What Writing Style is Best?
October 18th, 2006 by Bob Bly
A few months ago, I was teaching a class in business writing to a group of managers and engineers at a large manufacturing company.
I was talking about how good business writing is conversational, and how you should avoid jargon, overly formal language, corporate-speak, and the like.
This angered a gray-haired fellow who I judged to be in his 60s.
“I was taught to write in a proper, formal style, and that’s how I’m going to keep on writing,” he said.
“But modern writing is conversational,” I replied.
“Oh, yeah?” he challenged me. “Prove it!”
What would you have done in this situation if you were the instructor?
I mean, I’ve been a professional writer for a quarter of a century, with hundreds of published articles and 70 published books.
But actually PROVE to a skeptic that good writing is conversational writing?
How?
Let me ask you….
Do you agree with me that good writing is conversational writing?
And if so, what proof is there that conversational writing is more effective than the old-school stiff, stilted, formal business writing that was popular half a century ago?
This entry was posted on Wednesday, October 18th, 2006 at 10:31 am and is filed under General, Writing. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
October 18th, 2006 at 2:06 pm
Yes…and no. The difference is that the 60-year-old gentleman is more likely to judge the content of the message by the the rigid rules of formal writing. I’m stepping out on a limb here, but I wouldn’t be surprised if he had attended a parochial school as a younster. (Everytime I’ve come across a grammatical traditionalist they attended paraochial school.)
Since most people under 25 communicate via text messaging they are use to conversational styles. In fact, I’d even go so far as to say that they tend to ‘tune-out’ formal writing because it is too stodge and a relic of another era.
Taking a kid text messaging with their SideKick at one end of the spectrum and the grammatical traditionalist at polar opposite, the rest of us probably fall somewhere in the middle of those two.
October 18th, 2006 at 2:39 pm
I get battered by this argument a lot, being a Gen-Xer who doesn’t like the mangled form of language teenagers use nowadays. On the one hand, I use conversational writing whenever possible. Like you Bob, I think it’s better-flowing and resonates much more. But there are times when people insist on formal copy, like it’s ironclad “status quo” and they don’t want to rock the boat.
I think there are times – admittedly, not many anymore – when formal writing is a better choice. But for the most part? Inject some conversation!
October 18th, 2006 at 3:20 pm
[...] Here you go, this is today’s reading list. Make sure you head over to Copyblogger or Problogger if you want to be fed with more things!Update: Bob Bly (of Bly.com Blog) have just posted something worth your time. It’s thought provoking things which will make you want to explore the world of blogging more… [...]
October 18th, 2006 at 7:13 pm
Hey Bob;
There is a place for conversational writing. For example, blogs and newsletters and even books work this way. Witness Peter Bowerman’s writing. Even ads work this way.
But, brochures and white papers typically do NOT have conversation writing. The writing needs to grab readers, but does need to be a little more formal in these contexts (in my opinion).
So …
How did you respond?
Mike
October 18th, 2006 at 10:32 pm
I think we have to distinguish between conversational and informal. Conversational is similar to broadcast copy, in my mind. It still has grammatical structure but is easy to read and understand. Informal is the kind of text messaging shorthand that is all but impossible to present as business communication.
Conversational can still be good writing, but it’s more like popular fiction or non-fiction articles than scholarly journals or white papers.
October 19th, 2006 at 3:57 am
The conversational writing style has developed in response to the changing attitude to marketing messages online. People want transparency, honesty and value in how they are communicated to. Corporate claptrap and marketing spiel will simply frighten off the reader and provoke them to find the information they were looking for elsewhere. Writing in a conversational style doesn’t mean its unprofessional – its simply adjusting to the conventions of writing online.
October 19th, 2006 at 4:59 am
For 20 years now I have been media training executives in Australia (and internationally) and I have really pushed the fact that, in my opinion, there is only ONE way to write and that is as we talk.
Why should we have a written style and a spoken style. Good grief, we have a leader (John Howard for you ignorati!)who speaks the written word every day and it sounds bloody stiff and formal.
