Author: mj

Ted Lasso dropped by his boss’s office and gave her a treat. He also engaged in small talk to build their relationship. At first, it didn’t make the impact he hoped for.

Ted didn’t notice. Or didn’t care. Either way, every morning, he kept bringing freshly baked biscuits in a pink box and shared something about himself.

The same thing happened as I worked on making my writing more likable. I tweaked this. And I tweaked that. At first, I didn’t notice any improvement. No one noticed. Or they didn’t care.

Eventually, Rebecca came around. Your reader will too.

Yesterday, I shared a tip on feedback. Today, I read an academic article on it…actually three.

I don’t know if you’ve read many academic articles. Saraha Desert is the image that comes to mind.

For some reason, reading these articles reminded me of a writing-improvement exercise.

The idea is to find a block of text and rewrite it.

I decided to experiment and randomly picked a paragraph from one of the articles. The goal was at least 100 words but landed on a paragraph with 90. Close enough, right?

Here’s the paragraph from the article:

We live in complex, living and dynamic systems. Order emerges out of these systems in nonlinear ways. The same holds true for teaching and learning. How I learn as a student is not how other students learn. What works for some teachers does not work for others. Teaching and learning in such complex and ever-changing systems cannot be boiled-down to one “right” way–students and teachers make meaning for themselves, play with what is of interest to them, and provide a web of feedback loops within a community of learning.

Here’s my 39-word translation:

Teaching and learning are hard and always changing, just like life. Students and teachers must find their paths and put systems in place to help them succeed, just like life. There’s not one right way, just like life.

I know. Each serves a different purpose.

And I’m not saying mine is right. And, maybe, I destroyed the original meaning. It was an experiment.

Oh! Just for fun, I threw the original in ChatGPT.

Here is its 48-word, 7-second version:

Learning and teaching are complex and ever-changing. Everyone learns differently and what works for one person may not work for another. There is no one “right” way to learn or teach. Students and teachers have to discover what works best for them and learn together as a community.

Hm?

I am an online university instructor. Well. It’s one of the things I do.

The most overlooked place to connect with students and build relationships is in the grading feedback.

A rule I use is I, you, and we. Let’s look at it in action, shall we?

Suppose the student submitted an assignment. And it’s off the mark completely. I could say, “You were completely off the mark here. Please go back, look at the instructions, and resubmit.” But see where the blame is. It forces the student to put his dukes up and defend. We want to avoid that.

Instead, we might say, “I did a bad job of explaining this one. When is a good time to meet so we can bump your grade up.” That puts the blame on me which, as the instructor, it should be. And then it moves to how we are going to fix it to help them.

But what if they did a fantastic job? In that case, we might say, “You did fantastic work on this assignment. You followed all the instructions perfectly. And I really like how you talked about X because of Y.” Praise is placed on the student where it belongs.

This is a leadership strategy I’ve used for years and it traverses the academic and business gorge well. I’ll bet you get more from your students (and people) using this strategy.

Have you ever read something so engaging you didn’t even realize you were reading? It felt more like a conversation. But you weren’t sure why.

It may have been that the writer was asking questions.

Questions engage your brain.

They draw you in.

Think about it. When you’re reading, and the writer asks a question, you don’t just blow by it. You pause. If only for a second.

Do you know why that is?

Even though the writer isn’t standing in front of you, and the question is rhetorical, you formulate an answer. And you might even craft a rebuttal to the follow-up question the writer might ask. You become engaged.

Be careful, though.

You can go too far with this tool. Asking too many questions without any context doesn’t feel like a conversation anymore. Because it’s not. A conversation is an exchange of ideas.

Next time you’re writing something.

Try this. Try sharing ideas with your reader. And sprinkle in some questions throughout.

Does that make sense?

Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

Robert J. Hanlon

I know. That’s not very likable, but it’s an old quote. As I’ve said, words change. Annnnnd, it’s a bit arrogant to assume the stupidity is the other person.

I received a harsh reply to an email this morning.

Immediately, I wondered if I had said something stupid that caused the reaction. Believe me. I’m not above saying something stupid. I have receipts.

When I went back and looked at what I wrote, I didn’t see anything that warranted the reply. Nope. I was my usual, likable self.

I could have snapped back with an equally harsh reply.

BUT. I assumed the person wasn’t angry with me. My message just didn’t hit the mark. Once I cleared it up. We’d be good.

Plus. It wouldn’t have helped get anything done.

AND. As a writer. Any miscommunication between my reader and me is my fault. So, I apologized and rephrased my request.

Here’s what happened next…

The person replied to me and apologized for responding that way. They read my email wrong.

Now. We’re good.

I wonder what would have happened if responded differently. A few days ago, I shared the principle of mirroring. This exchange is a good example of the principle in reverse.

Yesterday I talked about people sharing tips for using AI to write all your stuff.

What’s interesting are the camps surrounding this topic.

It feels like it is either the end of the world. Everyone is going to stop thinking.

Or refusing to use it will put you back in the dark ages.

Like everything else, it’s not a binary. It’s yes and.

For example, I wrote an 800-word essay this morning. I ran my 953-word first draft through Grammarly – which is AI. Over the past few years, that robot has analyzed millions of words that migrated from my head through the keyboard. Remarkable.

I look at all of the change suggestions it makes. Some, I change. Some I get…but I keep them as-is because my way is more likable. And some of the suggestions are waaaaaay off base; in those cases, I ignore them. And not once have we bickered about it.

The point is AI is here. Depending on your philosophical bent, it will get better or worse.

We, writers, have to decide the best way to make it work for our readers in the short and long runs.

It takes 20 years to build a reputation and five minutes to ruin it. If you think about that, you’ll do things differently.

Warren Buffett

Over the past few weeks, we’ve seen tips on how AI can write an email for us. Write a social media post. Write a blog post…like this one.

And. It can do it faster too. In seconds.

Maybe it can. Maybe 999 times out of 1,000, the bot can write something for you. Maybe it’s worth it.

What about that one time?

Just remember. Every email you send. Every social media post. Every interaction you have with someone is a chance to build the relationship or destroy it. If you think about that, you’ll do things differently.

There is a lot of talk about work-life balance. Burnout, a verb, is real. And, when used today, everyone knows what it means. Even without context.

Burnout was real in the 1970s too. But it meant something different. Back then, it was a noun and referred to a person who used drugs heavily. Everyone knew what it meant. Even without context.

There are lots of words like this. And there will be many more.

Words change. Their meanings get coopted. Sometimes, the definition changes. As writers, it’s up to us to use words the reader understands. Even without context.

Be obscure clearly!

William Strunk

That is a quote from Strunk’s book, The Elements of Style. Strunk wasn’t totally against playing fast and loose with the rules of grammar. Nor was he against using obscurity to tell a story.

But, because writing IS communication. Clarity IS vital.

As you find your voice and work to become a more likable writer, remember whether…

• …you religiously follow grammar rules or intentionally break them…
• …you use similes or metaphors…
• …you use short words or long ones…

…above all. Be clear.

Unconsciously or consciously, we don’t like being told this has not happened.

We prefer this will be finished shortly. Or…

This could be better.

Here are some more examples:

I don’t work out every day.	I work out four days per week.
My teacher is not a nice person.	My teacher has a short fuse.
I don’t like lettuce.	I prefer spinach.
I am not a great writer.	My writing is more likable.