As a lapsed applied linguist, I'm well aware of the inexorable processes of linguistic change, and for the most part it is interesting and even amusing to observe change in progress. What is less tolerable, from a personal viewpoint, is the way language is used to bamboozle, fool, and deceive. Nothing new in this, of course, and the uses to which language is put reflects the ideological changes which affect public discourse.
In the 1990s, 'deliver' seemed to cross the boundary from the terminology of project management to the lexicon of mangerialism, and by the end of the 1990s, no politicians could open their mouths without uttering 'deliver' in its various manifestations. There was even a Delivery Unit at the heart of the Blair government at No. 10 Downing Street, for heaven's sake. Now 'deliver' has replaced more precise and more appropriate terms like 'apply' (policies), 'provide' (benefits), 'fulfil' (promises), 'implement' (policies, plans) and so on. Policies, we are told, are 'delivered', even goals are 'delivered' and so are promises (which are, of course, also broken).
The latest blight on the verbal landscape is the phrase: 'in terms of' (ITO). Today, I read on the website of Car magazine, a report which contained the following especially gross example of ITO:
‘It will not only be the most prestigious SUV on sale, but also the fastest in terms of top speed, and the most expensive in terms of price,’ Dr Dürheimer told CAR (referring to the latest bling Bentley for the ultra rich).
Unfortunately, it's too late to ban 'in terms of' (ITO). Yes, I know that like 'less' (when it should be' fewer') and 'deliver' and numerous other examples, banning is a battle that one can only lose. ITO has infected most notably spoken discourse. It's impossible to listen to the radio or TV nowadays without hearing ITO uttered by presenters, interviewers and interviewees. Basically, it marks what I think in past times would have been called the rheme. (I'm probably wrong about the term, but what I'm referring to is the new information to follow the theme, which in the above would be 'it'.) Often, ITO replaces a simple preposition, e.g.
It has a knock on effect in terms of how much you have to pay….
It has a knock on how much you have to pay….
there had to be compromises in terms of quality to meet the target.
there had to be compromises in quality to meet the target.
Only occasionally is ITO used more or less correctly:
Andrew Boodworth of the British Geological Survey reckons that aggregates are still the country's biggest primary industry -- in terms of weight, not value. Economist, February 25th, 2012, p. 31 .
Dr Dürheimer is clearly a very competent speaker of English, even though it presumably is not his native language. Maybe when a non native English speaker can use the latest cliché in a way that would do honour to the boilerplate of any native English speaking corporate spokesperson, it really is time to admit defeat!
Tuesday 6 March 2012
Sunday 4 March 2012
Going Viral
Context: we live in Henley-on-Thames, a small south Oxfordshire town with a population of about 12,500, 8 miles from Reading, the county town of Berkshire, which has aspirations to achieve city status during the Jubilee Year. South Oxfordshire is Conservative country, with an affluent population, some of whom, living in the Henley hinterland, are seriously and globally rich. The town sports two supermarkets: Waitrose, which is part of the John Lewis Partnership, and Tesco, which, by a substantial margin, controls around 30% of national market share (compared with Waitrose’s 4%).
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/aug/16/supermarkets-market-share-kantar
In Henley, Waitrose is located in the centre of town, so that one of the two adjacent central car parks is known as the ‘Waitrose Car Park’. Tesco, with a much more recent history in the town, is situated on the outskirts, off the Reading Road, and has its own free parking. From our point of view, Waitrose is our local shop, and although Tesco has a reputation for very competitive pricing, there is little sense in driving to a supermarket when we can walk. Besides, if we do drive to Waitrose, the first hour’s parking is refunded – an inducement to help compensate for the competitive advantage that Tesco enjoys by having free parking.
As part of the John Lewis Partnership, Waitrose occupies a unique position because staff are part owners and are known and referred to as ‘partners’. Recently, in much media and political brow beating about the need to rethink nasty capitalism, the John Lewis model has been frequently cited. Basically, thanks to expansion of power-sharing policies by the son of the eponymous founder, partners have a say in the way the business is run, as well being beneficiaries of a bonus sharing scheme which gives them a significant share in the profits.
(See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lewis_Partnership)
That the John Lewis model of corporate governance is successful is demonstrated by their leading position in the retail market. Not only are they ‘never knowingly undersold’, they also enjoy an almost hallowed status among their middle class clientele, thanks in no small measure to their emphasis on providing excellent customer service. This means that customers can expect to be given good advice by knowledgeable sales staff, an important consideration when major purchases are involved. Although Waitrose, as a supermarket chain, is not selling high cost/value products, the same values and attitudes extend to their stores and staff who, for instance, are trained not only to point customers in the direction of sought for groceries, but to accompany them to the specific location while engaging them in conversation! (You don't get this sort of treatment at Tesco!)
Yesterday we did a routine Saturday morning shop at Waitrose, and on returning home, my wife noticed on the receipt that there was an invitation to participate in an on-line customer survey as part of the Waitrose-Experience. So, I logged on to see what this was all about. (We were both uneasy about the terminology: it seems that we no longer shop, but have a retail experience.)
To participate, I had to key in a code printed on the receipt. So, there is a gateway to entry to the survey, which only bona fide customers can pass. The survey itself is very similar to anything to be found on SurveyMonkey, with a lot of Likert scale items in which customers are asked to rate range of merchandise, quality of service, and so on. Significantly, in view of the importance attached to the latter, one item asks customers to rate staff on their ‘passion’ and ‘product knowledge’.
