As a strategic communication agency for nonprofits and for profit companies advancing social change, we know that word choice matters immensely to achieve organizational goals. But often decisions about language are made quickly, and founded on a list of trending or no-go words, as a way to save time for other prioritized activities. Nonprofits, foundations and for profit companies should move past that practice to proactively establish a philosophy that guides the vocabulary they use to communicate with their audiences. This not only unifies the decisions around language choice, but also helps staff build their instinct guided by this ethos in cases where they encounter language or vocabulary that is new to them and raises flags.
Sometimes word choice is easy: let’s say “process” or “procedures” rather than “orchestration mechanism” to simplify our communications. But in other instances, we need something more concrete to guide decisions. We recommend to our clients that they identify and adopt a philosophy stemming from their mission and vision that informs their word choice. For example, clients should consider where the organization is today and how language can provide a roadmap toward their aspirations. Often, clients ask us for “cheat sheets” and we tactfully share that we believe that’s the wrong approach. Cheat sheets do not help build the muscles needed for staff to make language choices independently. Nor can they incorporate the nuance in language such as how certain words take on meaning with particular audiences or situations.
An organization’s mission and vision are informed by data collection on communications. This should guide the philosophy that anchors them to engage stakeholders.
For example, The Wakeman Agency derives its language choices from our grounding philosophy of Narrative Justice which focuses on:
- Centering accurate accounts of lived experiences.
- Amplifying the narratives and experiences of those impacted by structural and historic dynamics incongruous with their aspirations for a better future.
- Bravery in messaging and delivery, knowing that uncomfortable truths can only be effectively tackled in contexts of deep belonging.
With this philosophy, our decisions about word choice are necessarily tied to the data we gather from communities and individuals closest to the issues we need to amplify.
It is important that philanthropic organizations and foundations understand clearly which audiences they are hoping to reach through their communications. Feedback from those audiences on communications, and data on what makes them impactful should contribute to word choice and narrative decisions. Additionally, organizations must be aware of the history of exclusion in their focus area—whether that is ending intimate partner violence, advancing more just climate mitigation techniques, providing wrap-around services for students historically excluded from the high school to college pipeline, or another area of work. Language choices should strategically take the history of injustice into account, speaking candidly about it.
This means that key words and phrases to use or avoid should be determined per audience. Of course, organizations should frame communications recognizing the history of exclusion in their industry in specific ways when those messages are meant for funders. However, the same organization will very likely use different words when communicating to people who have themselves been excluded.
Word choice is a key element of effective communications. But no one will benefit from ad hoc lists that become completely taboo nor the over usage of words to the point that they lose their meaning. Nonprofits, foundations and for profit companies will be well served by identifying an existing organizational philosophy or creating one to guide language usage for both internal and external audiences.
One effective way to accomplish this is through a language audit and Lexicon, which can help tighten existing values into a set of themes for a coherent philosophy to drive communications. Having regularly conducted this kind of work for clients we have observed how it not only guides the use of language by an organization but supports the development of skills among staff to make independent language choices in nuanced contexts, consistent with the organization’s mission and vision.
If your organization lacks a clear picture of how your mission and vision manifest in your communications efforts, fill out the contact form at the bottom of this page for a private consultation.