11 November 2024

Disempowering neuroinclusivity: Five public service phrases that should be culled from our vocabulary

| Oliver Jacques
Join the conversation
29
two women pointing to their shirts

The term empower should be disempowered. Photo: Renew Europe.

Anyone who’s worked in the public service – or watched the TV show Utopia – knows about its love for jargon.

Pretentious, meaningless words are vital in bureaucracies that need to pretend to do what they’re not actually doing.

But lately, I’ve noticed some awful public service phrases creeping into everyday discourse (sorry, I mean conversation. I’m guilty, too).

We must put a stop to this trend before it’s too late.

Outside the grey cubicle, there’s never an excuse to use a big word when a diminutive synonym would sufficiently convey its connotation.

Here are five terms that should be exterminated from the English language.

Empower

There was once a time when it was enough to show or teach somebody something.

But now, we must “empower” them. For instance, the latest wave of government reform is designed to “empower the public service and increase trust and confidence in Australia’s public sector institutions”.

Naturally, the bureaucracy loves such a term, as it helps mask the powerlessness of many public servants and our declining trust in institutions. But why are so many others using it?

Netball Australia recently issued a media release saying its sport empowered girls to be strong and confident. The ABC has reported on how Ancient Asian music empowers kids with visual impairment.

You’ll notice the word is often used to describe what’s happening to women, people with disabilities, Indigenous families and other racial minorities – which shows how patronising it is.

Seriously, just say ‘teach’ and be done with it.

Neurodivergence

It’s probably now wrong to talk about disability, with neurodivergence being the popular buzz term.

But what exactly does neurodivergent mean? I know it’s used to describe those on the autism spectrum, but it seems people with ADHD, dementia and mental illness (diagnosed or undiagnosed) are sometimes included within the neurodivergent family.

Apparently, the term explains that people’s brains work differently. But doesn’t that mean we’re all neurodivergent, to a degree, and render the word meaningless?

Worse still, it’s also spawned even more pretentious offshoots – like neuroinclusivity. Delete now.

Stakeholder engagement

We know the government loves to talk about stakeholder engagement because it ’empowers’ people who participate in community consultation sessions, which it doesn’t take seriously.

But the term has now infected rugby league. In July, it was announced Canberra Raiders legend Mal Meninga would return to the club to increase “engagement with stakeholders”.

The Canterbury Bulldogs club have even appointed a general manager of stakeholder engagement, a job title that implies there are more paid positions to engage stakeholders.

How about clubs use that money to recruit better players and stick to calling us fans?

Workshop (as a verb)

When I was growing up, the term workshop was a noun used to describe a factory-like setting where people built and repaired things using tools and machines.

But now it’s often used in white-collar workplaces, universities and even social clubs – as a verb – to describe people talking. That’s quite a leap.

Perhaps people don’t want to say they’re just chatting, as it sounds like they’re not really working. But from discussion to meeting to debate, there are more accurate terms to use than a manufactured verb like workshop.

Keep it ‘high level’

I was invited to give a speech at a wedding a few months ago but told to “keep it high level”. Luckily, I’d been in the public before, so I knew what this meant – make it brief and avoid detail.

This phrase was always great for departmental meetings when I needed to speak about a subject I didn’t understand, and nobody else understood either. But it’s very different from the conventional meaning of ‘high-level’. The public service was always very confused when it came to ranking terms (the most junior person in the office was given a title like ‘senior policy officer’, for example).

Hence, there’s no need to use this deceptive phrase outside your siloed office.

So let me keep it high level one last time, and ask that all you neurodivergent stakeholders who read Region workshop with me the need to disempower this phrase, and the four above it.

Join the conversation

29
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest
Tempus Viator4:20 pm 01 Nov 24

I think we need to ‘brainstorm’ this topic so we can ‘roadmap’ a direction and set the ‘Goals’ so that everyone can be on the ‘same page’.

Neurodiversity is not a bureaucratic buzzword but it is (& has been here) misconstrued and misunderstood. ADHD, Autism, Dyslexia, Dysgraphia, and other less well known conditions are under this umbrella, but not Dementia. Yes these are also disabilities. And the phrase “everyone is a little…Autistic/Dyslexic/ADHD etc” dismisses and diminishes the lived experiences of these conditions. For example, you might misspell a word occasionally, that doesn’t mean you’re a “bit dyslexic” because a once off event is not systemic, pervasive, and constant, and often generally debilitating, requiring tools, self knowledge, and a bunch of things to address to work around it, which can be exhausting. The nature of being neurodivergent is a whole brain / body experience that cannot be isolated from the person, what it is not is a single behaviour. Not everyone is neurodivergent but seeing workplaces more often using this term is a positive until I read this, which means more education is clearly required.

My pet peeve? Utilized. Use

My pet peev….US English spelling of words like utilised.

Yes the buzz words are a part of public service life. Many.moons ago as a consultant in a meeting someone suggested we “vertically align the splinter group”. Newer buzz words are “decentralisation” “hollistic” and everything today is “sustainable”. Then there’s “outcomes focussed”. There was a game called “Buzz word Bingo” which we all loved.

