If you work for a large organization, you probably have to submit your work to a series of subject matter experts, managers and executives for approval.
Some of these people are a dream to work with. They understand your role and their own; they might even be pretty good writers themselves. They can be counted on to put the product first, and don't feel a need to put their personal stamp on every item that crosses their desks. Most of the time, they stick to their areas of expertise and any changes they recommend serve to improve the product.
Then there are the others. Although they're a small minority, they take up an inordinate amount of your time. Often, they don't really know what they want or, if they do, they don't provide clear direction. So they gather their subject matter experts together and they write, and re-write, until they've said what they think they want to say. It's usually too long, too jargony and too convoluted to make sense to anyone but themselves. BUT, they're crazy about it. It's full of PhD-level terminology, buzzwords and stale turns of phrase that sound clever - at least to themselves.
It's tempting to try to head them off by writing the way we think they want us to write.
This is never a good idea.
First of all, the product will suffer if you're delivering something less than your best just to appease a small minority of people.
Also, when you second-guess your approvers this way, you're assuming they will like your convoluted, jargon-laden writing better than their own, and you're probably assuming wrong. In many cases they're not messing with your work because there's anything wrong with it, but just because they can. They may think they're not adding value if they're not putting in their two cents.
Third, if you don't like the way they write, it's a pretty good bet you're not alone. So trying to write in their style is bound to alienate more than a few of the approvers who have always supported your work and acted constructively to improve the product. This not only hurts the relationships you've built with these people, it undermines your own credibility.
If you follow your head and your instincts, you'll find that your work takes the path of least resistance through the people who always put the product first. As for the others - when you write really good copy, trusting yourself to do the best job you can and not letting yourself be defeated, some really good stuff won't make it to the final product, and that's unfortunate. But you might be surprised at what does get through. That's the communication business - an art, not a science.
In my next post I'll look at the other side of the coin - when I ask you to confront the possibility that it's you, not them.
