Nadja Green on Making Plain Language a Business Priority

Episode 8: Nadja Green

‍

English is only the home language about nine percent of South Africa. So most of us, including myself, deal with English in a second or third language capacity, and that immediately brings some barriers to understanding. I think it almost places more importance on having accessible English as a starting point, to make sure that all South Africans would be able to understand.

*This transcript was corrected with Claude AI. The human version is coming soon.

Bob Welcome to Top of Their Game, the show where we speak with the people, making communications clearer, fairer and just plain better. I'm your host, Bob Milstein, a lawyer and plain language trainer, practitioner and advocate. Today we're visiting South Africa. Nadja Green is a plain language content developer, researcher and strategist with a special interest in promoting plain language as a strategic priority, not just based in Johannesburg, South Africa, and is a partner of the Plain Language Institute. Having a chat about plain language in South Africa is, I think, particularly fascinating given the complex and troubled recent history in that country. But it's not all gloom. Quite notably, the people responsible for putting together the South African constitution in the post-apartheid era engaged a range of plain language experts to help with that process. And it shows. Today, we'll speak with Nadja about the challenges she has encountered engaging with South African business and government when seeking to persuade them that plain language is in fact, a strategic priority. And we'll also talk about the work she's done internationally. And now, Nadja — welcome, and thank you for joining us.

Nadja Thank you so much for having me, Bob. And thank you for inviting me.

Bob On behalf of In-Game Learning, I will say it's a pleasure. I wanted to start, as I always start when I speak to impressive guests like you, just to tell us how you found your way into the world of plain language communications and what you were doing beforehand.

Nadja Well, I was quite lucky, Bob. That plain language found me. Initially, when I had to pick a university degree, I was a bit confused as to what I should go into. I love writing and creating content, but I also was interested in something more strategic, something more in the business area like corporate communications. So in the end, I decided to do a BCom in communication Management, and I also did an honors after my undergraduate studies. And then I was actually a jobless graduate and I had to look for a job. And I started sending my CV and a nice cover letter to loads of communication agencies. And I got a reply from Doctor Sarah at the Plain Language Institute. And that's really where my relationship with plain language started. I started as an intern at the company, and that grew into a more permanent position. And then ten years later, I'm now the co-managing partner of the Plain Language Institute.

Bob Could you tell us a little bit about the Institute?

Nadja Yes, of course. We specialise in communication, design, training, really walking the journey of achieving plain language in an organisation. We work mostly in the financial sector because in South Africa, plain language is a legislative requirement in the financial sector, but we also work with, in some cases, the public sector and the water sector to make communication more accessible to South Africans.

Bob Nadja, I'm a lawyer by training, so when you talk about legislative requirements, my heart skips a beat and I get very excited. So do you recall broadly what that legislative requirement states?

Nadja Yes. So we are very privileged in South Africa that plain language is a legal requirement in numerous legislative documents. So we don't have like in the USA where there's a plain language writing act, we have it dispersed throughout legislation. One of it is the Consumer Protection Act, where I think it's section twenty two that requires all communication to consumers to be in plain and understandable language. And the CPA or the Consumer Protection Act also gives a definition of plain language. And what is really interesting is that even though I think it was written in two thousand and eight, that definition is quite well aligned to the international definition of language, the one from the International Plain Language Federation.

Bob And that is for the benefit of the many millions of listeners to this podcast who might not be familiar with that definition. Words, structure, design that make it easy for the target reader to find what they need, understand what they found, use what they've understood.

Nadja Absolutely.

Bob What was the driver in South Africa, politically speaking, to generate these changes, I assume in the early two thousand?

Nadja Yes. I think the main trigger was our political past. So in the apartheid era, only two languages were considered official languages, that is, English and Afrikaans. So all communication in South Africa was either in English or Afrikaans. But when we became a democracy in nineteen ninety four, there was this opportunity to bring in new ideas into the Constitution. And actually, what is really interesting is our Constitution is actually written in plain language. And one of the people that was involved, I don't know if you noticed, was Christopher Bamford.

Bob He has told me that many times.

Nadja So yeah, so he was involved. And I think that was the start of introducing plain language into our legislation.

