Think of a piece of writing as a trip from a definite starting point to a definite destination. At the very start we look for a signpost pointing the way and naming the place we are headed for. At every fork of the road we need directions--legible and understandable directions. From time to time we glance back over the road we have already come, in order to remind ourselves of our position and direction. At the end we want to know that we have arrived at the point we set out for. Reminders of this sort are just as necessary in writing as they are in posting a road." (Ewing)
Unfortunately, the process of writing cannot be separated from the content of writing. No matter how good your ideas are, if your writing is ineffective, there is a very good chance the reader will either miss your good ideas or will discount them. It would be a waste to spend all of your time and money in college learning how to analyze problems effectively and then find the learning useless because of an inability to effectively communicate your ideas.
Anybody can learn and follow basic steps of effective writing. You do not have to be an artist. While following the recipe below will not make you a great writer, it can make you a very adequate and effective writer.
As the technical content of our exchanges rise, so does the need for precision. Similarly, the growing complexity of organizations and their external environments have resulted in a proliferation of colleagues and audiences who need to be kept informed. The explosion of information technology has not reduced the emphasis on written communication; rather it has added additional issues of concern to writers since the mediums for communications have increased in number and complexity.
Writing is not simply the process of putting words on paper (or a computer screen). Writing is situational. Writing is persuasion and therefore requires the kind of analysis that you would apply to almost any other managerial problem. You must analyze the situation; it requires understanding your audience, understanding timing, and understanding the culture of the group you are trying to influence. Thus effective writing involves analyzing and planning as well as doing.
Organizing your thinking
|
Every piece of writing is a form of persuasion. The writer has an array of tools available to persuade or influence and decisions must be made about what approach might best accomplish the goals of the persuasion. Choices will have to be made among the many possible ideas to present, the comparative emphasis on various arguments, the type of reasons and supportive material used, the establishment of credibility, etc.
In everyday, face-to-face interactions, we would rarely act in a way oblivious of the individual we were interacting with and the circumstances surrounding the interaction. Written communication should follow a similar approach.
As in any act of persuasion, the circumstances will determine which strategies or tactics we might choose. The approach to persuading another person will be a function of the relationship of the two people, the message itself, and the time frame involved.
There is no universal prescription for problem solving but there are various approaches that seem to work well. In a particular situation, there may be more steps than listed below, but there is a pretty good chance that each of the steps below should be found somewhere in your analysis.
In general, it is best to think inductively but write deductively. Deductive logic involves starting with a conclusion or generalization and drawing particular implications from that generalization. Inductive reasoning follows the reverse order; it moves from the particular to the general. It leads to a conclusion rather than drawing from a conclusion.
In analyzing most business problems, we want to think inductively. We don't want to start with a conclusion; rather we want to analyze information and eventually reach a conclusion.
However, when we write, we generally want to follow a deductive pattern. Even though we have thought about an issue inductively, we want to write about it deductively. We want to state our main point, our generalization (or conclusion), up front.
Many writers are uncomfortable with this; they would prefer to carefully describe the purpose of the writing, the methodology, and carefully state the conclusion only after careful elaboration of the information that led to it.
For the writer, this approach makes a lot of sense; the writer knows the conclusion. But for many readers, it is only the conclusion and its implications that may be of interest. There is a good chance that this reader may not stay around long enough to find out the conclusions if it is written in an inductive fashion rather than a deductive manner.
Assuming you are clear about your intended message, consider the following issues:
The opening paragraph probably deserves more thought than any other part of your document. Many readers will not read beyond your first paragraph. It is critical that your opening paragraph convey a lot of information and effectively persuade the reader to go farther. In essence, writing opening paragraphs is like many managerial endeavors. The lack of a clear purpose, identified up front, will cause failure.
The reader must perceive quickly what the benefits are of reading the document. Few readers will go through a document to find its real message; if the purpose isn't evident up front, the document will not be read.
In addition, a weak opening paragraph will cause the document to lose impact. If a reader has an incorrect or vague notion of the main point of the document, there is a good chance he or she will misunderstand much of the information that follows.
Writers sometimes want to lead the reader through the tortured process that led to a conclusion. This approach might work for a mystery or suspense novel but in business, we read for information and the reader will resent every moment wasted.
Other problems include:
In general, put yourself in the shoes of the intended readers, when you begin. You see the whole picture and how all the points relate to each other. The reader will not. They will see your material in a linear sequence, although you may see it as a more complex form.
While openings will vary as a function of the nature of the message, the amount of controversy and surprise involved, and the audience, there are some generalizations we can make.
