The Most Dangerous Word in the Meeting

“You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”

Since I started working in the consulting world, that’s exactly the sentence I’ve wanted to say in more meetings than I can count. And not just about the word inconceivable like Vizzini and Inigo in The Princess Bride.

"Strategic." I do not think it means what you think it means.

"Engagement." I do not think it means what you think it means.

"Cost-effective." I do not think it means what you think it means.

"Accountability." ...you get the idea.

Yet those words – and plenty of others like them – still keep coming up over and over again, to the point where I've started feeling like I could win leadership buzzword bingo before the meeting is half over.

They're all good words. They're also words we rarely stop to define because we assume everyone already shares the same picture.

Unlike Inigo, though, my reaction isn’t usually about the dictionary definition.

What I actually mean is, "I don't think that's the conversation you actually think you’re having."

Take "strategic." It's become one of those words that makes us feel like we're saying something important, when what we often mean could be any number of things: Developing a long-term vision. Setting priorities. Making difficult choices. Aligning resources. Stopping work that no longer serves the mission.

Those aren't all the same conversation.

Or "cost-effective." Too often it’s shorthand for, "Can't we pay less for this?" rather than asking, "Does this investment give us a good return on what we're trying to accomplish?"

And "engagement"? Don't even get me started.

Do we want more people volunteering? More conference attendees? More comments on social media? Better committee participation? Higher member retention? They're all forms of engagement, but they're not interchangeable.

Now, as an English major, I love words. There are a lot of great ones out there.

But in leadership, I'm finding we sometimes reach for words because they sound like they belong in the conversation. They make us feel like we know what we’re talking about, or that we’ve said something meaningful and leader-y. Everyone around the table nods because, of course, we all want to be more strategic. We all want more engagement. Or more whatever.

The problem is that we're often nodding at the word, not the idea behind it. And that's where leadership gets tricky.

Imagine a board agrees they need to "increase engagement."

Six months later, marketing celebrates because social media interactions are up. The conference committee is disappointed because attendance stayed flat. The membership committee points out volunteer participation declined. The board wonders why renewal rates haven't changed.

Nobody failed. They were simply measuring different things, because no one ever stopped to define what "engagement" meant in the first place.

So what’s the most dangerous word in a meeting? It depends.

Sometimes it's strategic. Sometimes it's engagement. Sometimes it's accountability. Sometimes it's innovation. I’ve got a whole bingo card full of them.

The point is that the dangerous word isn't a particular word. It's the undefined one. The one that makes everyone in a meeting nod, while seeing a completely different picture in their own head.

Before your team leaves the room, try asking a few simple questions:

• What do we actually mean by that?

• What would we expect to see happening if we were successful?

• How would we know we'd achieved it?

• If someone observed us six months from now, what would they notice was different?

If people answer those questions differently, the group probably isn’t aligned yet. And you should probably continue asking those questions like a persistent toddler until they are.

Words matter.

But shared understanding matters even more.

Sometimes the most valuable thing a leader can do isn’t to watch everyone nod along.

It's to pause long enough to say, “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”