Bob He tells me that he was one of several plain language experts who were brought in for the purposes of working on the constitutional wording.

Nadja Yes, that's correct. I think the other person was full nut from Canada and I am unsure of the others.

Bob Not only does Christopher tell me about his involvement, but in the training that he used to run and I continue to run, we recite the preamble to the Constitution to explore a fundamental grammatical structural issue. And it says we, the people of South Africa recognise the injustices of our past and honour those who suffered for freedom and justice in their land. It's kind of poetic, and yet it's a very strong piece of writing.

Nadja It is absolutely.

Bob You mentioned earlier that you'd done some academic work before finding the Plain Language Institute or before it found you. What was that work?

Nadja So it was firstly, the bachelor's in communication management, where we looked at different elements of communication within the business field, you know, strategic communication, corporate communication. And then I also did an honours. My honours didn't focus on anything plain language. It actually focused on emotional intelligence. But when I started my work at the Plain Language Institute, that opened my eyes to the possibility of doing a master's study on plain language. And what I quickly realised when I started working with insurance companies and banks and other financial institutions is that they all want to implement plain language. They all want to satisfy the regulator, but they are quite unsure as to how to do it and how to do it in a sustainable and strategic way. So the strategies that they follow are often haphazard, maybe like a one off attempt to change the document and satisfy the regulator. So that motivated me to do some research on master's research to find out exactly what are the strategies that companies follow to implement plain language, and how can this be improved.

Bob And I understand that you are very strong on conveying the message that this is a strategic issue, not a aesthetic issue, if you like.

Nadja Yes, absolutely. So from my master's research, I was able to develop a framework how to implement plain language more strategically in organization. And it basically revolves around three main principles. Firstly, that you need leadership commitment right from the start. So you need your senior leaders to recognize the value that plain language can have on an organization. And then you should make plain language a strategic priority. And what I mean by that is you should see that plain language isn't, like you said, nice writing or a quick fix or just a tweak in wording, but it's actually a way to either solve a business problem that you are experiencing within your organization. For example, you have some difficulties with your internal communication and that is demotivating to your employees. That is a real business problem. And if you can improve your internal communication, then that solves a business problem. The other aspect is that plain language can help you to achieve your business objectives. So it is not just a nice to have, like you said, but you can really apply the principles of plain language to improve your customer experience or your user experience.

Bob When you walk into an organization to have that chat. Do you find you need to convince leadership about those things, or are some already on board, or is it really a mix?

Nadja It's usually a mix. What I find, well, and this is also what I learned over the last, you know, six to seven years. Implementing the framework is that you need to show leaders the value of plain language in the sense of picking a business problem or a key frustration, and using plain language to solve that problem, and then showing that results to leadership to convince them and to show them the value of plain language.

Bob And the leaders look at the concept of value in terms of a bottom line.

Nadja You mean in terms of money?

Bob Yes.

Nadja Yes, yes. If it's in a corporate space where the business goal is to make money, then of course money is fixed. So if you can show cost saving or you can show increase in sales or better retention, obviously that speaks volumes to leadership.

Bob Without getting into commercial in confidence matters. Could you give us some examples of where you've been able to persuade corporate clients about those things through an initiative that you've been involved in?

Nadja Um, yes. So the people that are usually the most reluctant in terms of taking plain language on board in a financial space is the legal department. Um, yes. So they are very hesitant. And what we try to do is from the offset of a project is to include them in the plain language process. So instead of maybe taking insurance policy wording. Doing some work and then sending it to legal to get some feedback. What we really see works is taking them on the journey every step of the way to see the value of plain labs, and also to give them opportunity to right from the start to give input. So that is really what we at the Plain Language Institute have found to work well, is really to build a relationship with the client and to slowly show them how plain language can make a difference.

Bob And that's a really important factor that I think some zealots in the world of plain language overlook, that sometimes the lawyers have really, really good reasons to push back against certain rewrites, and sometimes it's quite proper for them to demand that certain words appear in a certain order for certain reasons. So having them inside the tent, as it were, and having the conversation and having the negotiation sounds like a brilliant way to go.

