Legalese Does Not Create Legal Ease

I came across an article today from Forbes magazine entitled, "The Most Annoying, Pretentious and Useless Business Jargon," and (forgive me, but) I couldn't help thinking of lawyers. The authors of the article identified 45 of what they consider to be the most annoying business words, and they quote Jennifer Chatman, a managment professor from UC-Berkeley, who says that people use jargon "as a substitute for thinking hard and clearly about their goals and the direction that they want to give others.”

While I may not agree with everything the article says, I do agree with the fundamental principle behind it. Jargon is a crutch that is often the lazy way out; rather than searching for a more precise word, we rely on business "buzzwords" - even if those buzzwords aren't accurate.

One of my personal favorites is "Best Practice." My regular readers and my clients know that I don't believe in "best practices." Although there may be such a thing as "worst practices," there is no one method that words best for everyone, all of the time.

Jargon is not only annoying, it can confuse clients and cost you business. The same is true for "legalese," the jargon that is the special province of lawyers. Instead of trying to impress clients, potential clients and referral sources with your legal acumen and superior knowledge, try speaking in plain English.

Why?

• If clients can't understand you, how can they trust you or effectively follow your advice? 
• If potential clients can't understand you, what are the chances that they will feel comfortable enough to pay you for your services? 
• If referral sources (including lawyers in other practice areas) don't understand what you do and can't either explain it to others or at least recognize the need when it arises, how will they refer business to you?

As a lawyer, you are the expert in your field. The best way to demonstrate true expertise is not by talking over the heads of others or resorting to words you didn't know until law school, but by explaining what you do in a way that non-lawyers can understand. Your goal is to put them at ease and make them comfortable, not to prove that you are smarter than they are.

To paraphrase a quote from the article, if you can't express what you do for your clients in simple terms - without legalese or other jargon - maybe you're not so sure yourself how you can help them.

What do you think is the most annoying "legalese" used by lawyers?

 

Comments

[Allison Shields]

Donna,

Thanks for your comment. While I agree that some language has been litigated and may be required in legal documents, that's no reason to fail to explain it in plain language to clients, and certainly no reason to use those terms for purposes of developing business or marketing your practice.

Allison

[Donna Ray Berkelhammer]

As a lawyer who constantly tries to root out "legaleze," I do want to make one point. We sometimes stick to certain terminology because it has been litigated and within the legal world has a specific meaning. Unfortunately some of these phrases are bulky, cumbersome, or otherwise unintelligible in a business context. But if we changed them, and there was a law suit over that language, it would be expensive and time-consuming for a court to interpret the simpler language.