Strategy is specific, specifics are semantics

There is a difference between probability and possibility, between rationality and reason, empathy and sympathy, between dogma and ideal, strategy and tactics, differentiation and distinctiveness, supplement and replacement, and efficiency and effectiveness.

To some, even the difference between whiskey or whisky matters — as with butter and margarine, or Great Britain and the United Kingdom. And when we label apps ‘the Facebook of China’ or label markets with ‘neo-colonialism’, we provide handles but hinder deeper understanding, because we ignore the specifics.

It’s not about how complicated the words we use are, or how many words we use — but about how precise they are. There’s a vast difference between statements like ‘Our travellers are important to us’ and ‘We see the changes in people’s behaviours and the way they travel, and we adept to those new needs’. Both use common words, but the former is as useful as ‘North East’, the latter provides direction like an address.

When we express ourselves — to others or ourselves — our words and their precise meaning aren’t just useful, they’re the only thing we’ve got.