logo
I started using corporate lingo ironically – and now I can't stop

I started using corporate lingo ironically – and now I can't stop

CNA21-06-2025
I nodded as a coworker listed out a few suggestions on ways her team and mine could collaborate in the next few months.
'Yeah, that sounds like a good way to synergise,' I said.
And then we both made a face.
Almost a decade ago, when I started my first official 'office job', I made a silent vow to myself that I would never become One of Those. A corporate drone on autopilot, mindlessly regurgitating buzzwords and key phrases day in and day out to no real end until I would one day reach my final form: a glorified LinkedIn bot.
I didn't really 'use' corporate lingo so much as make fun of it – in a good-natured, tongue-in-cheek sort of way. It was a quick fix for lightening the mood for everybody, myself included: 'Well, since that project fell through, guess that's one less loop to close, huh?'
But these days, I find myself starting to slip into corporate lingo unironically, the same way I started doing years ago with skinny jeans, emojis, and the acronym 'LOL'.
LINGO LIMBO
More people are expressing annoyance or frustration with it these days, especially on social media, but make no mistake – corporate lingo is nothing new. From the 'value chains' of the 1980s and 1990s to the 'key performance indicators' you hear your own manager wax on about today, such jargon has long been a mainstay of working life.
Like with most things that eventually trigger widespread discussions and accusations online of being 'annoying' or 'cringe', there's a legitimately useful element to corporate lingo's villain origin story.
Business and work have grown more complex over the last few decades. Thanks to globalisation, the systems we operate in have become more interconnected and as a result, more expansive and intricate. So have the individual roles we play in those systems.
We started needing quicker, simpler ways to sum up big or complicated ideas – or ideas that weren't that big or complicated, but were just a mouthful to say.
After all, it's definitely easier to say 'outsourcing' than 'farming this out to a peripheral individual, group or organisation so I have more time and energy to focus on more important things'.
But over time, something happened to corporate lingo: People started creating buzzwords and phrases for things and situations that didn't seem to require it at all.
We stopped postponing or revisiting discussions of an issue and started 'circling back' instead.
We eschewed talking to each other and started 'touching base' instead.
And then people started 'checking in', but not just any checks, mind you. Temperature checks. Sense checks. Vibe checks.
Instead of coining new terms to neatly condense big, complicated ideas, we now seem to be finding overly complex ways to phrase very simple things.
WHEN YOU SAY NOTHING AT ALL
Again, it's not a bad thing to develop lingo over the course of engaging with other fellow humans in labour.
Well before we became office dwellers, plenty of colloquialisms from agricultural work had been leaving the farm to become part of everyday English. For example, "No reason to have a cow about that" or "beat a dead horse".
Such jargon of yore does the work it's meant to do, which is to replace a wordy sentiment or thought process with a bite-sized turn of phrase.
In comparison, what exactly does the phrase 'moving the needle' accomplish, particularly when in most cases, you immediately have to go on to explain exactly what needle you're hoping to move and in which direction? (Yes, we've done it, we've made shop-talk more efficient – all we had to do was transform our seven-word statement into a 15-word run-on behemoth.)
The danger is when we're more concerned about communication for communication's sake, rather than the purposes and objectives for which we're communicating. Are we trying to be in the know, or simply appear so to others? Are we really achieving or improving productivity, or just performing it?
MAKE WORK JARGON WORK AGAIN
Either way, corporate lingo is here to stay. The exact words and phrases in rotation may come and go, but humans will always want to find a way to jazz up interpersonal communication simply because we're creative, social beings.
So is there a way to salvage this? (Or, for the corporate jargon-heads out there: What are the actionable insights and key takeaways to be derived from this?)
For my part, I still find myself resisting what I feel are inorganic attempts to shoehorn unnecessary lingo into conversations about work, but I'm trying not to be pedantic about it.
If someone says 'Can we align or bridge the gap on this?', I respond, 'Sure, what's unclear right now?'
If someone says 'Can I get a sense check on when this might be completed?', I give them a date. (But maybe I'll also have a little rant to a fellow coworker later on about why the question can't simply be 'When will this be done?')
Instead of the snark I used to deploy perhaps a little too freely in response to cringey corporate jargon, I try to reach for the same attitude I employ whenever I'm speaking with someone who may not be entirely fluent in English – if I understand what they're saying, maybe how they're saying it doesn't have to matter as much.
Still, at the end of the day, there's never any harm in asking, plain and simple: 'What do you mean?'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Exclusive-Scale AI's bigger rival Surge AI seeks up to $1 billion capital raise, sources say
Exclusive-Scale AI's bigger rival Surge AI seeks up to $1 billion capital raise, sources say

CNA

time35 minutes ago

  • CNA

Exclusive-Scale AI's bigger rival Surge AI seeks up to $1 billion capital raise, sources say

