Client communication: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 64: Line 64:


====Sub-rule: don’t track regulatory language====
====Sub-rule: don’t track regulatory language====
It is fashionable among [[Legal eagle|legal eagles]] to “track the language of the legislation” in client communications. This ensures utmost fidelity with the rules: one cannot be blamed for getting anything wrong if one copies out the text verbatim. ''YOU SHOULD NOT WRITE WITH THE MAIN GOAL OF AVOIDING BLAME FOR GETTING THINGS WRONG''. Write with the objective of ''getting things right''. ''Own'' your expertise. Own your language. ''Be brave''. Tracking legislation is ''lazy''. It is ''timid''. It ''rejects responsibility'' and puts it on the customer. It converts ''your'' regulatory problem  into your customer’s.  
It is fashionable among [[Legal eagle|legal eagles]] to “track the language of the legislation” in client communications. This ensures utmost fidelity with the rules: one cannot be blamed for getting anything wrong if one copies out the text verbatim. ''DO NOT WRITE TO AVOID BLAME FOR GETTING THINGS WRONG''. Write to ''get things right''. ''Own'' your expertise. ''Own'' your language. ''Be brave''. Tracking legislation is ''lazy''. It is ''timid''. It ''rejects responsibility'' and puts it on the customer. It converts ''your'' regulatory problem  into your customer’s.  


Your job is to to make your customer’s life easier, not harder. You are meant to internalise the ugliness of your regulatory environment, not to lay it on your client. It is not your client’s problem. It most likely meant to be for your client’s benefit. So: speak only in terms of consequences, and action. Where this points back to regulation, summarise. Extract. Contextualise. Put this in a format the customer can understand and relate to. ''Think'' like a professional writer, because you ''are'' a goddamn professional writer.
Your job is to to make your customer’s life easier, not harder. You are meant to internalise the ugliness of your regulatory environment, not to lay it on your client. It is not your client’s problem. It most likely meant to be for your client’s benefit. So: speak only in terms of consequences, and action. Where this points back to regulation, summarise. Extract. Contextualise. Put this in a format the customer can understand and relate to. ''Think'' like a professional writer, because you ''are'' a goddamn professional writer.

Navigation menu