacks urgency. It doesn’t communicate that the “criticality” might cause people to die. It focuses on a fact, not on a consequence of the fact. OK, the reader might think, so there’s criticality. What is the consequence of the criticality? The reader of the memo was an engineer, so he knew intellectually. But perhaps it did not affect him enough to make him fight with NASA. What might have gotten his attention more powerfully? Perhaps

O-Ring ErosionThreatens Survival of Astronauts
O-Ring Erosion Threatens Success of Mission
Immediate Danger Posed by O-Ring Erosion

Subject lines such as these move the focus off of the fact and emphasize the consequences of the fact. Would they have been more likely to spark his reader’s interest? By focusing on what would happen because of the criticality, Boisjoly might have been more persuasive.

What about his opening line? 
It starts in the passive voice: “This letter is written… ”  Perhaps he could have led with the active voice: 
“This letter highlights the threat to SRM joints caused by the current O-ring erosion problem.”

And what if he had pointed out the consequences of the consequences? That is, what would happen to the mission if the problem with the SRM joint was not fixed? He could have written 

“This letter highlights the threat to mission survival caused by the O-ring erosion problem.” 
Or perhaps he could have avoided referring to “this letter.” Then he could have written, 

“Our current O-ring erosion problem may threaten mission survival.” Or even: 
“Our current O-ring erosion problem threatens astronaut survival.”

In the memo, Boisjoly was following the unspoken writing rule of big organizations: Don’t be too direct. Perhaps he succeeded in convincing the VP of Engineering that the O-rings were a problem. But the consequences of the problem never penetrated the minds of the people who mattered: the executives at NASA. This was a failure of communication.

Multiple books have been written to dissect what went wrong. Of course, an engineering problem caused the spacecraft to crash. But a communication problem caused it to launch. In the end, the words that the engineers used simply did not persuade NASA executives to delay the launch. 

We know that many Morton Thiokol managers agreed with Boisjoly and were browbeaten by NASA executives until they consented to the launch. But we can imagine that if stronger language — language focusing on the results of the O-Ring problem — had appeared at the beginning of the process, the path to the decision might have been different. 

What Can We Learn?
Most of us do not write about life-and-death decisions. We write about the events and ideas that affect our organizations’ success and productivity. We write about things that matter to us. How can we be more persuasive to our readers? By presenting the impact of the details along with the details themselves.

When you write your subject lines and openings, consider the impact you intend to produce in your reader. Focus on the consequences of heeding or not heeding your message. Use clear, forceful language. Perhaps you can prevent a disaster.

©2020 Elizabeth Danziger All rights reserved

Schedule an online consultation today! Communication woes drain the lifeblood from an organization. Connect me with your decision-makers and see how Worktalk can transform communication in your world.  Contact me at lizd@worktalk.com or 310.396.8303. You can also book through www.calendly.com/worktalk.

The post Can a Subject Line Save Lives? appeared first on Worktalk.