# The Limits of Organizational Words By:: [[Brian Heath]] 2022-10-04 Words constrain our thoughts. For example, take a second to answer the following question: how are you feeling today? Now, how did you answer? Perhaps you said good, fine, great, horribly, or tired. These are words representing things and not the feelings going on inside you right now. You could have just responded quietly to yourself with just the acknowledgment of that feeling without describing it. But, you probably didn't consider that and just picked a word that described your feelings. Given the infinite number of feelings that could exist, narrowing it down to happy or sad is limiting at best, and yet it starts to shape how we think we feel. You can't be happy and sad as it seems like a logical fallacy as defined by a dictionary. But, I have felt happy and sad and a million other things all at once. Nuance is lost as the words that empower us to share so much also limit what we see as possible. We intuitively know that more is happening - it just can't be described. Within organizations, words and narratives are often used to constrain or shape behaviors. Nearly every organization has core values, a mission statement, and a list of [[priorities]]. These words give each member a sense of the work to accomplish. I don't know what an organization would look like without these words, but words are not real things and lack the nuance of our experienced [[reality]]. As a result, most organizational priorities and [[mission statements]] are either intractable or meaningless. Certainly, some organizational bullet points are better than others, but words are lacking because that's the nature of words. More is going on in reality, and organizations that ignore this face endless frustration and anxiety. Under any microscope, all organizational words fall apart. Individuals are left facing the challenge of being paid to act on behalf of the organization but without any clear direction as to what that means. For example, consider Google's now deleted code of conduct item: don't be evil. What in the world does it mean to not be evil? Who is the judge? How far does it go? Is driving to work versus riding a bike more or less evil? As with asking how you feel, we quickly get sucked into the artificial world of words that don't describe the situation. Perhaps Google was trying to convey a spirit of making a positive difference, but what in the world does that mean? This is an extreme example, but all organizational words will face these kinds of issues. As a result, individuals will feel constrained by words that don't describe or are not entirely useful at work. Meanwhile, the organization beats its head against the wall wondering why aren't things moving forward. Where does one go from here? First, understanding the limitations and constraints of words enables us to acknowledge the problem and maybe break free from this constraint. Second, organizations should consider [[Society|what the liberal arts have to say]] on the subject. Third, reality isn't a blog post. #### Related Items [[Language]] [[Words]] [[Work]] [[Business]] [[Liberal Arts]] [[Value]] [[Management]] [[Philosophy]]