Nadja Yes, I think negotiation is spot on. It's all about sitting down and really having a conversation and showing people the vehicle of a leadership that we are not changing the intent of what is said in this policy wording or what is said in this document. We are just rewriting it in a way, or restructuring it a way that the intended reader will be able to understand this intent.

Bob Does your work extend beyond those technical documents, like policies, into correspondence emails?

Nadja Yeah, that's very often the case that we will start with, let's say a policy wording and insurance policy wording. And then based on that change, that new document, we will do some supporting documents because obviously from a policy wording, you've got a policy schedule, you get some letters, you have onboarding, you have sales documents. So we found easier to start with the policy Wording the key document the Bible, if you can say it like that. And then from that, spread it into the supporting document.

Bob Even where the C-suite is in favor of a plain language cultural shift. What do organizations find most challenging when they try to do it?

Nadja I think it is getting their head around the change in process that instead of the reader, the user of the communication being at the end of the line and you communicating to them, it is taking the reader, taking their purpose, taking their needs, and putting that at the front of the process, really starting with what your readers need. And then based on that information, doing all of the rest, working towards a final product. So it's that mind shift that we start with ourselves and we communicate to Twitter reader to. Starting with the reader and communicating with them in mind.

Bob Did you ever have a client who just didn't get it at first, but then came around.

Nadja Um, yes. Varying degrees. That happens. It's like I said, almost always the legal team that pushes back. But what we really try to do is build a relationship with our clients and also to include them in our conversations. So instead of us taking, let's say, a document and going off on our own and doing some rewriting and, and reworking and restructuring, we include them in some of the decision making.

Bob I use the word negotiation. Before Nadja, when you were talking about your relationship with the lawyers. But I guess another way to frame it, and this is the way I've kind of put it when I've been involved in similar situations, is that your role is almost like the honest broker that you can bring together. What are warring or disparate cultural factions within a corporate organization, all of whom have very legitimate perspectives.

Nadja Absolutely. Yeah. Being the voice of reason, being the voice of the reader in a very complicated corporate world.

Bob I know that you've done a lot in the world of international standards through the International Organization for standardization, the ISO. Would you care to say a little bit about what you've done and what you're focused on currently?

Nadja Yes. Of course. So my relationship with ISO started in twenty nineteen, when Christopher again asked me to look at the draft of the part one of the standard. So part one claims that it works for most languages. And my role was to make sure that it worked in Afrikaans. So that Invitation to comment on part one. Really started my volunteer work in plain language. So from there I got involved with our national standards body, the SABC in South Africa, and it was quite an easy process for me to become part of that committee and also the international committee. So I am on the international ISO Committee, where I can give expert input into all the parts of the standard.

Bob Can I take you back to the translation issue and whether it works in and for Afrikaans? As an Australian, I come from a monoculture and pretty much a one language culture. I'm therefore not particularly sensitive to those challenges of translation. What are they? Broadly speaking.

Nadja I think it's not a translation issue, but more an issue of the guidelines. Would you be able to apply that in a different language? Some languages have really strict use of gender in certain ways. So some guidelines could be tricky in that sense. In Afrikaans we do not have that. So it was easy to see the applicability of part one for Afrikaans too.

Bob Mhm.

Nadja So saying don't use passive language, use. The active voice is also something that is relevant in Afrikaans or Afrikaans.

Bob I suspect that anyone who's listening to this conversation will know what part one, two, three, and part four are. I'd better say it for the record. Um.

Nadja Yes please.

Bob Part one is General Principles and Guidelines. Part two is a supplement on the topic of legal communication and part three, soon to be released at the time of this recording on science writing.

Nadja Absolutely. Yeah.

Bob You mentioned your early involvement in part one, but you've moved through the parts and I gather you're heavily involved as well in part four. Is that right?

Nadja Yes. Um, so part four is a requirement standard. So that means that organizations will be able to be certified against part four for implementing plain language in the organization.

Bob Demonstrating that you've met certain quality standards organizationally.

Nadja That too. Yes. So maybe just to touch on, there are two types of requirements in part four. The first is having a process in place that speaks to the four principles of part one of the ISO standard. So that is giving your readers what they want. So relevance, making it easy for readers to find what they need, understand what they find, and use that information to the four principles. The other requirements are more enabling requirements that will enable you to make a success of that process. And those are having a culture for plain language. have leadership buy in, having the resources in place, having a strategy and implementation plans, and those elements talk directly to what I found in my master study.

