Creating Impactful Messaging

🐑 Business Language vs. UX Language. How to present design work, explain design decisions and get stakeholders on your side ↓ 🤔 Businesses rarely understand the impact of UX work. 🤔 UX language is overloaded with ambiguous terms/labels. 🤔 Business can’t support initiatives it doesn’t understand. ✅ Leave UX language and UX abbreviations at the door. ✅ Explain design work through the lens of business goals. 🚫 Avoid “consistency”, “empathy”, “simplicity”, “affordance”. 🚫 Avoid “design thinking”, “cognitive load”, “universal design”. 🚫 Avoid “lean UX”, “agile”, “archetypes”, “Jobs-To-Be-Done”. 🚫 Avoid “stakeholder management” and “design validation”. 🚫 Avoid abbreviations: WIP, POC, HMW, IxD, PDP, PLP, WCAG. ✅ Explain how you’ll measure success of your design work. ✅ Speak of business value, loyalty, abandonment, churn. ✅ Show risk management, compliance, governance, evidence. ✅ Refer to cost reduction, efficiency, growth, success, Design KPIs. ✅ Present inclusive design as an industry-wide way of working. As designers, we often use design terms, such as consistency, friction and empathy. Yet to many managers, these attributes don’t map to any business objectives at all, often leaving them baffled and utterly confused about the actual real-life impact of our UX work. One way out that changed everything for me is to leave UX vocabulary at the door when entering a business meeting. Instead, I try to explain design work through the lens of the business, often rehearsing and testing the script ahead of time. When presenting design work in a big meeting, I try to be very deliberate and strategic in the choice of words. I won’t be speaking about attracting “eye-balls” or getting users “hooked”. It’s just not me. But I won’t be speaking about reducing “friction” or improving “consistency” either. Instead, I tell a story. A story that visualizes how our work helps the business. How design team has translated business goals into specific design initiatives. How UX can reduce costs. Increase revenue. Grow business. Open new opportunities. New markets. Increase efficiency. Extend reach. Mitigate risk. Amplify word of mouth. And how we’ll measure all that huge impact of our work. Typically, it’s broken down into 8 sections: 🎯 Goals ← Business targets, KRs we aim to achieve. 💥 Translation ← Design initiatives, iterations, tests. 🕵️ Evidence ← Data from UX research, pain points. 🧠 Ideas ← Prioritized by an impact/effort-matrix. 🕹 Design work ← Flows, features, user journeys. 📈 Design KPIs ← How we’ll measure/report success. 🐑 Shepherding ← Risk management, governance. 🔮 Future ← What we believe are good next steps. Next time you walk in a meeting, pay attention to your words. Translate UX terms in a language that other departments understand. It might not take long until you’ll see support coming from everywhere — just because everyone can now clearly see how your work helps them do their work better. [continues in the comments]

Translating health science into understandable and clear health advice isn’t easy, especially on social media. And it’s not about what algorithms want us to do to engage their users. It’s about how people think. In the past three years, the World Health Organization worked on a project with Meta, using their Brand Lift Study tool to test how different kinds of message framings, built on behavioural science theories, affect how people perceive risk and act on it. In the paper below, we highlight a measles vaccination experiment in which we targeted parents of young children. We compared two types of messaging: - Verbatim: fact-based and precise “1 in 1,000 children who get measles will die.” - Gist: essence-based and emotional “Some children who get measles will die.” Both are accurate, but they communicate risk differently. Here are a few reflections from the process: - We need to design social media public health campaigns with behavioural science lenses, not just communication instinct. - We need to evaluate impact beyond likes and shares; focus on understanding and intention. - We must keep messages evidence-based but human; clarity matters as much as accuracy. What matters most isn’t how much information we share, but how people make sense of it. Small shifts in framing can change how people understand risk and how they act on it — which is the ultimate objective of public health communication. WHO project team: Simon Williams Elena Altieri Mohamed Gulaid Giselle Miguens Lisa Menning Karin Stein, MD, MScPH

Europe is the most fragmented market on earth. That makes it uniquely complex for brands. Unlike Australia or even the U.S., where scale can be achieved through a handful of dominant players, Europe is renowned for its diversity of markets. Each country brings its own mix of retailers, languages, and cultural nuances, sometimes shifting entirely within just a few hours’ drive. Supermarkets like Carrefour, Auchan, and Lidl each command enormous influence, yet even they adjust their strategies from country to country. For this reason, you can’t build a single campaign in Lisbon and expect it to resonate in Lausanne or Lyon. With multiple chains competing across each market, brands must fight harder for physical and mental availability. The challenge is being coherent, but not too uniform; maintaining distinctive brand assets that can flex across cultures and chains without your brand losing its foundations. The key is cultural literacy, understanding not just what’s sold, but why it resonates and adapting your otherwise stable brand ever so slightly to accommodate for this nuance. To put it simply, Europe rewards brands that can think globally but behave locally. Those who manage to balance both are the ones that cut through.

