Page 14 of 33

Re: Corporate Speak

Posted: March 27 12, 2:17 pm
by TAZ
From The Daily Show's Earth, the (audio)Book, here's a segment...

"The Memo"
(Spoken by Samantha Bee)
"It is my understanding that some team members are experiencing a non-satisfactory level of disconnect, vis-à-vis our interpersonel messaging. To ensure we're all on the same page with our ducks in a row, we're opening the kimono to initiate a global refresh on FTF and e-munication standards, therefore, FYI, FFR, interface, dialogue, touchbase, face-to-face, connect, and advise indicate interpersonal communication. Execute, implement, leverage, facilitate, synergize, deliver, and exploit pertain to the performance of work. Robust, value-rich, seamless, best of read and user-centric denote merititorious quality. Further to enhighten our task simplicity quotient, the revealing of which could result in significant new awareness of human capital redundancy and attendant downsizing, all comms should going forward be both redundant and repetitive, with the occasional word-vention utilized in place of vocables of greater brevity, clarity, and bra verity. Augment with "occasional impenetrable acronyms" (OIAs), these syntactical enhancements add perceived value to each employee's personal brand. Exemplifications are under posted:
1. I want to circle back and interface about how to right-size our head count while still keeping workers incentivized.
2. Due to unforeseen life events, I'll be offline tomorrow, so can we push our interlock until post all-hands?
3. At the end of the day, net net, if we have a joint brown bag to come to agreeance on how to grow mind-share among targeted thought leaders by implementing best practices across the board, we can marketeer our wage ward synergizing a frictionless sales environment."

Translation of "The Memo"
(Spoken by Wyatt Cynak)
"Hey dumb [expletive], 90% of the stuff we say basically means either "talk", "make" or "good". But nobody pays fat salaries for talking about making good things. So to keep our scam going only use ungainly words and always 3 times as many of them as a normal person. Like you just heard:
1. Let’s discuss how we can fire people without making the ones we keep cry.
2. My uncle died, can we meet later?
3. Lunch?"

Re: Corporate Speak

Posted: March 27 12, 5:51 pm
by G. Keenan
Just came across this gem in an article about the onerous burdens the city of Chicago has started putting on festival organizers.
The meeting was one of several “cultural focus groups” the city is convening as the next step in the much-ballyhooed process of compiling the Emanuel administration’s Cultural Plan, the first since Mayor Harold Washington in 1986. Then, there was “a major emphasis on public engagement,” with more than 200 community meetings seeking input before the old plan was written. This time, there will be about 30 as part of the “ground-truthing” effort—that’s consultant-speak for fact-finding—including the public community meetings that already have been held and a half-dozen smaller invite-only “sector sessions” such as Monday’s on festivals.
How does whoever came up with that look themselves in the mirror?

Re: Corporate Speak

Posted: March 27 12, 5:58 pm
by Arthur Dent
G. Keenan wrote:"High-energy team players to work in a fast-paced, deadline-driven environment"

That description appears in 99.9% of job listings.
Is that line intended to attract job seekers or to warm them that the workplace is going to suck?

Re: Corporate Speak

Posted: March 27 12, 6:14 pm
by G. Keenan
Arthur Dent wrote:
G. Keenan wrote:"High-energy team players to work in a fast-paced, deadline-driven environment"

That description appears in 99.9% of job listings.
Is that line intended to attract job seekers or to warm them that the workplace is going to suck?
It's got to be the latter, right? I swear, I've seen that exact phrasing in listings for everything from coffee shops to the American Bar Association.

Re: Corporate Speak

Posted: March 27 12, 9:30 pm
by jim
Onerous? What the [expletive] is that?

Re: Corporate Speak

Posted: March 28 12, 8:20 am
by G. Keenan
jim wrote:Onerous? What the [expletive] is that?
You know what it is.

Re: Corporate Speak

Posted: March 28 12, 8:34 am
by wart57
G. Keenan wrote:Just came across this gem in an article about the onerous burdens the city of Chicago has started putting on festival organizers.
The meeting was one of several “cultural focus groups” the city is convening as the next step in the much-ballyhooed process of compiling the Emanuel administration’s Cultural Plan, the first since Mayor Harold Washington in 1986. Then, there was “a major emphasis on public engagement,” with more than 200 community meetings seeking input before the old plan was written. This time, there will be about 30 as part of the “ground-truthing” effort—that’s consultant-speak for fact-finding—including the public community meetings that already have been held and a half-dozen smaller invite-only “sector sessions” such as Monday’s on festivals.
How does whoever came up with that look themselves in the mirror?
With a common vision....

Re: Corporate Speak

Posted: March 28 12, 8:36 am
by jim
G. Keenan wrote:
jim wrote:Onerous? What the [expletive] is that?
You know what it is.
I do now .. it's my word of the day.
on·er·ous   [on-er-uhs, oh-ner-]
adjective
1.burdensome, oppressive, or troublesome; causing hardship: onerous duties.
2.having or involving obligations or responsibilities, especially legal ones, that outweigh the advantages: an onerous agreement.

I'm going to use that word today at work .... Your requirements are onerous so [expletive] off. Onerous.

Re: Corporate Speak

Posted: March 28 12, 8:38 am
by Radbird
If I had to choose one word to describe my current job, it would be onerous.

Re: Corporate Speak

Posted: March 30 12, 9:27 am
by Radbird
On a conference call right now. In response to someone asking if an issue was being worked, this guy said "Yes, it's being efforted."

:-k