It's worth getting a role where you're forced into improving. I'm definitely a better communicator than I was before that job because of it.
- They didn't make assumptions about what the person reading would already know. Everything simple was explained, and was there were link to prior docs where complicated concepts were needed (e.g end of day cash consolidation in a store, because Japanese stores worked differently to US and Europe.) That made it really easy to read any document in isolation. We had a really good wiki that covered everything.
- The team insisted on keeping docs up to date, and deprecating old docs for things that weren't relevant any more. They kept things tidy. They didn't drop writing documentation when things got busy.
- They seemed to have spent quite a lot of effort organising things - tickets were always labelled and complete.
- They were dedicated to using consistent terminology everywhere. They had a glossary and they stuck to it, and that extended to the code that they wrote. Product docs, tech docs, and code all used the same language for the same thing. I think they avoided using similar terms for things too, especially where things could be ambiguous in translation from Japanese to English and vice versa.
To be honest, and with a decent amount of hindsight, I don't think anything was especially clever. It was just clear that the team put the effort in to doing the things most teams know they should be doing. I haven't worked there for a few years now but I bet they're having a lot of success with AI because that documentation would be a great source of context.
I once worked in a job where each day of the week was covered by a different person. Meaning at the end of the day you had to leave everything in a state that another person could pick it up right away without much hassle. This was mostly done via emails and pieces of paper with text on it, but worked flawlessly.
And the only reason it did was because you couldn't just ask the guy from the day before a question. It all needed to be anwered by the work he left for you.
Love japanese and japan but their work culture is horrific - Japanese are inefficient and the veneer of looking to work "hard" is more important than the hard work itself. People often stay until ridiculously late just to show they "put in the effort" which is more important than outcome.
Then again that happens in many other countries as well ...
I haven't directly experienced Japanese work culture (just language and traveling) but it seems like they value hard work above all else, which makes innovation almost a threat. You might take away someone's opportunity to show "hard work" if you removed a difficult task.
Even as a native English speaker I find this type of language hard to understand, fluffy and ambiguous. We would all benefit from using plain language not just non native English speakers
User-facing touch points: everything a user can interact with
Sign-up friction: self explanatory
Stickiness: less bounce rate
Lean: don't overload with touch points/bloat
I've worked in Japan for 7 years and majority of the time you will not be working with native English speakers, usually people who speak multiple languages at all times, if you're only language you know is English you are the minority and people will have to work with you to understand.
I couldnt even finish the article after that insane ramble of gibberish I'm genuinely confused who in the hell would ever talk like that.
This is pretty much life anywhere outside of North America and the UK (or colonies). In Norway, I don't think a single coworker of mine is a native English speaker (I am). We get along fine of course, but often I see the resistance they feel when having to switch to English. Second (or third) languages just take more brain power, and have more friction.
I have learned Norwegian, but English is still is required sometimes, as it's the common denominator amongst the mix of Norwegian, Swedish, German, and Spanish people. And that English is usually functional and as clear as can be.
This is the engineering department though. If you go to marketing or strategy it's full of this corpo double-speak.
In this case that just means: our landing page needs to convince more people to sign up without getting too bloated.
This means it implies a linear correlation between amount of content on the page and sign ups. More content, more signups. But not too much, otherwise it is bad again.
In essence it is a bad take on a probably real problem, expressed by a person that needs to hide behind the lingo.
This was buried at the end of the essay, but is one of the most important points.
I worked (not as a developer) in a company that was acquired by a Japanese company. Meetings were structured, and debate was kept to a minimum. If there was disagreement (typically framed as a difference of opinion or conflicting goals) there would be an effort to achieve some sort of balance or harmony. If the boundary was not hard, it was possible to push back. Politely.
Also, if Japanese colleagues expressed frustration, or were confrontational, that was a red flag that some hard boundary had been crossed. This was extremely rare, and replies had to be made in a very careful, respectful way.
You can see that, to some extent, in how the article’s points apply to language and communication in general, not just between Japanese and English. While turns of phrase give your repartee a flavour that sells your point—like what you’re reading now—it’s also a product of your thinking process, and as the article says, could cloud the point you’re trying to make. If you can speak or write clearer, then your points will also become clearer to yourself. That’s follows my experience, since I speak a lot of German for work. In German, I must think carefully about each point I make, otherwise I’ll run into a sentence for which I don’t know the words. I endeavour to respect the language and culture, and in doing so put effort into making my points simple enough for me to reach for the right words and phrases to show this respect (at least, I try!)
For a good example: David Sylvian collaborating with the late Ryuichi Sakamoto. You can see them writing ‘Blue of Noon’ in the Brilliant Trees sessions on Vimeo/Youtube. David talks about his use of really minimal language to get musical structure and points across, since Ryuichi’s English wasn’t yet as perfect in the 80s as it was later on. You see this directly in the session videos. What’s truly the best about it, is the respect they show for each other.
Bad example (potentially): Aston Martin F1 collaborating with Honda on the new F1 engine :-) . After several years of extensive development and billion-dollar investment, today they’re at the back end of the grid, more than 3 seconds off the pace. According to recent rumours, as recently as November, the Aston Martin F1 bosses visited Tokyo to discuss progress of the engine that had been in development for a few years, apparently having hardly visited before, and were shocked to learn that only about 30% of the original workforce from Honda's previous venture in F1 remained. It seems they didn't even know how far behind schedule Honda was! For projects as large as F1 car development, it’s unfathomable that this mutual curiosity, which in effect is a form of respect, apparently wasn’t there.
I've hear this notion called "international English". English spoken in a way that non-native speakers find relatively easy to understand and follow.
The hard part of this is that non-native speakers will rarely ask for this. It's a gift that you have to give, and a gift you have to encourage others to give. And most of all, it needs to be done in a way so as not to be condescending, by simply being clear.
On the opposite end: I had a coworker, I only ever got about 30% of what he said. I thought it's my Japanese skills. He used complicated sentences and words all over the place. But when I asked other Japanese coworkers, they told me they could not understand him either.
If you said this in Japanese, I'd say something like "Hmm, that seems a bit...". And you'd be expected to figure out what the rest of the sentence was.
To be more clear, I don't think the generalization you're making is valid. My experience of non-"Western" cultural communication styles has not at all been uniformly more direct and clear. I think some subcultures in the US have an annoying habit of doing what you describe (e.g. "if you can't follow this you must be dumb" kind of mentality) but many others do not.