Surge AI, a data-labeling firm that competes with Scale AI, has hired advisors to raise as much as $1 billion in the first capital raising in the firm's history, sources told Reuters, as it seeks to capitalize on growing user demand amid Scale AI's recent customer exodus. The company, founded by former Google and Meta engineer Edwin Chen, is targeting a valuation of over $15 billion, sources said, cautioning that the talks are still in early stages and the final number could be higher. The funding would be a mix of primary and secondary capital that provides liquidity for the employees. Surge AI, which has been profitable and bootstrapped by Chen, has raked in over $1 billion in revenue last year, bigger than its better-known competitor Scale AI, which reported $870 million in revenue over the same period of time. In comparison, Scale AI was valued at $14 billion in a funding round last year, and was mostly recently valued at nearly $29 billion when Meta invested for a 49 per cent stake in the company and poached its CEO Alexandr Wang to be its chief AI officer to lead its new Superintelligence Labs. Surge AI declined to comment. Like other Scale AI competitors, Surge AI is benefiting from Scale AI's customer losses following Meta's investment. This includes OpenAI and Scale's largest customer, Google, who are now planning to move away from the platform over concerns that doing business with Scale could expose their research priorities to Meta. Scale has said its business remains strong, and it is committed to protecting customer data. Surge AI's quiet yet meteoric rise has positioned it as one of the largest players in the crowded data labeling industry, defying the typical Silicon Valley playbook of raising massive rounds of venture capital to fuel growth. Founded in 2020, the San Francisco-based company has largely operated under the radar, known for its premium, high-end data labeling services used by top AI labs, including Google, OpenAI and Anthropic. As reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) has become more important in training advanced AI systems, the demand for meticulously labeled, nuanced datasets has grown. Surge AI has capitalized on this trend by appealing to a network of highly skilled contractors instead of large pools of low-wage labor. The outsized funding of Surge would be a test of investor interest in the data labeling sector. Some investors view data labeling as an ongoing necessity for AI development, predicting a continued demand from leading AI labs. Others express concern that the industry's low margins and reliance on human labor could make it vulnerable to automation, as AI technology advances and the need for manual annotation diminishes.

Dollar gains ground against major peers after better-than-expected US jobs data
Dollar gains ground against major peers after better-than-expected US jobs data

CNA

timean hour ago

  • CNA

Dollar gains ground against major peers after better-than-expected US jobs data

NEW YORK :The U.S. dollar gained ground against major currencies including the yen and Swiss franc on Tuesday after data showed a better-than-expected increase in labor market demand, indicating the Federal Reserve will likely take its time to cut interest rates. Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell reiterated that the central bank plans to wait for more data before it starts monetary policy easing, but he didn't rule out a July start. Powell spoke at a central banking conference in Portugal. The dollar pared losses against the Japanese yen and the Swiss franc after Labor Department data showed that job openings rose 374,000 to 7.769 million in May. The dollar weakened 0.33 per cent to 143.53 against the yen and was down 0.09 per cent to 0.7925 versus the Swiss franc, compared with a drop of 0.46 per cent and 0.28 per cent respectively before the data. The euro was last down 0.06 per cent at $1.178150 after being up 0.05 per cent earlier in the day. The dollar index, which measures the greenback against a basket of currencies including the yen and the euro, rose 0.09 per cent at 96.84 after being down 0.05 per cent to 96.71.

Trump says will 'take a look' at deporting Musk
Trump says will 'take a look' at deporting Musk

CNA

timean hour ago

  • CNA

Trump says will 'take a look' at deporting Musk

WASHINGTON: United States President Donald Trump said on Tuesday (Jul 1) he could consider deporting Elon Musk, after the South African-born billionaire slammed his flagship spending Bill. Trump also said the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which Musk headed before stepping down in late May, may train its sights on the Tesla and SpaceX founder's government subsidies. "I don't know. We'll have to take a look," Trump told reporters at the White House when asked if he would consider deporting Musk. "We might have to put DOGE on Elon. You know what DOGE is? DOGE is the monster that might have to go back and eat Elon." Trump doubled down on the threat when he said he believed Musk was attacking his so-called "One Big Beautiful Bill" because he was annoyed that it had dropped measures to support electric vehicles (EV). "He's losing his EV mandate. He's very upset about things, but you know, he could lose a lot more than that, I can tell you right now. Elon can lose a lot more than that." Trump made similar comments on his Truth Social network late on Monday, saying that "without subsidies, Elon would probably have to close up shop and head back home to South Africa". Musk, the world's richest person, was Trump's biggest donor in the 2024 election and initially maintained a near-constant presence at the newly elected president's side. They had an acrimonious public falling out this month over the Bill, and the tycoon has reprised his criticisms in recent days, accusing Republicans of abandoning efforts to place the US at the front of the EV and clean energy revolution. Musk has also renewed his calls for the formation of a new political party called the "America Party" if the Bill passes.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store