<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Keeping it simple</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.the-storytellers.com/archives/keeping-it-simple/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.the-storytellers.com/archives/keeping-it-simple</link>
	<description>We help business leaders engage their people in strategy, vision, values and change....connecting people through storytelling</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 21:59:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Paul Honeywell</title>
		<link>http://www.the-storytellers.com/archives/keeping-it-simple/comment-page-1#comment-241</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul Honeywell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Oct 2007 15:44:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-storytellers.com/archives/keeping-it-simple#comment-241</guid>
		<description>I think that we develop &quot;business-speak&quot; as a shorthand for complex concepts.  This develops into a language for those in the inner circle.  That&#039;s fine, as it&#039;s efficient for those people.

The problem comes when it migrates outside this group.  It becomes a barrier, rather than an enabler.  It means that some people understand, and others are excluded.  Those excluded will not admit that they don&#039;t understand, and even worse may start to adopt this language to indicate to others that they are included - and the whole thing becomes a mess!

I often think of us oldies trying to use teenage-speak - we just sound daft, and get quizzical looks from those that really understand...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think that we develop &#8220;business-speak&#8221; as a shorthand for complex concepts.  This develops into a language for those in the inner circle.  That&#8217;s fine, as it&#8217;s efficient for those people.</p>
<p>The problem comes when it migrates outside this group.  It becomes a barrier, rather than an enabler.  It means that some people understand, and others are excluded.  Those excluded will not admit that they don&#8217;t understand, and even worse may start to adopt this language to indicate to others that they are included &#8211; and the whole thing becomes a mess!</p>
<p>I often think of us oldies trying to use teenage-speak &#8211; we just sound daft, and get quizzical looks from those that really understand&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Glenn Mason</title>
		<link>http://www.the-storytellers.com/archives/keeping-it-simple/comment-page-1#comment-239</link>
		<dc:creator>Glenn Mason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Oct 2007 15:32:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-storytellers.com/archives/keeping-it-simple#comment-239</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s a funny old world we live in - on the one hand I don&#039;t think anyone would argue with keeping language as clear, simple and concise as possible, but on the other hand our working lives are so often littered with &#039;business-speak&#039; and &#039;corporate-isms&#039;. I wonder why that is?

Shouldn&#039;t we speak business like we speak everything else?

After all, it&#039;s only when employees have complete clarity about what you&#039;re asking them to do, do they understand how they can contribute.

&#039;So how do we keep it simple?&#039; I hear you ask...well, we find stories help!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s a funny old world we live in &#8211; on the one hand I don&#8217;t think anyone would argue with keeping language as clear, simple and concise as possible, but on the other hand our working lives are so often littered with &#8216;business-speak&#8217; and &#8216;corporate-isms&#8217;. I wonder why that is?</p>
<p>Shouldn&#8217;t we speak business like we speak everything else?</p>
<p>After all, it&#8217;s only when employees have complete clarity about what you&#8217;re asking them to do, do they understand how they can contribute.</p>
<p>&#8216;So how do we keep it simple?&#8217; I hear you ask&#8230;well, we find stories help!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alison Esse</title>
		<link>http://www.the-storytellers.com/archives/keeping-it-simple/comment-page-1#comment-240</link>
		<dc:creator>Alison Esse</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Oct 2007 09:02:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-storytellers.com/archives/keeping-it-simple#comment-240</guid>
		<description>The key thing for me on reading this article was John Thompson&#039;s line:  “You need to have a clarity of message and clarity of purpose so that everyone in the business understands what they’re doing and how they’re doing it. If you keep it simple, your staff will understand what’s expected of them and they’ll work more efficiently&quot;.

Says it all really.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The key thing for me on reading this article was John Thompson&#8217;s line:  “You need to have a clarity of message and clarity of purpose so that everyone in the business understands what they’re doing and how they’re doing it. If you keep it simple, your staff will understand what’s expected of them and they’ll work more efficiently&#8221;.</p>
<p>Says it all really.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
