I’ve been in my field a long time. Part of that time has been business owner (I hesitate on the use of the word entrepreneur since I don’t think anything I’ve ever put out there qualifies as product, yet). Own a business, and you learn a few things about service, contracts, marketing, and so on.
As you call can figure out, LinkedIn is a pretty big part of most people’s professional lives. As that company has grown and had to seek its own financial fortunes, they’ve instituted things like ads, and the pro version and such.
One of the things I get now is a LinkedIn page every Monday about trending articles. I don’t know if it’s things in my profile that trigger this, or whether I at some point indicated I was interested in such types of articles, but lately the articles have been VERY interesting in one sense (
There’s this whole new language in the business world that is being spoken, with words and phrases such as these:
“… transparency of the connection and engagement …”
“…where services and employment become more ‘on-demand’ and those with reputation as a measure of that quantification will become king.”
“…talk of reputation, quantification, transparency, and trust…”
(No, I am specifically NOT linking to this article because if it is, as I suspect, utter garbage, I do not want the author getting free clicks just because people who like what *I* write felt obliged to follow a link.)
What kind of tripe is this? Whatever happened to telling it like it is? Or using the English language to describe situations in an English-speaking country? This kind of ‘erudition’ smells of someone trying to obfuscate the facts with complete, stinking, utter horseshit.
Not that I have any trouble reading the words and understanding the concept, but honestly, what has become of the concepts of hard work, innovation, and good customer service? Seems to me it’s been replaced by buzzword central (this coming from a man whose profession swears by the TLA (three letter acronym) and will never stop) and concepts that are not based in reality.
Am I completely alone in this line of thinking, and therefore, off my rocker? Or do I see this one correctly?