Bob And if an organization wants to embrace part four, does that mean they need an external person to review or survey or accredit it?

Nadja They can buy part four for two reasons. They can buy it as guidelines to help them on their journey to be more strategic and more sustainable about plain language implementation. But if they want to be certified, that is where they will need to talk to an external auditor or a certifier of ISO standards. And that process differs from country to country. So I can't speak to how it will work in Australia and the USA or in Europe. But I know the South Africa national standards body is asserting foreign body, so they will be responsible for doing the certification against thoughtful.

Bob So I wanted the tour to South Africa. Fascinating history, complicated, sad and troubled. But I want to talk about how that all plays out in language. How is plain language evolved in South Africa, and what particular challenges have you observed, if any?

Nadja So I said at the beginning of the conversation, initially we only had two official languages in South Africa. It was part of the apartheid regime that was English and Afrikaans. But with democracy also came more official languages. And we currently have twelve official languages, including South African Sign Language. But the reality of having so many languages spoken in a country is that you need a shared language, and our shared language is English. So if I go out and I go to the shop, I speak English. If I go and I need to get a cell phone contract, I speak English. So our shared language, our business language is English. Now the reality is that English is only the home language, about nine percent of South Africa. So most of us, including myself, deal with English in a second or third language capacity. And that immediately brings some barriers to understanding. So I think it almost places more importance on having accessible English as a starting point, to make sure that all South Africans would be able to understand, because the reality is that translation into all languages is very difficult and often impractical for organizations.

Bob Do you see plain language in South Africa as a social justice issue or opportunity?

Nadja Yes, absolutely. It's part of our Bill of rights. We have the right to information, but it is impossible to understand information if it's not accessible to you. So for us as a South African to receive information, to be able to participate in democracy, information needs to be in plain language, irrespective of the language.

Bob I imagine one consequence of that is that plain language can help to bridge power gaps between institutions and the public.

Nadja Yes, that is absolutely true, and I think that is probably one of the main goals of regulator, including plain language, as a requirement in financial legislation, is really trying to bridge that gap between the all powerful organisation and us mere consumers, and really bringing us closer together. So there isn't this power struggle in South Africa.

Bob I did say I wanted to talk about your role as a consultant and trainer. I did read an interview with you where you talk about a twelve hour online course. Yeah, that's a lot of hours. What does that involve?

Nadja So I was lucky enough that after my master's study, I had the opportunity to develop my framework into a course. Now it isn't a full, you know, twelve hour course. It is six modules that is spread over twelve weeks.

Bob It takes oh that's easy.

Nadja Yeah, exactly. Okay. Um, and it takes about twelve hours in total to complete the course is called Implementing Plain Language as a strategic priority. It's offered internationally through the Plain Language Academy learning platform.

Bob I know we've talked about Plain Language Institute, but then there's a separate entity, the Academy, is that correct?

Nadja Yes. So the Plain Language Academy is Kate Harrison Whiteside's learning platform, where she offers different courses that people from all over the world can take. And she asked the Plain Language Institute to develop a course for the academy. And that is where our course started in twenty twenty one. It has been running for six years, and it really takes participants through the process of preparing an organization to implement plain language more strategically.

Bob So does that mean it's pitched at a managerial level, rather than the people on the factory floor, as it were, or is it pitched for everyone and anyone.

Nadja In an organization? It can be at different levels. It can be for the person that is responsible for implementing plain language, which is often not a higher level person, it is usually somewhat more in the middle or at the bottom, but we have also had more senior leaders take support. It's also relevant for plain language consultants that want to expand their services into a more strategic focus, where they go into organizations and help them with their plan language strategy. So we give you the tools to help you implement plan language more strategically, but it's up to you to take that tools and to tailor it to your situation.

Bob What's the most common pushback you hear when you advocate for organizational change? Nadja.

Nadja Uh, it will cost too much. Uh, it will take too long. Uh, we have been doing this for twenty plus years. Why do we have to change now? Uh, we don't have the resources. That's the things we usually. Uh.

