In my experience people who use a lot of corporate buzzwords do it to obfuscate their own incompetence.

Try asking those people to explain their buzzwords in more detail or give an example. It'll become clear if they even know what they are saying.

I think a lot of this kind of bullshit is more of an HR strategy rather than actual business strategy, but most of those are probably just as vapid.

I look forward to future full-slop/devslOps engineer job listings

I never thought of it like that before but yeah, you're right, he just spouts Manosphere Corpospeak!

I was just going after names a dude bro management type would know. They're so full of shit, lol. I like that they can't tell when you're mocking them though, they hear their language and accept it.

My most-hated blather expression is "going forward", as in "we're going to do a better job going forward". Just completely unnecessary when used with verbs in future tense -- which is the only time it's ever used. I hate it almost as much as "folks".

Before he became mainstream, he was asked if he believes in god, and he started with "what do you mean by god?" and went on jibber jabber without actually answering yes or no. I didn't take him seriously since. Two years later, I was surprised he became popular. But anyway, his meandering and sophistry without addressing the main premise has always been his MO, especially with the trademark question "what do you mean..."

Yeah, this can't be a real one, right?

Corporate bullshit is done by talkers, not by makers.

he started with “what do you mean by god?”

Sounds about right lmao

Weird Al, Mission Statement

Paradigm by itself is useful in computer science. A lot of corpo speak comes from terms initially created for agile, but eventually scrum masters were not the engineers and the useful words that were used a describers are now used as content. Agile is a mistake.

Beat me to it!

Going backward, I agree with you.

Suite Judy! He hit everything including the Golden Parachute.

You learn it, you climb the ladder, you bring your kids a higher paycheck. Literally we're conditioned to learn it like dogs

I agree with you on the "going forward" part. It sounds inane. "Folks" on the other hand I disagree with for two reasons. One, where I live, it's a pretty standard term, as in "hey there folks" as well as a synonym for "parents" depending on context.

The other, I've started using it as a gender neutral in place of things like "ladies and gentlemen." People who get mad about using peoples' correct pronouns, aka conservative assholes, are completely blind to it being for that purpose. While it's not something that matters very often for me, it's useful and therefore just an easy habit to adopt that's harmless in all contexts.

Basically "tell us your secrets" or "show you're not hiding anything".

Back in the day, westerners thought samurai would open their kimonos to show they're not hiding a sword. That wasn't really a thing but that's why it's a phrase (or was anyway)

Time ago, I interacted with a vendor contact who was an expert at using such corpo-jargon—it was a masterclass in listening to English sentences devoid of meaning every time she spoke in meetings. If it was 40 years in the future she’d probably have a bunch of cyberwear and a whole team of corpo-ninjas at her disposal.

She is no longer employed by said vendor (or moved to a different project/disposed of by corpo-ninjas on their end—who knows).

Hope she’s still making the big money saying literally nothing.

Also glad I don’t gotta get talked at by her anymore.

Okay just for fun, I wanted to take a stab at trying to understand some of the examples mentioned in the article.

We will actualize a renewed level of cradle-to-grave credentialing.

We're gonna do a really good job of making passwords (or degrees?) that last a lifecycle.

By getting our friends in the tent with our best practices, we will pressure-test a renewed level of adaptive coherence.

By convincing people we can do our jobs well, we're gonna prove we're really good at listening.

For instance, a leaked 2009 Pepsi marketing presentation with language such as “The Pepsi DNA finds its origin in the dynamic of perimeter oscillations…our proposition is the establishment of a gravitational pull to shift from a transactional experience to an invitational expression …”

uhhh okay this is tough. how about:

Pepsi is known for waves (maybe lmao? i genuinely don't know what perimeter oscillations is trying to say). We want to make people feel like buying Pepsi isn't just buying something but is an invitation.

Our device strategy must reflect Microsoft’s strategy and must be accomplished within an appropriate financial envelope

oh this actually isn't that hard: "Corporate cut our budget."

My main beef with "folks" is when politicians use it instead of "people" to give off a fake down-homey vibe.

Workers who were more susceptible to corporate BS rated their supervisors as more charismatic and “visionary,” but also displayed lower scores on a portion of the study that tested analytic thinking, cognitive reflection and fluid intelligence.

Guess which workers the supervisors like and want to see more and promote and which ones they really want to get rid of?

BTW, AI text also is interesting to evaluate in this context.

And now we have LLMs...

I've heard it before....

Kinda knew that. Number one reason I would never take an office job.

If you need an example give a listen to Weird Al's 'Mission Statement'

Problem as evidenced by a lot of outsourcing success is that the people cutting the checks are not fazed by broken software.

This applies to a lot of industries where laypeople are at the mercy of 'expertise', a lot of folks doing things like HVAC or auto mechanics are actually not that good, and while they are the bane of the good HVAC and mechanics, they manage to secure market share just fine. Yes, there are mechanics that have crappier mechanics to thank for them having some stuff to fix, but the crappy mechanics can do easy stuff fine and lots of people driving with something busted because the mechanic couldn't figure it out and told the customer "yeah, it actually is normal for it to be that way".

I mean, it's confirming what folks pretty much already knew and won't make a dent in the cringe corporate culture... I guess it's at least somewhat nice to see it more formally affirmed, but on the other hand it could be even more depressing that you were right all along and it doesn't even matter...

Let's take this discussion offline.

I think it's a complex problem. A lot of these "buzzwords" are actually quite semantically rich, if used correctly. "Synergy" refers to the principle of mutually advantageous reinforcement between factors, like the "three sisters" technique in agriculture. "Paradigm" is a concise word to denote an established, standard framework or perspective.

They are technical jargon, when used correctly. Used responsibly, they can convey a great deal of information with high semantic density. The problem arises when they're transformed into buzzwords, layered in confusing or abstract ways.

Wtf does it mean

I get that.

You missed the part where this culture ruins the business eventually. It's self correcting. Hopefully

For instance, a leaked 2009 Pepsi marketing presentation with language such as “The Pepsi DNA finds its origin in the dynamic of perimeter oscillations…our proposition is the establishment of a gravitational pull to shift from a transactional experience to an invitational expression …”

uhhh okay this is tough. how about:

Pepsi is known for waves (maybe lmao? i genuinely don’t know what perimeter oscillations is trying to say). We want to make people feel like buying Pepsi isn’t just buying something but is an invitation.

LOL that one's a mess.

"Perimeter oscillations" sounds to me like a way to describe shifts in consumer opinions and preferences. A really dumb way. But who knows? Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of marketing execs?

I get the same feeling from corpo-speak as I get from bad poetry. Like the author runs all their ideas through a few rounds of mutations, out of fear of being seen as simple. The goal is not to be understood, but to make yourself harder to criticize.