Business terms and buzzwords you hate

[Max Rockatansky]

I have employees not "associates"  or "team members."   I am their manager and not their "team leader."

I am not a fan of "associates", but I don't have any problem with the use of "team leader/member". It sounds less hierarchical, which is a positive IMO.

Not in my opinion.  My boss is my boss, not my buddy.

I can be someone's friend or I can be their boss, I can't be both.  There is a clear hierarchy in what I do, so why use diminishing terminology?  A "team leader"  or "team member"  doesn't imply a professional relationship.  It might imply a sports relationship, but not definitely not a Manager/Employee relation. 

Edit:  Just noticed that there was a lot more banter from the other posters regarding these phrases on Page 1.  Yes, working well in a group is important for a manager but I don't think that I need a buzzword to make me seem more friendly/approachable to employees after twenty years of experience. 

[GaryV]

A team leader, to me, is someone who leads a group of people working on a project.  The leader may be the boss of the other workers on the team. Or the leader may simply be a more senior employee, and the whole team reports to another person.

[Max Rockatansky]

A team leader, to me, is someone who leads a group of people working on a project.  The leader may be the boss of the other workers on the team. Or the leader may simply be a more senior employee, and the whole team reports to another person.

I don't feel that it implies the actual employee-manager relationship that is the reality.  Conversely I make sure myself to call people who work for me either "my employee"  or by their actual job title, I feel like I'm disrespecting them otherwise.  I don't see what the point of using neutered terminology is, does it actually change anything or make people somehow feel more valued?  I suspect that is probably what a lot of Human Resources people or even Union Representatives probably think.  To me, it is just plain silly and I refuse to engage in it. 

Also, a customer is not a "guest."   I guest is someone you invite over to dinner and not over to buy something from your place of business. 

[kphoger]

Also, a customer is not a "guest."   I guest is someone you invite over to dinner and not over to buy something from your place of business. 

Even at a restaurant?

[formulanone]

Guru

I have tried too often to work "tathāgata" into conversation and it doesn't work. 

Clarity seems to count for leadership but using buzzwords and simple words just doesn't impress me as much as a seasoned vocabulary might catch my attention.

I do like the idea of "thought leader", but it really sounds like someone who masterminds a cult.

[texaskdog]

Reaching out.  No one used to ever say it ...

yet no one else ever said it. 

[Max Rockatansky]

Also, a customer is not a "guest."   I guest is someone you invite over to dinner and not over to buy something from your place of business. 

Even at a restaurant?

On the surface it seems more fitting but I would ask this; would a guest anywhere else pay for their meal?

Also, come to think of it I don't recall ever hearing someone call themselves a "paying guest"  when lodging a complaint. 

[texaskdog]

A team leader, to me, is someone who leads a group of people working on a project.  The leader may be the boss of the other workers on the team. Or the leader may simply be a more senior employee, and the whole team reports to another person.

I don't feel that it implies the actual employee-manager relationship that is the reality.  Conversely I make sure myself to call people who work for me either "my employee"  or by their actual job title, I feel like I'm disrespecting them otherwise.  I don't see what the point of using neutered terminology is, does it actually change anything or make people somehow feel more valued?  I suspect that is probably what a lot of Human Resources people or even Union Representatives probably think.  To me, it is just plain silly and I refuse to engage in it. 

Also, a customer is not a "guest."   I guest is someone you invite over to dinner and not over to buy something from your place of business. 

E.g. when you drive Uber.  If someone is paying you, they are your customer.  if you let them ride for free they are a guest.   

I guess those people who sit around in bookstores and reading and never buy anything could be guests. 

Customers at Rudys BBQ, Target, In and Out, NOT guests

[texaskdog]

Also, a customer is not a “guest.”  I guest is someone you invite over to dinner and not over to buy something from your place of business. 

Even at a restaurant?

On the surface it seems more fitting but I would ask this; would a guest anywhere else pay for their meal?

