Business Phrases That Need to Be Cancelled
Business Phrases That Need to Be Cancelled
I’ve worked in IT for nearly thirty years. This means I’ve been working “In business” for my career, even if at times it was lugging servers more than sitting in board rooms. Business has its share of buzzwords (to be fair, every other pursuit I’ve been party of has it’s share of jargon and buzzwords). I use them without thinking about it.
However, there are some phrases that I’d love to see phased out of use, for a variety of reasons.
Open the Kimono
What It Means
It means with one party provides greater-than-typical transparency about its business practices, negotiating position, or other propritary information to a business partner.
Why It Must Be Cancelled
The imagry is exposing a naked body, and it’s suggestd to be a woman (think geisha). It feels a bit misoginistic. Even if you wanted to suggest it’s a man’s kimono being opened, it seems needlessly sexual and exploitive.
What to Use Instead
“Put all our cards on the table” is what I’d personally go with. Or perhaps “peek behind the curtain.” The latter could be interpreted a number of ways (a stage, a dressing room, the Wizard of Oz), it at least has more wiggle room.
One Throat to Choke
What It Means
It’s an arguemnet for having fewer vendors involved. By having one vendor provide multiple services, rather than splitting it among several, there is only one contract and one team to go to when there is an issue. There is also less of a chance there will be finger-pointing: that one vendor owns all of the system, so they can’t say it was the other guy.
Why It Must Be Cancelled
It seems needlessly violent and adversarial. While I’m not totally adverse to violent language in the workplace, this phrase seems particularly graphic. It also seems rather adversarial: if I’m using the vendor to support a portion of my delivery, it’s in my interest to partner with them.
What to Use Instead
I’m not sure there is a perfect one. “Agregate the spend” is another reason you want to use fewer vendors. By spending more with one vendor, you get more leverage with that company than splitting up the total amount among several vendors. If you favor a particular airline, grocery store, or gas station in order to maximize the return on a loyalty program, it’s a similar thing. While this phrase doesn’t quite capture the notion of having fewer responsible parties, it’s in the right direction.
Night Job/Day Job
What It Means
At it’s most basic, it deliniates something that is your core responsibilities from some additional task or function. You might be the manager of a team and responsible for their delivery, but also taking on management of a project, or the key point of contact for an office.
Why It Must Be Cancelled
The problem is the “night job” also often means the individual is spending significant additional time on that, to the point of “working two jobs” (though without any additioanl compensation). The the US, exempt employees (i.e. people who are salaried and exempt from overtime rules) are often seen as bottomless pools of labor. Some managers will act as though someone isn’t pulling their weight unless they are putting in 25-50% (or more) overtime on a regular basis. So, they assign “night jobs” to ensure that every resource is hitting that target.
What to Use Instead
This is a case where the term itself isn’t the issue, but the fact that the rational for it is common enough for the term to exist. If these .25-.5 FTEs add up to another person, hire another person. An employee should have only a “day job” or a “night job” from a given company. While exempt employees should expect to put in extra effort, if it hits a point where it feels like an extra job, something is not right.
Are there any other business phrases you feel need to stop being used?