Pedantic or precise: to discriminate between related management terms

Tease me for hair-splitting or praise me for hair-raising perspicuity, I will still continue to write about differences between similar management concepts. Many posts on these pages express my effort to use management terms precisely and correctly, such as the nuances between “effective” and “blended” rates, “litigation” and “lawsuit,” “statistics” and “probability,” “pro bono” and “community service,” “uncertainty” and “risk,” “flow chart” and “process map,” “general compliance” and “regulatory compliance,” “customize” and “configure,” “offshore” and “outsource,” and “Associate GC” and “Assistant GC.”

Each of those distinctions in meanings, and many more I am sure, has been the subject of a post (See my post of June 13, 2006: blended vs. effective rates; Sept. 9, 2008: litigation vs. lawsuit; Nov. 16, 2008: statistics vs. probability; Dec. 16, 2008: pro bono vs. community service; Jan. 13, 2006 on uncertainty vs. risk; Feb. 16, 2008: flow chart vs. process map; Nov. 30, 2008: general compliance vs. regulatory compliance; May 8, 2008: customize vs. configure; June 25, 2008: outsource vs. offshore; and Nov. 8, 2005: Assistant vs. Associate.).

We welcome comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *