<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Top 100 Influencers in HR, Recruiting &#38; Talent Acquisition &#187; language</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.top100influencers.com/tag/language/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.top100influencers.com</link>
	<description>Profiling the Top 100 Influencers in the Recruiting and HR Industry</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Jan 2012 17:01:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Mincing Words</title>
		<link>http://www.top100influencers.com/mincing-words</link>
		<comments>http://www.top100influencers.com/mincing-words#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Apr 2009 04:44:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>John Sumser</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Blog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[capital]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[communication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[human]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[john sumser]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[language]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.recruitingblogs.com/?p=752</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By John Sumser (April 24, 2009) What you say and how you say it matters. The other side of the political correctness debate is a simple idea. Your language says a lot about how you see things. While I agree with Heather&#8217;s frustration, the proper alternative is not a free for all.. What you call [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://recruitingblogs.ning.com/profile/JohnSumser">By John Sumser</a></p>
<p>(April 24, 2009) What you say and how you say it  	matters. The other side of the political correctness debate is a simple  	idea. Your language says a lot about how you see things. While I agree  	with <a href="../the-cult-of-nice">Heather&#8217;s  	frustration</a>, the proper alternative is not a free for all..</p>
<p>What you call people and how you say it can be offensive. You may be  	astonished (as I have been from time to time) at the way people react to  	the simplest cultural references.  On the one side of the argument  	is being clear about what you mean. On the other side is being clear  	about what you don&#8217;t mean.</p>
<p>We&#8217;re all acutely aware of the damage that&#8217;s been done to  	inter-gender communication. As Heather noted, it&#8217;s now impossible to  	slide a compliment across the gender gap. Defeatists and agitators say  	this means we should end brute force language surveillance.</p>
<p>I think we have a good ways to go.</p>
<p>A huge part of the problem in our industry is that we are really  	imprecise with our language. The people of HR and Recruiting are willing  	to use unexamined language in a way that none of the other professions  	do. Ill conceived metaphors about human beings litter the HR landscape.  	Like most metaphorical conversation, the end result is bad communication  	when people start believing the literal meaning  and missing the  	idea.</p>
<p>Here is a very simple idea. In the 21st Century, it is against the  	law almost everywhere, to own another person. Any language that hints at  	the idea of that kind of ownership is both offensive and misguided. It&#8217;s  	easy to slip and there are not readily available replacement words.</p>
<p>Human beings are not capital. They are not assets. They are not  	resources. They are not talent. Each of these ideas compares people to  	forms of wealth and raw material. Each of these notions 	<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectification">objectifies</a> people. It is demeaning. It is a bad way to communicate the underlying  	idea.</p>
<p>It makes for bad decision making.</p>
<p>People are not a list of skills and accomplishments. A job is not a  	buzzword search string. Work is not a formulaic application of capital  	to a task.</p>
<p>No, people are dynamic and complex. The way that they fit into jobs  	(or don&#8217;t) is surprising and mysterious. The very work that they do  	changes because they are doing it. The way that they interact with the  	team to produce results is only vaguely predictable. They seem to  	perform better in circumstances where trust and transparency are the  	norm.</p>
<p>In Heather&#8217;s 	<a href="../the-cult-of-nice">assault on the  	Cult of Nice</a>, she says:</p>
<blockquote><p>The Cult of Nice demands that everyone conform to one set of  	rules that is politically correct, conflict-free and most of all,  	their way. It?s an insidious form of codependency where Nice is the  	highest good. The focus is entirely on the behavior of others and  	how it makes the cult member feel. It makes substantive discussion  	impossible.</p></blockquote>
<p>Wah, wah, wah. Substantive discussion can&#8217;t take place when the  	fundamental language is demeaning. Ms Bussing&#8217;s answer is to kick away  	the constraints. But, in some cases, the rules are not harsh enough.  	Ironically, Heather&#8217;s position boils down to the same thing she argues  	against i.e., not making you feel bad makes me feel bad.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, we are letting our business leaders make gross judgment  	error by allowing them to think of the people who work for them as  	material objects.</p>
<p>So, the /component/option,com_jcalpro/Itemid,28/extmode,cats/&#8221;>how to get cialis</a>  next time you hear someone use the phrase &#8220;Human Capital&#8221;,  	please tell them that &#8220;Humans are not Capital, owning people is against  	the law.&#8221; If they backpedal and say, &#8220;I mean they are assets&#8221;, tell them  	that &#8220;people are not property of any kind&#8221;. Force the dialog.</p>
<p>In this instance, the question is better than all of the answers you  	could get.</p>
<hr />
<ul>
<li><span style="font-size: x-small;">I&#8217;m on <a href="http://twitter.com/JohnSumser">Twitter</a>, <a href="http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=717170226&amp;hiq=john,sumser">Facebook</a>, <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/johnsumser">LinkedIn</a> /component/option,com_jcalpro/Itemid,28/extmode,cats/&#8221;>how to get cialis</a>  and <a href="http://friendfeed.com/johnrsumser">Friendfeed</a>. Catch up with me.</span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: x-small;">I&#8217;m doing a Free Webinar: <strong> <a href="http://ow.ly/2DYR">Regional HR Marketing and PR &#8211; Tailoring Sales to Market Realities</a></strong><br />
- Thursday, May 7, 2009,<br />
- 10-11 am PT (1-2 pm ET)</span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: x-small;">I&#8217;m leading an Intensive workshop called <a href="http://www.therecruitingconference.com/intensives?C=C1mKxQNoCLgb5Mh6"><strong>Recruiting Strategy in a Down Economy: Identifying What&#8217;s to Come in the Upturn</strong></a> at the Kennedy Recruiting Conference in Las Vegas on May 19.</span></li>
<p><strong><br />
If you enjoyed this conversation, <a href="http://recruitingblogs.ning.com/main/authorization/signUp?">consider joining our community</a>. It&#8217;s even better inside.</strong><span style="font-size: x-small;"> <span style="font-size: x-small;"> </span></span></ul>
<p><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></span></span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.top100influencers.com/mincing-words/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>32</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

