Think for just a minute about the specialists who make a difference in your company or organization. Let's say you're a product manager.
An IT specialist may keep your computers and networks up-to-date and working smoothly.
A marketing specialist may help you see opportunities to reach new customers or help to identify features customer want.
A programming specialist may help you discover ways software can make the product more powerful.
Together, these specialists and others become a team that helps you and your organization be successful. But that success also depends on another factor that impacts every part of the process: communication. The best IT, marketing and programming specialists must communicate effectively to have an impact - and that’s why we need a new kind of specialist.
I think it’s time to recognize that explanation is a fundamental skill for professionals, something that everyone can learn and improve. Imagine a team of IT pros who learn to explain computer problems and solutions in a more understandable way. Imagine a finance pro who can make complex financial forecasts easy to grasp for junior employees.
To make this happen, we need a new kind of specialist, someone who can work across teams and specialties with one focus: helping people rethink how they explain ideas. By focusing on explanation as a skill, this person can illustrate how explanations can make people care about ideas and motivate them to take the next step.
I’m talking about the role of Explanation Specialist - and I think it could be your future job. This is a specialty that has the potential to impact every part of the organization. From finance to HR to the executive suite, everyone can benefit from being more understandable.
It starts with an interest in communication and a realization that better explanations are possible. From there it’s a matter of understanding the basics of explanation - why they work, why they fail, and how to solve explanation problems. These skills can be applied across teams, products and situations.
An Explanation Specialist may act as a kind of reviewer or consultant; someone who can make recommendations about how to approach a complex idea in terms of explanation. This person may be a part of the Marketing team. Like a designer shapes color, typeface and visuals, the explainer works to shape communications into a more understandable form. An explanation specialist may work with executives on speeches and presentations. The potential is endless.
Of course, these things may be happening today. You may already be an explanation specialist or know one. Some people have become excellent explainers through experience and practice. It’s a skill we all use everyday, and most importantly, one that we can improve. We can learn to be better at explanation and if we do, the impact could be tremendous.
We need specialists who are ready to help the world become a more understandable place to live and work. Perhaps that will be you.
The best I can remember, my formal education in written communication ended in formal letter writing. We learned where to put the return address and date, how to write a salutation and where to sign it. While these are still valuable skills, in the past ten years, I have used this knowledge approximately zero times. Yet, I have likely written tens of thousands of emails over the same period.
No one ever taught me how to communicate with a computer or email. It just happened - I got a computer, email arrived, I replied. I was self-taught and I’m certainly not alone.
In my first job out of grad school, I was a data analyst, but much of my day was spent supporting our customers and email was the tool I used most of all. I went to training sessions on databases, spreadsheets and others, but email? Never. I never learned any best practices or evaluations. It was assumed that I, along with those in similar positions, had sufficient email communication and organization skills. It never occurred to anyone that email communication is something that could be learned and improved.
And you’ve seen the outcomes. Confused colleagues, wasted time and missing details are all symptoms. I think most people would agree that the state of email communication is pretty poor - and it’s no surprise. There has rarely been a standard. We don’t know what effective email communication looks like or achieves. We don’t think about best practices.
I bring this up because it is just one example of how we take our everyday communications for granted. We communicate so often that we rarely take a step back and think - could I do this better? Could I be more successful if I improved this skill I use every day? Could my organization be more efficient and effective if everyone improved their communication skills?
It’s this idea that is behind the Art of Explanation. Like our email communications, we explain ideas so often that we don’t consider how we could do it better. And like email, no one ever taught us to do it effectively. We’re self-taught and our explanations just...happen.
I think there’s a better way. By learning to explain our ideas more effectively, we can invite our bosses, students, colleagues and customers to care and be motivated to take the next step. It’s a fundamental communication skill in any medium - something we can learn and improve over time, something that can make a difference in our lives.
The march towards publishing The Art of Explanation continues on swimmingly. The publisher recently sent over "page proofs" which are hard copies of the book as it will appear in the real thing. Reviewing the proofs is our last chance to make any corrections and changes before the book gets printed. When I send these puppies back, my work (in writing at least) is pretty much done. Phew. The book comes out in print and ebooks on October 8th.
Here are some photos of the proofs...
The book has three parts: Plan, Package, Present. You'll recognize the drawings I think.
Because the book references a number of Common Craft videos, we added QR codes so you can quickly watch the video on a smartphone as you read.
Today we're shooting a video and part of that process is taking every piece of paper and spreading it out on the whiteboard. Then, we go through the storyboard and organize the images by scene and put them aside. This is nearly every cut-out that will appear in the video.
Below I'm using a single scene from this video to highlight an important element of explanation: building and sustaining confidence.
NOTE: If you're interested in learning in-depth about the skill of explanation and how to make Common Craft Style videos, check out our online courses at the Explainer Academy.
A quick point about intent. This video is not entitled “Private Equity Explained” or “Private Equity Made Easy”. Further, the target audience for the video is not stated, so I acknowledge that the intent may not be explanation or for a general audience.
First, I think it’s nicely presented. The illustrations work well with the voice-over and it has a friendly, approachable feel. And I think it does a reasonable job of explaining the basic ideas behind private equity from the perspective of the industry.
However, when I watch the video I see language that represents a risk. I’m a big believer in the idea that explanations should build and sustain confidence for the audience. Anything that takes away confidence erodes the power of the explanation.
The first big and potentially powerful point in the video is this:
Private Equity firms partner with investors like public and private pension funds, university endowments and charitable foundations to buy companies...
If you work in finance, this may make perfect sense to you and seem simple. But I doubt that the average person, whom I believe is the target for this video, will get it. Understanding what each of these investors are and do can be intimidating. Like so many explanations, it depends on assumptions. Let’s take a look:
The question is “What is Private Equity” and the first point they make is about “private equity firms partner with...”. Assumption(1): People know that private equity is something that a “firm” does. Assumption (2) People know what it means to “partner” with an investor.
The firms “partner with investors like public and private pension funds, university endowments and charitable foundations.” Assumption (1): People know what those things are. Assumption (2): People know that pension funds, endowments and foundations can be investors.
These assumptions don’t necessarily compromise the video, but they offer the audience a good reason to lose confidence.
Further, the point on investment partners is a distraction that was likely included to promote a message of positivity (private equity helps things that do good). Aren’t the investment partners a detail that can be covered later?
If I had to rethink the beginning of the video, I’d zoom-out, talk about the big picture and discuss the various needs at work, without all the details:
On one side, there are investors that have money and need a way to make more. On the other, there are companies that need money and have the potential to grow. In the middle are private equity firms, which use the money from investors to buy companies, turn them around and sell them to at a profit.
It’s a very simplified view but one that focuses on the big, high level concept. Of course it’s not bulletproof, but it builds a foundation that may help the audience feel more confident in understanding the big ideas *first* and the smaller ones later - and that’s what matters.