Bob Yeah, that response came pretty quickly to you. I feel your pain. Um, and and what do you nicely say by way of pushback?

Nadja Um, again, we like to show not tell people. So that is where we either dig into previous projects, previous case studies where we can show people the value of plain language, or we might implement a plain language in that organization to really show it isn't this difficult. You don't need many resources. So we should the scale as to how you can implement plain language in an organization, be it a big overhaul of the communication throughout organization, or only a small startup project to get you going.

Bob I know you've identified the frequent flyer objections that you face, but if you dig more deeply, do you think resistance is founded more in matters of habit or ego or power or something else?

Nadja I think in every organization there are politics and you should always play a bit of politics if you want to bring about change. So yes, it is definitely a habit. It's definitely in some people's ego where they have been doing things in the same way for many years. So it's all about navigating relationships and politics, trying to find an inroad where you can start a plan and initiative.

Bob You've moved on to a question I was going to ask you. The question was going to be, have you ever had to navigate organisational politics to get plain language adopted? I think the question should have been have you never had to navigate organisational politics?

Nadja I think it's a reality in most projects, and some people are more open to plain language than others. But it's why we, as the Plain Language Institute, really take the time to understand our clients, how they operate, what is important to them, what is not important to them. Um, who are the big fishes in the corporate world for that client and how we should navigate that? It's almost like the principles of plain language. We have to understand your intended reader. You also have to understand your intended client and what their needs are.

Bob Yes, I know your patch is South Africa, but I also know you've had global experience and insights. Is there any country that you look at as an exemplar of plain language progress or best practice?

Nadja Uh, the first one that came to mind is Norway. I think Norway has plain language included in their language act. They have a language council that is doing amazing work to promote and help organizations adhere to that language act. So I really think they have come a long way in really not only doing plain language because the law says so, but because of the benefit of the country and its people.

Bob Want to have a brief chat about your views as to the future of plain language. Where do you see plain language, whether we characterize it as a profession or as a movement or something else, where do you see it heading in the next five to ten years?

Nadja Well, I hope with pothole coming, with certification being a reality soon, that it will become the global standard. Not a nice to have something extra to do to boost your revenue or to make a quick change, but really being the global standard. Transparency, building trust and being open and honest to your customers being the global standard of practice.

Bob How do you think a generative AI will or might affect plain language work in the future?

Nadja I think AI is a wonderful support tool to help you to achieve your goals quicker and easier. But to work with AI in an efficient manner, you still need a human. So yes, you can use AI as a support tool to make your plan language work easier. To help if you have a question, but it's really showing the worth of those user insights, talking to your target audience, those things that I would never be able to do.

Bob It's a really delicate communication, isn't it? Because you have to have a nuanced think about where is the value of the technology and where is the residual and arguably overriding value of the cognitive effort that people are trying to acquire and people paid to deliver?

Nadja Yes.

Bob It's a toughie.

Nadja That's absolutely yeah. Very tough. Yeah. And I don't think anyone has the answer as to how to navigate that. I think that will play out in the coming years.

Bob Mhm. No. It'll be fascinating to observe and scary to participate in.

Nadja Yes.

Bob Nadja. I wanted to approach the end of our time together by just exploring some lighter issues. Do you, for instance, have a personal, plain language pet peeve?

Nadja I think my pet peeve is if I finish reading something and I think I still don't know what I'm supposed to do. So what do you want me to do? Why am I reading this? I'm very unclear as to why I received this communication. What I should do.

Bob That's a pretty fundamental flaw in the communication.

Nadja Yes, the structure and the relevance. Absolutely. The first principles of part one.

Bob Sometimes the answers, those questions are there buried deep within the text and they shouldn't be buried. Other times they're just not there.

Nadja Absolutely. Yeah.

Bob If you could ban just one word or phrase from professional writing forever, any thoughts as to what that might be?

Nadja Um, the first one that comes to mind is please be advised. And then usually it's some kind of bad news. Just tell me the bad news. Just tell me what I need to know. And the other one is if someone tells me something is self-explanatory, usually it isn't.

Bob Yeah, that's right up there with the fact of the matter is. And the reality is they're always tells that, oh, well, this is where everyone's going to disagree. Yeah. What's a fun or unexpected skill you have outside of your work?