If you make your writing sound informal it doesn’t have to lack authority or expertise. It might lack gravitas, but, gee, ain’t that a good thing. Back up your informal statements with enough experience and good information and that beats the formal,professorial type delivery any day.
I’ve had clients tell me that they’re put my media (communications)training into practice in normal, every day situations and work presentations and their colleagues were thrilled and enlightened b y this fresh approach,
Long live clear, plain English speech, delivered informally and with passion and ooomph!
Graham Kelly
The Man DownUnder
http://bestonlinetips.com
October 19th, 2006 at 7:37 am
I have a secretary like that – a Catholic school grad – who takes offense to any color or a nice turn of phrase in my business writing.
These folks are more interested in following rules than communicating.
Read the Gettysburg address or any churchill. Important formal events were discussed in a conversation tone. Read other official docs from the civil war and it’s hard to follow.
What good is following the rules if noone reads what you wrote?
October 19th, 2006 at 8:21 am
How about using the phrase “easy to read” versus “formal and informal”? I want something written in clear, conscise English that I can understand quickly and easily. Tone, word choice, “color,” — those things come into play depending on your audience, your medium (ie: white paper vs. landing page), and even your sales objective.
Even engineers want something they can quickly read and understand versus something that will put them to sleep. When I hear the phrase “formal writing” I instantly think, “zzzzzzzzzz.”
As someone posted above, if people aren’t reading your copy, you’re not selling products.
October 19th, 2006 at 8:43 am
If you message is to be recieved it is always good to talk ‘their’ talk.
When I present/train Generational Dynamics communication, I always emphasize the need for content/channel respect for the reciever.
TXT MSG HPPY BDAY on that 60-year old’s pre-paid and in the drawer cell phone is lots less effective than a hand written note on a snail-mailed 100% rag business card. So I get his reaction. He just needs to learn the same about his GenX middle managers.
October 19th, 2006 at 11:37 am
Bob–It depends: (1) Who are your readers? (2) What is the context? and (3) What do you want your readers to take away?
If you are selling something, it’s critical that you make yourself understood. Confuse ‘em and you lose ‘em. But if you are writing an essay in Harvard Business Review it’s a different playing field and different ball game.
October 19th, 2006 at 12:35 pm
Morty: you are one of my favorite people, but I disagree about Harvard Business Review: articles, even (and maybe especially) on complex subjects, should be clear, simple, and written in plain English — even if your audience is CEOs and PhDs.
October 19th, 2006 at 2:40 pm
The only way to prove it would be to wear a tuxedo the next time you write a book or sales lettter. Sit with your back straight, chin up, and write away.
On the other hand, all writing is communication, so if one communicates better while writing naked, by all means, be INformal.
If formal writing were the way to communicate, why wouldn’t it be the way we orally communicate?
I believe people, and thus civilizations, are adaptive to the positive outcomes they wish to achieve. Conversational writing is the evolution of formal writing.
This dinosaur in your class is going to be replaced by my 15 year old daughter who can communicate with 7 different friends, all in 7 different windows on her computer, while sending a text message on her cell phone and updating her MySpace page with music. It’s a good thing he has these informal writers around to fund his Social Security checks through the years.
October 20th, 2006 at 4:41 am
What Neil said.
October 20th, 2006 at 6:41 am
I think I SHOULD have said: “Yes, the formal style was preferred when you started as a manager, but today readers want an informal, breezy style. The reason is email: most correspondence today is e-mails, not letters, and e-mails are quick and conversational.
October 21st, 2006 at 7:41 pm
Former AWAI staff guy Scott Rempe recently mentioned a book, “How I Raised Myself From Failure To Success In Selling,” by Frank Bettger.
Scott’s piece about Bettger’s book was so engaging that I pulled the book out of my bookcase to refresh my memory of it.
Geez – Bettger was born around 1890, writing this book in the 1940s, and reading it, it’s like the man is sitting right there with you, telling his wonderful story.