If only people would research the actual meaning of these terms instead of just adopting the meaning they hear, often from those who have no idea and are just trying to look smart. Or, in some organisations, they’re intentionally being ambiguous so they can claim they meant something different to what the person understood to cover their own actions.

Kill the ambiguity by clarifying meanings! Try looking up the meaning of ‘high level’ and see how the way it’s used in some places creates confusion.

When did learning become learnings? Language shifts with use and misuse.

Too many people misuse these words, terms and phrases because they are trying to impress others without first learning the actual meaning of each term. Sadly, this clearly includes the author of this article.

I see this often in the public service, in journalism, in sales, in management, in ICT, in the military and in consulting firms, where people are suggesting they’re going to do something impressive, when really they really are not. They’re going to do something very ordinary that falls far short of the words they use.

People often use acronyms without any idea of what they stand for, because they want to appear up to date, knowledgeable and so use common terms to hide their ignorance. They often get away with it because people rarely ask what they actually mean, as they don’t want to admit their own lack of knowledge. As a recruiter and interviewer, I delighted in asking people exactly what they meant. Most had no idea and some responded aggressively to my questions, trying to hide their ignorance. It is very revealing to ask what people mean, instead of assuming you know.

Many of us who do know the meanings have been caught out when we expected much more than was delivered, so now we question the detail of what they mean or what they intend to do. High level was the most recent one to catch me out as I’d heard it used in more meaningful ways than how it’s used currently.

When people misuse terms often enough and it spreads far enough, the original meaning is lost and the new use sticks. There are still many people who do not know what schizophrenia or schizophrenic is, due to so many ignorant novelists and journalists misusing the term.

I would outline the meanings of the terms misunderstood by the writer of the above article, but my post is already too long. Perhaps in a separate post if people are interested.

Stephen Larsson11:48 am 31 Oct 24

Hear, hear! This article will put a wry smile on the face of everyone who has ever tried dealing with a government agency or bureaucrat. I suspect bureaucrats will now be having a stop work meeting to discuss industrial action over this article.

These buzz words are a good opportunity to play w*nk word bingo. Next time you have a meeting, print out a bingo card with these common phrases and words. When you have crossed off all content, yell out “Bingo”

Quite amusing.

If you’re a really sophisticated foodie these days you say flavourful when it just used to be flavoursome.

Only the losers now have a boyfriend or a girlfriend while all the cognoscenti have a partner. This one is particularly puke worthy to me because of its obvious connection to pretentious politically correct inclusivity.

About 10 – 20 years ago, the A and the N in “dance”, “plants”, “France”, etc., used to mainly be pronounced the same way as in “nan”, and then just over night there was a noticeable turn where many became quite suave and started saying “da(r)nce”, “pla(r)nts and “Fra(r)nce”, with people actually having to make a conscious decision to replace how they used to say it with the new way.

if there’s anyone like that here – and there would be; it is a Canberra based website, after all – let us know how it improved your life

Gregg Heldon12:46 pm 31 Oct 24

I’m with you on partner. I refuse to say it. Partner, to me, implies a business relationship. Not one of Affection or romance. When I hear someone call their significant other, their partner, I always think that the relationship is cold and distant, for some reason. Or you don’t want people to know the true nature of the relationship.

You make incorrect and harsh assumptions about people’s intent without knowing anything about the people or their thinking.

I felt uncomfortable with the terms boyfriend and girlfriend when talking about my relationship with my partner, because of being in our 40s where people our age were neither boys nor girls, so partner was the only term that worked. We were not married but it was a heterosexual relationship with nothing unusual about it, except that it was truly a partnership with equal power shared between us. This was not about ‘pretentious political inclusivity’. Partner was the most practical term that honestly described our relationship.

Sadly, people often make assumptions without sufficient information, creating conflict and misunderstanding.

Gregg Heldon4:23 pm 31 Oct 24

I’m not being incorrect or harsh. I’m just stating my opinion. Nor am I making assumptions. It’s just how I feel when I hear the term.
If you’re happy, great. But you seem to be very defensive about my objection to a word and its particular application.

Gregg Heldon10:45 am 31 Oct 24

I have C-PTSD, so, I guess, would be classed as neurodivergent but it is a term that I would never use to describe myself. I have a mental injury because I acquired it in a workplace. My brain is wired differently now and forever more.
I’m comfortable and honest about my mental injury and it should be left as that description.

Samuel Gordon-Stewart7:51 am 31 Oct 24

If one is sufficiently skilled and empowered with the literary works of one Mr. Roget, a great synergistic melting pot of communicative pronouncements can be brought forth so as to ensure stakeholders obtain learnings of such verbosity that they will maintain the position that they have been bestowed with the utmost quality of informative communication, despite having actually received a deluge of dirge, a position maintained in the hope that their contemporaries will be equally befuddled and not dare burst the ubiquitous illusory concept and be colloquially outed as lacking the universal comprehensive understanding which prior pronouncements may have been designed to illicit an image thereof in the eye of the external bestakeholder.

Stephen Larsson11:53 am 31 Oct 24

Very funny and well done Samuel. You are obviously not a government bureaucrat – bureaucrats don’t have a sense of humour.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.