Nadja I'm quite good at building Lego. My last masterpiece is Van Gogh's Sunflowers. Oh, wow. So I do have a Van Gogh in my home. It's just not a real one.

Bob Oxford. Comma. Friend or foe.

Nadja That's a tough one. I think it depends on context. If it will make it easier to understand and if it's necessary, add it. Otherwise, don't.

Bob That's always got to be the guiding principle, doesn't it? It works better. Or if it doesn't?

Nadja Yeah.

Bob If you can have dinner with any writer, living or dead, who would it be?

Nadja For me, it's a toss up between J. Or Tolkien and Douglas Adams, because both of those writers and their books really shape my childhood and really made me love reading and really just diving into this amazing imaginary fantasy world. So it would be a toss up between them.

Bob You might have a bit more fun with Douglas Adams at the dinner table, perhaps.

Nadja Yeah, yeah. Maybe Tolkien is South African. So we do have that connection. So, of course.

Bob Coffee or tea while writing or perhaps something stronger.

Nadja Always coffee.

Bob Dog or cat person.

Nadja I don't have a pet at the moment, but I would love to get a dog one day. Great.

Bob I've got my dog sitting next to me asleep at the moment. Looking back, Nadja, what are you most proud of in your career so far? And I know there's a long way to go.

Nadja Oh, I'm proud that I was able to do something with my master's research. I think it's so often that you do some postgraduate research, a master's or PhD, and one often ends up happening. It becomes literally just a book lying there gathering dust. But I could really take my research and my framework, the extra mile, develop it into a course present about it at numerous conferences, and really try to spread the word About why plain languages should be a strategic priority for organizations.

Bob I'm just interested to know whether your master's supervisor had ever had a student focusing on that topic, or whether that was a first for them.

Nadja That was the first one, and it wasn't without a few battles on my end to convince them that this is a worthy topic.

Bob And they didn't think it was that hot to trot. Initially.

Nadja I think they tried to push me into a certain communication framework and away from plain language, and that was tough. Again, negotiation, it's all about negotiation and showing them that plain language is a true field of study and also a profession.

Bob What advice would you give to someone just starting out in the profession of plain language?

Nadja It can be a tough world. You will get some rejections. You will get people not understanding why plain language matters. It's all about sticking to your guns, not forgetting why you are doing this and persevering. I think you need a tough skin. Many clients won't get it. You will face many battles, but if you perfect the art of negotiation, you should be okay.

Bob Final question if you could go back and give your younger self one piece of advice, what would it be?

Nadja Probably. Don't be so unsure about yourself. You are doing good research. You do have something to say. You are doing good work and people will listen to you. My first international conference was the one in Oslo, and I was presenting my master's framework, and I was very nervous because I was just new research and I was unsure how it would land with people. And then I got the programme and I saw I was in the same slot as Doctor Neil Jones, Doctor Plain English, and I was so scared because my presentation is right after his. And I was. Will this land. Do I have something to say? And in the end, he gave his presentation about the ten success factors of implementing plain language and organization. And there were so many similarities with my research that really just gave me this absolute boost, that this is where I need to be, this is what I need to talk about, and people will listen.

Bob And you're on the right track.

Nadja Yes. It was very reassuring.

Bob That's great to hear. Well, Nadja, I've really enjoyed our chat. It was great to hear from you and your insights on the art, the science, and the negotiations linked to the world of plain language. Thank you so much for joining us.

Nadja Thank you so much, Bob. Appreciate it.

Bob Absolute pleasure. It was fascinating to hear Nadja's insights, particularly on her thoughts and her hopes around the part for standard on certification, something that, at the time of recording is now not too far away. For more about nudges, plain language work, and her other work, take a look at our show notes. Top of their game has been brought to you by In-Game Learning, the most fun you'll ever learn. Visit ingamelearning.com and see just how much fun online plain language training can be. If you enjoyed today's episode, share it with a colleague. Leave us a review. Or better yet, rewrite something terrible and send it to us. We'll love you forever, and so might your target readers. I'm Bob Milstein, and until next time, go forth and clarify.

‍