The opening should clarify the nature of the subject to be discussed and at least in a general way, point toward the conclusions, recommendations, or findings set forth later. This may not include an outline or listing of all the main ideas, but should make the purpose perfectly clear, specify the principal issues or questions you will address, and give the reader a general notion of the basic approach and conclusion.
The above is a minimum requirement opening and is sometimes not enough. You may need a more complete opening including:
Assume you have done a case analysis and have pages of ideas and information you want to convey. You have lived with the case for days and are overwhelmed with the notion of boiling all of your thoughts and recommendations down into an effective introduction. You need to do what writers have had to do for ages. You need to try to figure out what is the essence of the message. You might imagine a situation where you ran into your boss as you were about to go into an elevator and your boss asked you for the essence of your analysis; you only have 15 seconds. This is the essence of your opening.
You might ask yourself, what does the reader need most to know; what if the reader is interrupted on page one and never gets back to the document; what is the minimum the reader needs to have learned?
If your purpose is disclosing a new approach that may be helpful , your introduction might focus on mentioning the idea in a general way and indicate why it is important. If you are recommending a solution to a problem, you might state in general terms what the problem is and what way you are proposing. If you are evaluating work or a project previously reported, you might specify the work and indicate briefly the significance, feasibility, usefulness, integrity, or relevance.
In general, introductions include three elements: the situation, the complication, and the resolution.
Consider this example.
"For most of us, the two most formidable purchases in life are the house and the car. (situation)
But while buying a house is usually a thrilling experience, buying a car is often a chilling experience,
approached with the apprehension usually reserved for root canal surgery. (complication) But the car purchase experience needn't be traumatic.
If you know what you want, do your homework, and plot a bargaining strategy, you can buy a car and drive away without feeling that you
have just been mugged." (resolution) (Boston Globe, 3/3/93)
Writers often wonder what to put first. Should it be their main argument or the rationalization for that argument? For example, suppose you have this series of items:
|
| Organizing these items deductively: Deduction follows a line of
thought to a "therefore" conclusion. Arranged deductively, the earlier items would be ordered
chronologically, as follows: Last week four secretaries complained of overwork. Also, we've hired two managers and we have three new accounts. Finally, one of our typists just left to have a baby. For these reasons, we should consider adding four people to our support staff.
|
| Organizing these items Inductively: You could also structure the items according to an inductive line of reasoning.
Induction makes a
statement of inference (or conclusion) on the basis of the supporting reasons that follow it.
When you state an argument chronologically, you often include irrelevant information. When you
put your "therefore" conclusion first, the reader can evaluate all the information that follows it in
light of your main point. To illustrate:
Example 1-Revised-An Inductive Approach: This structure avoids the guessing game that occurs when you put your main point at the end. "Why are you telling me this?" asks the reader who hasn't read the ending. |
| Example 2-Original After a great deal of thought, I've concluded that it's about time we bought respirators for each employee and made it a safety requirement that each employee wear one. I think such an investment would boost morale and cut down on absenteeism and sick leave. Also, employees have warned us about their low morale and the retaliatory measures they'll take through their union if adequate relief isn't offered. If we can correct this situation, it would be good public relations. |
| Example 2-Revised We need to buy respirators and make their use mandatory for all employees for these reasons:
|
Sometimes we are trying to alert readers to a problem they should avoid or should correct. Yet we hide the problem in verbiage so dense that the reader never finds it. Often, this happens because the ideas are ordered chronologically. We tell a bedtime story, a "once upon a time" tale. Mixed in with the excess story telling is a hidden message. We can state it more clearly if we describe the problem, its analysis, and its solution. For example, consider the following:
|
Example 3-Original The ABC project team, which was appointed on August 14, has completed its analysis of the 1993 Automotive Review. It prepared its work plans, which outline tasks and man- day estimates; it recommended task force members; and it proposed an implementation schedule for each work plan.. A copy of each of the preliminary work plans is attached for your inspection.
I fully recognize the need to move forward in correcting the problems pointed out by the Project Team. However, the 744 man-days of work needed according to the report would make meeting the October 20 beginning date difficult, since all personnel are currently involved in other tasks. By shifting priorities and working on only two work plans concurrently, the Automotive Section can provide the necessary support to meet the implementation schedule in the report. Additional clerical staff would have to be provided also. MIS would have to allocate resources to the project that are now committed to 30 other projects. Several of these are critical to accomplishing our goals for next year. To continue these and to begin the new schedule, MIS will need a minimum of one additional analyst. A possible alternative is to authorize one MIS analyst from the 1994 budget. Barney Baker is in favor of the project and the changes I suggest. Please get back to me by the end of the week to discuss it.
|