The survey is quite long, and at the end customers are asked to share their information about the Waitrose experience with friends via the usual list of social network sites. This is where things became interesting. There is an empty field into which one can enter some text. However, when the button to post this to Facebook is clicked, a separate box appears, containing text to the effect that I ‘have just had a great Waitrose shopping experience and to find out more, click on a link’ which will, presumably, take the reader to my completed survey. Hmm.
At this point I started to feel that I was being manipulated in pursuit of a clever bit of viral marketing dreamt up by the Waitrose marketing department. (Viral marketing is what we used to call Word of Mouth -- WOM – but now the WOM is disseminated via the social media.) And when customers feel that they are being used, their attitude to the manipulator becomes less positive. So, from the customer service management point of view, I feel that my Waitrose Experience experience serves as a warning as far as surveying customers is concerned.
There was, of course, an inducement to complete the survey: entry into a draw to win £500 worth of Waitrose groceries. In relation to the Waitrose operation, this is less than a drop in the ocean. Last year, Waitrose spent £10 million on renewing its web and on-line services,
http://www.cio.co.uk/news/3266928/waitrose-experiences-major-problems-on-new-10m-website/
which shows not only how seriously they take this aspect of retailing, but also how only really big businesses can resource the data management and mining systems which they consider to be vital in meeting and forecasting consumer demands and taste.
Even so, there are dangers in co-opting the customer in the marketing process, and with the growing concern over the ownership and use of personal data,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/mar/02/digital-masters-must-be-watched-google
even the sainted John Lewis Partnership and Waitrose may need to think again.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/aug/16/supermarkets-market-share-kantar
In Henley, Waitrose is located in the centre of town, so that one of the two adjacent central car parks is known as the ‘Waitrose Car Park’. Tesco, with a much more recent history in the town, is situated on the outskirts, off the Reading Road, and has its own free parking. From our point of view, Waitrose is our local shop, and although Tesco has a reputation for very competitive pricing, there is little sense in driving to a supermarket when we can walk. Besides, if we do drive to Waitrose, the first hour’s parking is refunded – an inducement to help compensate for the competitive advantage that Tesco enjoys by having free parking.
As part of the John Lewis Partnership, Waitrose occupies a unique position because staff are part owners and are known and referred to as ‘partners’. Recently, in much media and political brow beating about the need to rethink nasty capitalism, the John Lewis model has been frequently cited. Basically, thanks to expansion of power-sharing policies by the son of the eponymous founder, partners have a say in the way the business is run, as well being beneficiaries of a bonus sharing scheme which gives them a significant share in the profits.
(See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lewis_Partnership)
That the John Lewis model of corporate governance is successful is demonstrated by their leading position in the retail market. Not only are they ‘never knowingly undersold’, they also enjoy an almost hallowed status among their middle class clientele, thanks in no small measure to their emphasis on providing excellent customer service. This means that customers can expect to be given good advice by knowledgeable sales staff, an important consideration when major purchases are involved. Although Waitrose, as a supermarket chain, is not selling high cost/value products, the same values and attitudes extend to their stores and staff who, for instance, are trained not only to point customers in the direction of sought for groceries, but to accompany them to the specific location while engaging them in conversation! (You don't get this sort of treatment at Tesco!)
Yesterday we did a routine Saturday morning shop at Waitrose, and on returning home, my wife noticed on the receipt that there was an invitation to participate in an on-line customer survey as part of the Waitrose-Experience. So, I logged on to see what this was all about. (We were both uneasy about the terminology: it seems that we no longer shop, but have a retail experience.)
To participate, I had to key in a code printed on the receipt. So, there is a gateway to entry to the survey, which only bona fide customers can pass. The survey itself is very similar to anything to be found on SurveyMonkey, with a lot of Likert scale items in which customers are asked to rate range of merchandise, quality of service, and so on. Significantly, in view of the importance attached to the latter, one item asks customers to rate staff on their ‘passion’ and ‘product knowledge’.
The survey is quite long, and at the end customers are asked to share their information about the Waitrose experience with friends via the usual list of social network sites. This is where things became interesting. There is an empty field into which one can enter some text. However, when the button to post this to Facebook is clicked, a separate box appears, containing text to the effect that I ‘have just had a great Waitrose shopping experience and to find out more, click on a link’ which will, presumably, take the reader to my completed survey. Hmm.
At this point I started to feel that I was being manipulated in pursuit of a clever bit of viral marketing dreamt up by the Waitrose marketing department. (Viral marketing is what we used to call Word of Mouth -- WOM – but now the WOM is disseminated via the social media.) And when customers feel that they are being used, their attitude to the manipulator becomes less positive. So, from the customer service management point of view, I feel that my Waitrose Experience experience serves as a warning as far as surveying customers is concerned.
There was, of course, an inducement to complete the survey: entry into a draw to win £500 worth of Waitrose groceries. In relation to the Waitrose operation, this is less than a drop in the ocean. Last year, Waitrose spent £10 million on renewing its web and on-line services,
http://www.cio.co.uk/news/3266928/waitrose-experiences-major-problems-on-new-10m-website/
which shows not only how seriously they take this aspect of retailing, but also how only really big businesses can resource the data management and mining systems which they consider to be vital in meeting and forecasting consumer demands and taste.
Even so, there are dangers in co-opting the customer in the marketing process, and with the growing concern over the ownership and use of personal data,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/mar/02/digital-masters-must-be-watched-google
even the sainted John Lewis Partnership and Waitrose may need to think again.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)