44 pages • 1 hour read
Jim Vandehei, Mike Allen, Roy SchwartzSmart Brevity: The Power of Saying More with Less
Nonfiction | Book | Adult | Published in 2022A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Themes
Cutting Through the Noise With Punchier Writing
The authors argue that today’s digital world calls for a different style of communication. The many platforms for communication available in the digital age have contributed to what the authors refer to as a “fog of words” (13). Especially on social media, gaining readers’ attention is a battle that the authors liken to a combat sport (155). With this overwhelming atmosphere in mind, writers must always consider and respect their busy readers’ time. In short, writers need a new approach for reaching their audience: “What we’re arguing is this: If you want vital information to stick in the digital world, you need to radically rethink—and repackage—how you deliver it” (16).
The new approach that the authors propose is smart brevity, which focuses on creating content that is as concise as possible and gets straight to the point. Readers are inundated with information. It is therefore crucial for writers to set themselves apart by streamlining their language. As the authors put it, “[t]he more noise and distractions there are, the more precision and efficiency matter in being heard—and remembered in all things” (173). Writers need to avoid a long-winded delivery that loses readers’ interest before readers even reach the main point of the written communication. The authors view verbose, lengthy writing as outdated, stating that “[w]ith the old ways of communicating, almost no one is listening” (14). Verbose writing, in their view, detracts from clear expression of the central message; therefore, it should be replaced by a more direct and pared-down writing style that eliminates fluff in lieu of tighter, leaner, more direct writing.
However, the authors emphasize that smart brevity does not entail dumbing down writing to make it digestible. Rather, the aim is to elevate the writing’s clarity, treating the reader like a “smart, curious friend” (52); writing with this audience in mind means that one “[doesn’t] tell people things they already know […] [doesn’t] explain the obvious” (52). In their explanation of the guiding principle of brevity, they advise writers to “[s]tay short, not shallow” (188). The authors are “not saying to write short for short’s sake—you bring more soul and salience to your writing by being direct, helpful and time-saving” (16). Done correctly and skillfully, a precise, clipped writing style is more effective at reaching the intended audience and is functionally a better communication method. In the same spirit, the authors also advocate for retaining an authentic voice: “You are a human, so you need to perform like one” (143).
For all its benefits, though, smart brevity is not necessarily easy to learn. Many people have a natural tendency to want to say more when trying to express a point or gain attention. When excited about a message, writers tend to elaborate, which can take on a momentum of its own. The authors, who mention their own struggles with the approach, acknowledge that smart brevity “is not natural or easy but can be learned with practice” (86).
The Business Benefits of Smart Brevity
Since the onset of the digital workplace, and especially since the COVID-19 pandemic, the nature of the modern workplace has changed. The authors argue that in order to be successful, and to build a positive workplace culture, companies need to recognize the importance of effective communication. Company employees spend substantial amounts of time on producing and absorbing communication, and from the management side, effective communication is key to “a vibrant culture, a clear strategy and swift execution” (9). The authors state that
[t]he days of top-down, secretive management teams ordering around compliant employees hunkered down in traditional offices are over. This is the dawn of remote idealistic employees demanding transparency and meaning at work. Culture will be as important as strategy or execution. Communications will be the central front in this revolution (120).
In other words, effective communication allows for a healthier style of management where employee satisfaction is recognized and fostered.
The authors discovered the benefits of smart brevity through their own business ventures. When they began Politico, they “scoffed at communications and culture and figured everything would be fine if people just did their jobs” (173). A prominent magazine then revealed their shockingly high attrition rate and labeled their company as “a punishing place to work” (173). When the authors started Axios, they altered their approach, embracing the power of open, effective communication. The new environment at Axios is much different and, according to the authors, has made this company a much more enjoyable and engaging place to work. They attribute this change in employee satisfaction to the way they communicate, saying their smart brevity is “central to [their] management and culture and a big reason [they] win awards for having an inclusive, happy, kick-ass workplace” (170).
There are two significantly positive outcomes of adopting an effective communication strategy. First, a company that openly communicates in precise, direct, attention-grabbing ways and thereby ensures reader retention has a much higher likelihood of cutting down on gossip. As the authors put it, “[a] magical thing happens when you communicate crisply and transparently: You cut out all the employee gossip and pot-stirring that come from being confused or kept in the dark” (170). Here, the authors imply that when employees are left in the dark, they tend to fill in the gaps and create their own stories of what may or may not be happening within the company. This kind of gossip is a potentially negative development capable of breeding discontent. Open and direct communication cuts down on the likelihood of it happening. Second, the authors argue that
[i]f you’re not communicating inclusively, you’re not communicating effectively […] We’re talking about being accessible, relatable and credible with everyone in your audience—regardless of gender, race, color, religion, gender identity, age, physical ability, sexual orientation or anything else (180).
That is to say, their approach of smart brevity, in their estimation, naturally fosters inclusivity, which in the modern workplace is crucial. The authors add that “[t]he principles of Smart Brevity can help bridge differences in background and abilities. It’s direct and stripped down—accessible and nondivisive by design” (180). For a company to have a successful workplace culture, the company must engage employees and ensure that employees feel that their work is meaningful. Inclusive communication, which, according to the authors, is facilitated by smart brevity, helps ensure this happens.
Evidence-Based Justifications for Smart Brevity
The authors frequently use data to support their positions in the book. They also cite the work of notable experts in media-related fields and refer to the work of polling organizations such as Gallup. One of the grounding principles of the book is that in the digital age, there is so much information and noise that it is changing how people consume information, particularly written communication. Here, the authors bring in some findings by researcher Ronald Yaros of the University of Maryland. Yaros, who has studied how people consume digital content, found that people do not really read in the typical sense of the word. Instead, people scan and skim written content. Yaros contends that “the typical person spends just 26 seconds on a story or update,” which he calls “time on text” (56). The authors, following up on that finding, conclude that this sets a time limit for writers: “Anything written after that? Usually wasted” (56). This assumption helps support their overall thesis in the book that a more precise and tighter writing style is an essential skill to possess in the digital age.
The authors further state that among the many kinds of written communications, email in particular lends itself to a long-winded, verbose writing style. People can easily get carried away when composing emails. The authors suggest that while this wordiness is common, it’s the wrong strategy. Email writing, perhaps even more so than other forms of writing, could benefit significantly from their smart brevity method. In making this claim, they again provide evidence, citing Cal Newport of Georgetown University, a specialist on workplace efficiency. Newport’s research found that in 2005, the average business user received 50 emails a day. By 2019, that number had increased to 126 (127). The authors use this datapoint to support their claim that there is “a fierce urgency to getting better at this fast” (127). In other words, the increase in email correspondence highlights how email contributes to the inundation of information, and the authors accordingly use this data to drive home their justification for adopting the strategy at the heart of the book. The authors also refer to the polling company Gallup multiple times in the book, which helps provide context for the subject at hand as well as further justification for their strategy. As an example, the authors use Gallup polling to frame their argument that direct, precise, short, and open communication in the workplace can help mitigate problems that crop up. The authors also reveal that they sought Gallup’s services exclusively for the book (127). Among the findings highlighted by Gallup’s polling is that “70 percent of employees want shorter communications at work” (127). The data used here further support the position that workplace communications should be much shorter, and in turn, the authors position their strategy as the best way of achieving this objective.