Hard-b*tt copy never achieves that. It sounds like that gray-hair guy was an ossified jerk. (They’re out there!) He may give information with his formal style, but I bet he never wins hearts.
October 22nd, 2006 at 1:19 pm
Bob–Whew! Blown away by that complimentary thunderbolt! The feeling is mutual!
Just for the record, I didn’t mean to put on a starched shirt for Harvard. As you know,I am a believer in simple, conversational writing. http://www.mortyschiller.com/html/no-nonsense_copywriting.html
And I know that the Wall St. Journal is a model of clear English. (Especially their first page.) I just mean that your conversation with fellow engineers is different from your conversation with me. You can use language with an engineer that I won’t understand.
And you write differenlty on your blog than you do in an annual report or white paper. That doesn’t mean pompous. It just means being suited to the situation… while making yourself understood.
You don’t wear jeans to a reception at the White House. But you also don’t want to wear a tux to a rodeo.
Morty
By the way, what in the world was that guy doing in your class?! Did he come to learn something? Sad story. Something more was bothering him than just writing style!
October 22nd, 2006 at 6:01 pm
You should simply ask him to speak.
If he can’t speak like he ‘writes’, then he’s talking nonsense. If he were to speak to you as ‘Dear Sir, Forthwith to our discussion, we’ve…”, then it would be fine for him to write like that.
If he can’t speak it, he can’t write it.
Plain and simple.
And the converse holds true: If you can speak it, you can write it.
Sean
http://www.psychotactics.com
October 23rd, 2006 at 1:48 pm
Hi, Bob,
Interesting problem. “How formal” is a question I also get in my writing workshops. But in this case, it might be different perspectives about “formal” and “conversational.” Your mature student might have thought that conversational mean slang, abbreviations, and sloppy grammar – all too common these days, as you know, but not very professional.
I see nothing wrong with using a more formal tone for some readers in some situations. What I insist on, however, is that people remember they are not writing to their best buddy when they write a business communication. The question of tone can be answered with 5 simple words: Keep the reader in mind.
October 23rd, 2006 at 9:00 pm
I have three considerations I tell everyone they should think of before they start writing: Audience, Context, and Tone. Audience is pretty obvious; think about to whom you’re writing (and Bob has great advice in this area). Context is taking into consideration how much they ALREADY know about your company, product or service, to avoid being boring (as Bob also notes in his writing). Tone is how they speak to each other.
Now, if your audience is full of ossified jerks, perhaps the proper tone is indeed formal and stiff. But the best writing style is the one that’s transparent to the reader. The worst style is the one in which you’re trying hard to communicate at a level that the audience doesn’t relate to, whether it’s ossified or txt msging. YMMV.
October 24th, 2006 at 11:03 am
Morti: he was there because someone made him go. In corporate training, your students are company employees who are MADE to go to the training by their supervisor, whose goal is to improve their skills. But the attendees often do not want to be there.
October 24th, 2006 at 9:02 pm
Bob: Like I said… It’s a sad story. I hope he loosened up enough to learn something! How do you handle a group like that? I’ve only heard you speak for paying customers anxious to hear what you have to say!
October 27th, 2006 at 2:17 pm
How about going all Jack Nicholson on him?
“You want proof? You can’t handle the proof!”
“I can tell you from 25 years of very successful experience as a copywriter that a conversational style is much more likely to elicit a desired action. I have A/B tested about a zillion campaigns in my career. As a matter of fact, that is why your employer insisted that you attend this class: so that you can learn more effective ways of communicating. Now, let me ask you something: are you open to learning more effective methods of communicating?”
If he says YES, he can sit down, take notes, and hopefully learn something.
If he says NO, excuse him from class, and coolly tell him you’ll communicate to his employer that he is not open to learning new and effective methodologies.
After all, the guy who writes your check needs to know if the guy is unwilling to be open to learning.
Proof, poof. The guy just wanted to derail you.
