Sorry, but this is contrived. One can speak clearly without resorting to a formula.

The story contradicts itself. The author describes at length the process he had to go through to decode this supposedly clear communication. The one person without a vested interest in the formula (his wife) just found it puzzling and annoying. Besides, it's obvious how to communicate the information "I've been in an accident, but I'm ok" straightforwardly.

I kept hoping that the story would turn out to be a clever parody of the father's pet theory by an impudent son. That, as anyone who has been mercilessly imitated by offspring knows, is what children are made for. But no such luck.

It reminds me of a book I read years ago by a psychologist who used to insist that people (including his children) speak in active tenses so as to take responsibility for things. Instead of saying, "The milk got spilled," one should say, "I spilled the milk," and so on. He knew he had gone too far when his 8-year-old came in soaking wet one day and said "Sorry Dad. I guess I rained all over myself."

This kind of thing appeals to technical people who like algorithms for things and want algorithms for human interaction. But that's a category error. Engineers who really want to get better at communication would get further by paying more attention to their audience (and themselves).

Best presentation advice I've heard: put your conclusions first. People zone out after five minutes if they're not interested. Tell people up front what you want them to take away from the talk. Then, even if they fall asleep, they'll know what you did - just not how you did it.

This is in an academic setting, by the way, and that advice was given from the chair of my department to someone in my research group who was prepping for an interview talk at a government lab.

I feel like I was tricked into reading an Oprah magazine article.

I liked the story. I remembered my grandfather (a very successful engineer) once told me I should take acting classes or something that would force me to address an audience and communicate something in a way the audience would understand. He then explained to me that engineers are usually not taught how to communicate things effectively, and how this can make a big difference in trying to accomplish your objectives in life.

Surely it should be: 'I'm OK, but I've been in a car accident'? Then maybe mention the bull.

I know Gopal (and Raj). This is an old, old story, but I get a kick out of it every time I hear it.

This was shared by a co-worker due to a problem i had at work, the business and engineers speak a very different language...anyway, the article has proven useful many, many times for me, hope you guys like it.

Maybe he should follow the style himself when writing the article about it. The punchline should almost stand alone by itself. It shouldn't say, "Hey, audience, now you have to listen to the rest of this to understand what I meant." "The bull is dead," is a very provocative clause that leaves the audience scrambling for (irrelevant) context.

This reminds me of a business case study done during my undergrad days. I don't remember the finer details of the study, but I remember the lesson. The case study was basically a company that had screwed up royally. We were not given much of any hints as to what needed to be done. Most people, including myself, went about creating huge forecasts for trying to solve a problem that really couldn't be solved. We were all wrong. The lesson of the case study was this: Sometimes the only answer is to admit that something has gone wrong, stay calm, severe ties to the project, understand what went wrong, and go about things with what you have left. This is one of the most important things I learned in business school.

As a project manager managing multiple projects, I often need status updates from my team. I find that without a standard structure, people often fail to convey the most important information. I ask my team to report status in the following manner: 1. Of the things that were expected to be done at this point, what is not done? 2. What other deliverables are in danger of not being done in time? 3. What is being done about items in #1 and #2 4. Of the things that were expected to be done at this point, what is done?

I'd love to receive feedback about this process. What has worked for you?

All the academic writing I produce and read begins with a conclusion, in the abstract.