Strategy is specific, specifics are semantics
There is a distinct difference between probability and possibility, between rationality and reason, empathy and sympathy, between dogma and ideal, strategy and tactics, differentiation and distinctiveness, and efficiency and effectiveness.
And to some, even the difference between whiskey or whisky matters — as with butter and margarine, or Great Britain and the United Kingdom. When we label apps ‘the Facebook of China’ or label markets with ‘neo-colonialism’, we provide handles but hinder deeper understanding, because we ignore the specifics.
It’s not about how complicated the words we use are, or how many words we use. There’s a vast difference between statements like ‘Our travellers are important to us’ and ‘We see the changes in people’s behaviours and the way they travel, and we adept to those new needs’. Both use common words, but the former is as useful as ’North East’, the latter provides direction like an address.
Specifics aren’t just about correctness and clarity, they’re about power too. ‘We answer on first ring’ is much stronger than saying ‘world class service’. The iPod didn’t launch with a promise of a 5 GB hard drive, but with ‘a 1000 songs in your pocket’.
When we express the world we see to ourselves and others, semantics aren’t just useful, they’re the only thing we’ve got.