Exactly.  In hotels you pay but at least there you're sleeping over, etc, and that is always what they were called, it wasn't some business trying to be more than they really are. 

Customer is not a bad work, nor is employee.  I remember the days of personnel before it became "Human Resources" and now at my wife's work it's "The People Team"  LOLOLOLOL

[Max Rockatansky]

Also, a customer is not a "guest."   I guest is someone you invite over to dinner and not over to buy something from your place of business. 

Even at a restaurant?

On the surface it seems more fitting but I would ask this; would a guest anywhere else pay for their meal?

Exactly.  In hotels you pay but at least there you're sleeping over, etc, and that is always what they were called, it wasn't some business trying to be more than they really are. 

Customer is not a bad work, nor is employee.  I remember the days of personnel before it became "Human Resources" and now at my wife's work it's "The People Team"  LOLOLOLOL

Heh, the term "Chief People Operator"  or something like that came up in one of the road chats that I'm in.  My new screen there now is Chief Operating Cantaloupe Emperor. 

[kphoger]

Also, a customer is not a "guest."   I guest is someone you invite over to dinner and not over to buy something from your place of business. 

Even at a restaurant?

On the surface it seems more fitting but I would ask this; would a guest anywhere else pay for their meal?

Also, come to think of it I don't recall ever hearing someone call themselves a "paying guest"  when lodging a complaint. 

Devil's advocate...  Where else besides a restaurant does a customer get to sit down in a chair, tell an employee what he wants, wait for it to be brought to him, completely destroy the item with the manager looking on, and then pay for it?

[Scott5114]

I can be someone's friend or I can be their boss, I can't be both.  There is a clear hierarchy in what I do, so why use diminishing terminology?  A "team leader"  or "team member"  doesn't imply a professional relationship.  It might imply a sports relationship, but not definitely not a Manager/Employee relation. 

Exactly. You see a lot of these sorts of things where they want to trick you into thinking it's not a hierarchy because they think that'll help morale, but they sure do want to keep all the perks of there being a hierarchy in place. That just makes things confusing because, well, are you the boss or not?

One example from the casino I used to work at was when they changed "chain of command" to "line of support". That was them feeding us a line of something, and it wasn't support. Not one of the people above me ever did anything supportive, but they sure did do a lot of commanding. With a chain you can chain someone up and you can beat them with it, both of which felt like more accurate depictions of what they did with the chain of command. 

Devil's advocate...  Where else besides a restaurant does a customer get to sit down in a chair, tell an employee what he wants, wait for it to be brought to him, completely destroy the item with the manager looking on, and then pay for it?

Blackjack table. You sit down, tell the employee you want a hand by putting money in the betting circle, they give you the hand, you bust it, the dealer takes your money.

[kphoger]

One example from the casino I used to work at was when they changed "chain of command" to "line of support". That was them feeding us a line of something, and it wasn't support.

So your managers were the "support staff"?      What a crock of... ummm... margarine!

[Scott5114]

Once I verbally walked my direct manager into a corner over why she didn't ever seem to take the employees' side, or try to explain to those above her why the policies they wanted to implement would make it harder to do our jobs, and she dropped the absolute gem of a line "Well, it's my job to support upper management." Who supports frontline, then?

[kphoger]

Once I verbally walked my direct manager into a corner over why she didn't ever seem to take the employees' side, or try to explain to those above her why the policies they wanted to implement would make it harder to do our jobs, and she dropped the absolute gem of a line "Well, it's my job to support upper management." Who supports frontline, then?

Sounds like Communism in a nutshell.

[kenarmy]

"Not quite". Wtf is "quite" then? Just say it's wrong or something else  .

[jmacswimmer]

Ryan's VP stint during Season 4 of The Office is a great microcosm of business buzzwords - I distinctly remember him using "hit the ground running" in one episode.

