Jane is a young Taiwanese professional seeking admission to an Ivy League MBA
program. She’s more than qualified – with impeccable undergraduate college
performance, impressive work experience after college and glowing
recommendations. Her GPA, GMAT & TOEFL scores are well above the threshold
for any Ivy League MBA program. What’s more, in her admissions essays,
she’s going to dazzle the admissions committee with her brilliance and
mastery of business English – through clever turns of phrase and
impressive vocabulary.
Everywhere Jane might have used the word“get”she will substitute
“obtain.” Where she would have written“use”“utilize”“take advantage of”
or “exploit”she will change the word to“leverage”– because that’s the
cool business-insider lingo.She will liberally sprinkle words and phrases like “facilitate,”
“proactively”“pivotal”“business acumen”“skill sets”“deliverables”
“incentivise”“key points” and “core competencies”throughout her essays.
Where previously she “helped” she will now “actively
participate in the facilitation of…”She’ll make long, complex sentences to
demonstrate her elegant mastery of English and employ passive verb constructions
wherever possible because that sounds more “professional.” Where she would have said,
“I closed the deal,” she will now say:“The successful consummation of the
deal resulted from my leadership and initiative to proactively leverage
my skill sets and core competencies toward the ultimate goal
of achieving consensus and facilitating a mutually favorable agreement.”
That will be Jane’s undoing. By the end of the first paragraph,
the admissions officer reading Jane’s essays will be mildly annoyed
at the unnecessary complexity of her writing but will maintain patience,
knowing English is not Jane’s first language. By the second paragraph,
the admissions officer will have realized that Jane’s convoluted writing
(and thinking) is an intentional attempt to show off, rather than an accident
of writing in a second language. By the third paragraph, the admissions
officer will have formed a solid impression that Jane is too immature for any
leadership role and will set Jane’s entire admissions package in the
rejection pile – relieved at not having to read her pompous and
unintelligible writing any further.
Where Jane thought she was demonstrating “Outside-the-Box” thinking,
she was, in fact, demonstrating inside-the-box conformity.
Where she thought she was demonstrating leadership,
she was actually demonstrating followership.
Rather than using her own words and expressing her own unique “voice”
in her writing, she imitated the language patterns of others.
Rather than employ her creativity or her whole vocabulary,
Jane restricted her thinking and vocabulary to a tightly conforming pattern
of buzzwords and “business-speak” that sounded (to the admissions committee)
indistinguishable from hundreds of other candidates who will also receive
rejection notices.
--
EditEnglish.Asia Communicating Excellence Globally
David Rutledge (洛大衛)
15 year of English Editing Consultancy
[email protected]
http://www.elcc.com.tw/
--
program. She’s more than qualified – with impeccable undergraduate college
performance, impressive work experience after college and glowing
recommendations. Her GPA, GMAT & TOEFL scores are well above the threshold
for any Ivy League MBA program. What’s more, in her admissions essays,
she’s going to dazzle the admissions committee with her brilliance and
mastery of business English – through clever turns of phrase and
impressive vocabulary.
Everywhere Jane might have used the word“get”she will substitute
“obtain.” Where she would have written“use”“utilize”“take advantage of”
or “exploit”she will change the word to“leverage”– because that’s the
cool business-insider lingo.She will liberally sprinkle words and phrases like “facilitate,”
“proactively”“pivotal”“business acumen”“skill sets”“deliverables”
“incentivise”“key points” and “core competencies”throughout her essays.
Where previously she “helped” she will now “actively
participate in the facilitation of…”She’ll make long, complex sentences to
demonstrate her elegant mastery of English and employ passive verb constructions
wherever possible because that sounds more “professional.” Where she would have said,
“I closed the deal,” she will now say:“The successful consummation of the
deal resulted from my leadership and initiative to proactively leverage
my skill sets and core competencies toward the ultimate goal
of achieving consensus and facilitating a mutually favorable agreement.”
That will be Jane’s undoing. By the end of the first paragraph,
the admissions officer reading Jane’s essays will be mildly annoyed
at the unnecessary complexity of her writing but will maintain patience,
knowing English is not Jane’s first language. By the second paragraph,
the admissions officer will have realized that Jane’s convoluted writing
(and thinking) is an intentional attempt to show off, rather than an accident
of writing in a second language. By the third paragraph, the admissions
officer will have formed a solid impression that Jane is too immature for any
leadership role and will set Jane’s entire admissions package in the
rejection pile – relieved at not having to read her pompous and
unintelligible writing any further.
Where Jane thought she was demonstrating “Outside-the-Box” thinking,
she was, in fact, demonstrating inside-the-box conformity.
Where she thought she was demonstrating leadership,
she was actually demonstrating followership.
Rather than using her own words and expressing her own unique “voice”
in her writing, she imitated the language patterns of others.
Rather than employ her creativity or her whole vocabulary,
Jane restricted her thinking and vocabulary to a tightly conforming pattern
of buzzwords and “business-speak” that sounded (to the admissions committee)
indistinguishable from hundreds of other candidates who will also receive
rejection notices.
--
EditEnglish.Asia Communicating Excellence Globally
David Rutledge (洛大衛)
15 year of English Editing Consultancy
[email protected]
http://www.elcc.com.tw/
--
All Comments