How small changes to word choice can make a big difference
Given that I presented a poster about a project Impact Architects did that revolved around literacy, it shouldn’t be surprising that one of my thematic takeaways from the 2023 American Evaluation Association annual conference is about words. In a work setting, words establish boundaries and determine activity, and because of that, careful word choice is essential. Making even small changes to word choice can make a big difference.
Given what I learned at AEA, I’m making two specific word choice changes in my work in the coming year.
A “focus group” by any other name might generate more insights
In one of our active scopes of work, we have “two focus groups” listed among the deliverables. Over the course of conversation with the client, they told us that they really prefer a different designation: “Stakeholder consultations.” I was skeptical that we needed to call a focus group by another name, but it wasn’t anything to get worked up over. Stakeholder consultations it is.
But over the course of the AEA conference, I noticed that when people referred to the qualitative data gathering practice that includes a tailored conversation of a group of up to 10 or so individuals and about a specific topic — what we call a focus group — they used different words. The one most common was “listening session.” I asked two fellow poster presenters why they used the term “listening session” rather than “focus group,” they told me that it had to do with the comfort of the participants and being more accurate with words. Just like our client’s use of “stakeholder conversation” is a more accurate description of what we’re going to actually do.
“Focus group” suggests that the most important aspect of the conversation is the topic, whereas “listening session” suggests that the most important aspect is the participant’s viewpoints. The change in word choice led to people feeling more comfortable. I also suspect that people might be freer with sharing their opinions in a “listening session” because it takes pressure away from saying something really smart in a focus group.
A new twist on an old framework
The second change comes out of an evaluation methodology that, honestly, I just like the sound of: Appreciative inquiry. I think I’m drawn to this because I’m generally an optimistic person, and if I had to identify one of my strengths, it would be telling compelling positive stories. Of course, an effective evaluation can’t just be a positive story, and appreciative inquiry is much more than just appreciating. The method supports strategic thinking and organizational change by focusing on strengths rather than weaknesses, and possibility rather than problems.
In the presentation I saw on appreciative inquiry (from Kathleen Dean of The Rucks Group and Lyssa W. Becho of Western Michigan University intentionally titled “Words create worlds”), the presenters introduced an alternative framework for identifying a program’s or organization’s strategic thinking that included two key, substantive word changes. Rather than the fairly common SWOT analysis for helping guide decision making by identifying Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats, the presenters told of an experience in which they used the SOAR framework: Strengths, Opportunities, Aspirations, and Results. This framework is perfectly molded for appreciative inquiry because it still keeps an emphasis on strengths and opportunities, but rather than focusing on limitations (weaknesses) it turns to possibility (aspirations), and rather than taking a defensive posture (threats) it focuses on identifying measures of success (results).
An example line of questioning in this framework might be: What is the future the program wants to see and aspire to, what does it need to make it happen, and how will it know it’s succeeding? These questions should show that just because appreciative inquiry focuses on the positive, it still leads to rigorous thinking. We’re still inquiring. It’s not a lovefest.
Wordsmithing toward 2024
I’m always gratified to learn how doing something as seemingly small as changing words can have a large impact. And I’m always humbled to be reminded that small changes are no less difficult than big ones. Part of that is the uncertainty that comes with change, but that’s the environment in which Impact Architects and our clients operate.
Words do matter (as the person who advised me not to title this blog “Don’t SWOT your SOAR” can attest), and changing them matters too. I think these will be for the best, and I look forward to seeing what we’ll learn by doing so.