What a crock of... ummm... margarine!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e33SNyaXNsk

[TheHighwayMan3561]

I mean, I've done it plenty of times when I visit friends where we plan to cook something at their place but we split the costs of the ingredients at the grocery store. I agree the fake humanization with "team member" is stupid, but restaurant "guests" makes sense - especially for the regular customers.

[webny99]

That principle, in my opinion, should carry over into the workplace:  my boss is not merely a co-worker, but rather she is hierarchically above me.  That's a good thing, and a distinction that should not be erased by semantics.

I don't think we're really disagreeing, then, because leader is distinct from member, and therefore, the distinction isn't erased by semantics.

I can be someone's friend or I can be their boss, I can't be both.  There is a clear hierarchy in what I do, so why use diminishing terminology?  A "team leader"  or "team member"  doesn't imply a professional relationship.  It might imply a sports relationship, but not definitely not a Manager/Employee relation. 

Exactly. You see a lot of these sorts of things where they want to trick you into thinking it's not a hierarchy because they think that'll help morale, but they sure do want to keep all the perks of there being a hierarchy in place. That just makes things confusing because, well, are you the boss or not?

The leader is the boss - that seems simple enough to me. If there's good ownership and a good business culture, it's not really a "trick" - everyone really is in it together. There can still be elements of a hierarchy and a clear chain of command without it being rigid and inflexible.

I agree the fake humanization with "team member" is stupid

Well, I guess this gets at the point here: if "fake humanization" really is accurate, that's a problem with the company, not a problem with the term.

[Max Rockatansky]

That principle, in my opinion, should carry over into the workplace:  my boss is not merely a co-worker, but rather she is hierarchically above me.  That's a good thing, and a distinction that should not be erased by semantics.

I don't think we're really disagreeing, then, because leader is distinct from member, and therefore, the distinction isn't erased by semantics.

I can be someone's friend or I can be their boss, I can't be both.  There is a clear hierarchy in what I do, so why use diminishing terminology?  A "team leader"  or "team member"  doesn't imply a professional relationship.  It might imply a sports relationship, but not definitely not a Manager/Employee relation. 

Exactly. You see a lot of these sorts of things where they want to trick you into thinking it's not a hierarchy because they think that'll help morale, but they sure do want to keep all the perks of there being a hierarchy in place. That just makes things confusing because, well, are you the boss or not?

The leader is the boss - that seems simple enough to me. If there's good ownership and a good business culture, it's not really a "trick" - everyone really is in it together. There can still be elements of a hierarchy and a clear chain of command without it being rigid and inflexible.

I agree the fake humanization with "team member" is stupid

Well, I guess this gets at the point here: if "fake humanization" really is accurate, that's a problem with the company, not a problem with the term.

What value is there in "business culture?"   Does it actually enhance anything nor change the fact that work is in fact work?  Why not just stay normalized and move onto more important work place problems?  Most of these buzzword names for employees are just a facade anyways. 

[Max Rockatansky]

Here is one that came to mind just now; Sandwich Artist. 

[Scott5114]

The leader is the boss - that seems simple enough to me. If there's good ownership and a good business culture

If there's good ownership, they're more likely to

stay normalized and move onto more important work place problems

The problem is when you get a boss who wants to lord it over everyone else, so everyone is miserable. So to "fix" the problem they use euphemisms like "team member" and "line of support" instead of addressing the underlying issues that take actual work to solve, or at least a change of behavior from management, like favoritism or punishments that are out of proportion with the purported crimes. So it just feels extremely gross to the employees, who generally aren't as stupid as managers assume they are and can see right through it.

[kphoger]

Someone needs to go outside and just breathe for a minute...

[texaskdog]

Here is one that came to mind just now; Sandwich Artist. 

that's just funny

[formulanone]

Here is one that came to mind just now; Sandwich Artist. 

that's just funny

I'm okay with calling the folks at Jersey Mike's or Publix Deli that title.