October 27th, 2006 at 3:39 pm
Laura: although your answer makes sense, my rule is never to embarrass a student in my class or try to show myself as superior in any way. What I usually do is let his peers deal with him, e.g., I ask, “Class, what do you think of what Joe has said?”
October 30th, 2006 at 10:08 am
Bob — Honestly, I’d probably do the same thing in your shoes!
(Only in my rich fantasy life do I allow myself to swagger so pompously!)
But I think it would be fun to feign having an alarmingly huge ego in front of a group of people, using all the affected speech and jargon in my arsonal — to not-so-subtly underscore the point that a high-handed, non-conversational approach might be off-putting!
Cheers!
November 1st, 2006 at 2:40 pm
Prove that a conversational tone is better? Three little words: Three Mile Island.
While I was studying technical writing, I saw an analysis of the infamous Three Mile Island memo warning of temperature problems. It was highly structured, highly technical, and had summed up the purpose of the memo – potentially defective temperature systems – at the very end. If that memo started, “Meltdown Warning!” and cut to the chase, history might have been a little different (technicians admitted that they only glazed over the memo which seemed to have little importance.)
November 29th, 2006 at 5:14 am
Hey bob
I guess it all depends whom you are writing for. I work for this agency in Mumbai called as Euro RSCG and the folks here raise steam if the rules of school english are broken. For me and the business I am into, writing is mode of communication and it should be done the way people want it and understand it.
Some of the far famed books in the world, ads, authors and even advertising legends have all been conversational with their work.
December 15th, 2006 at 5:30 am
erectile dysfunction .
March 22nd, 2007 at 7:46 pm
brand propecia .
May 18th, 2007 at 12:53 pm
ooo! it’s one of the best sites ever!
May 19th, 2007 at 1:53 am
The information I found here was rather helpful. Thank you for this.
May 19th, 2007 at 5:22 pm
Du musst ein Fachmann sein – wirklich guter Aufstellungsort, den du hast!
May 19th, 2007 at 10:32 pm
Lavoro eccellente! ..ringraziamenti per le informazioni..realmente lo apprezzo: D
May 20th, 2007 at 3:47 am
Nice site you have!
May 20th, 2007 at 9:43 pm
i’am really impressed!!
May 22nd, 2007 at 11:59 am
I’ll be BACK!
May 23rd, 2007 at 12:32 am
pagine piuttosto informative, piacevoli =)
May 23rd, 2007 at 10:35 am
Great site! Good luck to it’s owner!
May 26th, 2007 at 2:29 am
Interessare, molto interessante. Come avete fatto questo?
May 29th, 2007 at 8:00 am
totaly spies porn
totaly spies porn
May 29th, 2007 at 8:51 am
Chi ha fatto questo? E un buon posto per trovare le informazioni importanti!:)
June 25th, 2007 at 8:49 am
big tits mom
big tits mom
June 25th, 2007 at 9:18 am
pretty black women nude
pretty black women nude
June 25th, 2007 at 1:21 pm
free cartoon sex tape
free cartoon sex tape
July 2nd, 2007 at 8:36 am
free bizzare anal sex
free bizzare anal sex
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:12 am
asian fucking massive dildo
asian fucking massive dildo
July 8th, 2007 at 9:52 pm
free pictures of black gay dicks
free pictures of black gay dicks
July 9th, 2007 at 7:04 am
montreal transexual escort
montreal transexual escort
December 28th, 2010 at 12:27 am
When you’re chewing on life’s gristle
Don’t grumble, give a whistle
And this’ll help things turn out for the best…
And…always look on the bright side of life…
Always look on the light side of life.
November 29th, 2011 at 6:22 am
This website provides so much information and facts plus some outstanding article content as well. People today certainly do have a great deal on their intellects. Keep up the good work!
February 6th, 2012 at 1:26 am
I strongly disagree that there should be no distinction between writing style and speaking style! That’s separate from whether the writing should be conversational. Speech relies on inflection, body language, facial expression, and breath. Written text must compensate for – or replicate – that missing sensory input.