Communication shortcuts feel fast but create hidden costs: vague messages force readers to decode, guess, and follow up. Real efficiency means sending clear, complete thoughts the first time.
The story
We think communication “short cuts” are efficient because they’re fast to *send*.
But most of them are actually just outsourcing thinking to the reader.
Problem:
– We fire off half-formed Slacks: “Quick q – can you handle this?” [Handle *what*? By *when*? With *who*?]
– We skip grammar and structure, then wonder why we’re stuck in 12-message clarification threads.
– We optimize for “fewest keystrokes” instead of “fastest mutual understanding.”
Behind the scenes, this creates:
– Extra decoding [“What does she *mean* by this?”]
– Re-reads and guesses
– Emotional friction [“Did I mess up? Are they upset?”]
That’s not efficiency; that’s invisible cognitive tax.
Solution:
Slow down to speed up. Before I hit send, I ask:
– Is there *one* clear ask?
– Would a new person understand the who / what / when without context?
– Are my pronouns and references obvious, or am I making them do mind-reading?
Micro-edits, big payoff:
– Replace “this/that/it” with the actual thing.
– Split long, tangled sentences.
– Add the one missing detail that prevents three follow-ups.
As I explore in *A Practical EmPath* and with EmpathyBot.net, clarity is a form of care.
We’re not just arranging words; we’re conserving each other’s brain cells.
Can you imagine a workplace where messages land cleanly the first time?
Recent Comments