OK, I turn 50 later this year and I'm wondering if that's old enough to officially be a grumpy old man? My reason for asking is I realize that there's something that bugs me. I hate buzzwords. Actually I don't think it's a grumpy old man thing as I've always had a dislike for buzzwords along with an even stronger distaste for using unnecessarily complicated or pretentious language. I'm sure I'm guilty of using both, but nothing pleases me more than explaining complicated ideas using plain and simple language. In my mind the responsibility for good communication lies with the person doing the communicating. If they can't get across what they're saying so that the intended audience understands it nice and clearly then they need to try again. The person reading or listening should not have to consult a dictionary or Google the latest buzzword list because someone is trying to appear cool or more intelligent.
Buzzkill
Now I should be careful, I guess, because there is the argument that putting a new name to something can create a "buzz" (I guess that's why it's a buzzword?). It can create new interest in something old. There's also the argument that sometimes a new word or expression captures an idea or concept better somehow than however it was expressed in the past. Still I can't shake the thought that it's often the case that someone is trying to say something is new, when really it's just repackaging of an old idea and giving it a new name. Like I said, I may really be a grumpy old man already!
OK, OK, grumpy old man, give us some examples so we can see what you're talking about. Alrighty then young whipper-snapper, here is my "top 5" (or is that bottom 5?) of buzzwords that rub me the wrong way, starting from the least offensive to the one that will cause me to use almost cuss words...
1. Circular economy
This one used to bug me a lot more, but I've slowly warmed up to it. It basically means to use life cycle thinking about a product or process and the way it affects the environment. Having done a fair bit of work on life cycle assessments (LCA) to look at environmental impacts it really bothered me when people used the expression "circular economy" to say the same thing, more or less. But, I guess if you use "economy" in an expression then the bean counters will pay attention, and maybe it's a snappier title than having to explain a whole bunch of concepts with life cycles? I don't know. I give this just 2.5 out of 5 on my grump-o-meter.
2. Value proposition
Hmmm, I remember the first time I was in meeting and someone kept talking about "value propositions" and I had no clue, so I leaned over to my colleague and asked him what the heck it means. "It means a business case." Ah. Then why not say "business case" then? I should add that I'm a technical poop engineer and until that time I'd managed to avoid the cold realities of business stuff and business-speak, but here I am now dealing with a different type of fecal linguistics. Yeah, "value proposition" still rubs me the wrong way, but it's here to stay I guess. 3.0 on the grump-o-meter... unless you want to really get my juices flowing and shorten it to "value prop." and then I'll give you 3.5 or even 4.0.
3. Digital twin
I have to be careful with this one so that I don't violate my own dislike of pretentiousness. I've worked with computer models for more than 20 years and messed around with computers since the 1980's (yup I had a Sinclair ZX Spectrum and I was proud of it!). So here we are in 2020 and all of a sudden everything is freakin' "digital." Arghh. So, a "digital twin" is in fact a "computer model." Why we can't say that I don't know. Definitely a 3.5 on my grump-o-meter despite the fact that I use the term myself now on occasion as it's creeping into more conversations... and hate myself for doing so, just a little.
4. Totex
OK, I tried to look this up on Wikipedia to give you an official definition, but I think it's beneath them to even have this. According to Wikipedia it's a Japanese company that makes weather balloons. I actually much prefer that over the current vogue in the UK water sector where TOTEX is the name given to accounting for both operating expenses (OPEX) and the capital expenditure (CAPEX) in a project combined as... you guessed it... TOTEX, short for "total expenditure" or something like that I guess. It's an all new and fancy way of looking at projects... no wait a minute. It's a basic economic evaluation of operating and capital costs or value over time that's been called a "net present value" (NPV) or "net present cost" for years and years. That's how we've evaluated every project I've ever worked on since I was a poop engineer, I think. So what's new and shiny about "Totex"? Nothing. It's a basic and sensible economic evaluation that every sensible engineer has done since they graduated from university. 4.9 on my grump-o-meter. Please do shoot me if I ever use the expression. Or at least slap me very hard.
5. Ideation
Number 5 and an easy 5.0 on my grump-o-meter. Who came up with this word? It's not a real word. Let me go and slap them a little. Oh wait, it's an old word from 1818, though it appears it was originally a psychiatric term for suicidal thoughts. Huh, I'd never have guessed. Still, it's current usage is slap-worthy. It's a precocious way of saying "idea generation" or "brainstorming," but only if you think you're a cool person. Please, don't. It's really not cool.
OK so that was my rant for the day. I should say that I really don't feel too strongly about any of these words if you really, really do want to use them. Go ahead. I won't slap you really. Well not much. In my next post perhaps I'll make the pitch to have the word "squoze" added to the dictionary. English is, after-all, a consensus language!
I'd better go and ideate a new digital twin, being careful to include totex in my value proposition under the nexus of the circular economy.