Maybe the problem isn’t climate denial. Maybe it’s climate messaging. We’ve been attempting to scare or shame people into caring, and it’s not effective. Is it time to completely rethink how we talk about climate and sustainability? We've spent years trying to influence people through fear, data, and moral urgency. The results? Mixed. If we want genuine buy-in, we need to be honest about what’s isn’t working. Here are seven messaging mistakes we keep repeating. 1. Leading with Guilt and Doom: "We're killing the planet!" doesn't inspire - it overwhelms. Guilt sparks awareness, but rarely leads to action. 2. Talking About “The Planet” Instead of People People don’t wake up thinking about biodiversity - they think about bills, housing, jobs. Make climate personal. What can THEY GAIN out of changing their behaviour? 3. Assuming Rational Facts Will Change Behavior: 1.5°C Warming Is Essential, But Not Sufficient. Facts Inform, but Emotions Drive Action. 4. Using Elite, exclusionary language jargon, such as “net zero” and “green premiums,” alienates the majority. Sustainability can’t sound like it’s just for experts or elites. 5. Neglecting economic and social equity when we assume everyone can afford an EV or solar system, we lose trust. Green should be accessible to everyone - not just the wealthy. 6. Framing Green as Restriction, Not Opportunity: Less driving, flying, consuming... Where’s the upside? A green transition should feel like a win: lower bills, warmer homes, and cleaner air. 7. Treating Climate Like a Separate Issue. Climate isn’t separate from the economy, housing, or healthcare - it is those things. When we silo it, we shrink its relevance. So, how do we change the story? ✅ Speak to lived realities. Discuss how green policies improve everyday life, including jobs, bills, housing, and health. ✅ Shift from sacrifice to solutions. Replace “cut back” with “get more” - resilience, savings, mobility, and wellbeing. ✅ Make it simple. Use plain, human language. Instead of “decarbonize the grid,” say “cleaner, cheaper energy in every home. Help people to measure their carbon footprint.” ✅ Center fairness easily. Ensure that the benefits of sustainability are accessible - especially to those who have been historically excluded. ✅ Embed climate into everything. Don’t treat it like a separate crusade - show how it strengthens the economy, creates jobs, and benefits communities. ✅ Gemify climate action ✅ Give intrinsic value to change of behaviour and reducing carbon footprint. 👉 Time to stop scaring people into action - and start inspiring them with what’s possible. What language has been proven to be effective for climate and sustainability? Let’s share notes. ♻️ Repost this to help spread the word, please! 👉 Follow Gilad Regev for more insights like this.

🌍 New Series: "Mind the Gap – PR & Communication Across Borders" Ever tried launching a PR campaign in another country and thought, “Wait… why did that land like a lead balloon?” You're not alone. As someone who's navigated international communication for a while, I’ve seen firsthand how cultural nuance can make—or break—a message. So I’m kicking off a new series exploring how PR and communication differ around the globe. 👉 First up: Germany vs. the USA U.S. Communication: Enthusiastic, emotional, and yes—peppered with exclamation marks!!! Storytelling is king. Personal anecdotes and a strong “why” lead the way. Positivity sells. Even problems get rebranded as “growth opportunities.” German Communication: Direct, precise, and suspicious of unnecessary fluff. Facts first. Then more facts. Then a few more, just to be safe. Understatement rules. If a German says something is “not bad,” it might be worthy of an award. Example: An American press release might open with: “We’re thrilled to announce our exciting new partnership that will revolutionize the industry!” A German version? “Company A and Company B have entered a partnership effective May 15. Objectives include market expansion and product development.” Both are correct. Neither is wrong. But the context is everything. Takeaway: If you're crafting messages across borders, remember—it’s not just about what you say, but how it’s heard. ✨ Stay tuned for more posts comparing global comms styles—from Japan’s silence-as-a-power-move to Brazil’s beautifully fluid approach to formality. Have you run into cultural communication quirks in your PR work? I’d love to hear them! Chris Prouty, tell us about your experience as a US PR pro, please. #PR #Communication #CrossCulturalCommunication #Germany #USA #GlobalMarketing #Storytelling #Localization #InternationalBusiness

The biggest unlock between $1M and $10M ARR wasn’t product or sales. It was messaging. At $1M ARR, I kept hearing the same question on sales calls: ”So you’re like [consumer notetaking app], right?” We aren’t a notetaker. We are the API powering them. But if every lead is comparing you to the wrong product, that’s a messaging problem. Here’s what I changed: 1/ Clarified WHO we serve, not WHAT we do Before: “Capture and transcribe your meetings with ease” After: “The API for developers to get recordings, transcripts and metadata from meetings” 2/ Positioned as infrastructure, not a tool Before: “Works with Zoom, Meet, and Teams” After: “One API to access raw meeting data across Zoom, Meet and Teams” 3/ Used technical language with technical buyers Before: “Get meeting insights and transcripts” After: “Programmatic access to real-time meeting data” The transformation was immediate: - Wrong-fit leads dropped by 68% - Demo to close rate jumped from 12% to 31%. - Average deal size increased by 67%. Your messaging doesn’t describe your product. It determines who shows up to buy it.

Two Finnish artists just showed us the future of rising seas with light beams. On the remote islands of Scotland's Outer Hebrides, Pekka Niittyvirta and Timo Ahokanto crafted "Lines" – an installation using sensors to trigger beams of light showing exactly where future sea levels will reach. As tides rise, white light activates across fields, shorelines, and buildings. Not charts, graphs, or projections – actual visual lines marking what's coming. Most climate models remain abstract until it's too late. This makes the invisible visible in real time. And the impact hits you in the gut in ways no slide deck ever could. The artists later brought this stark visualization to Miami Beach, letting another vulnerable coastal community see their future written in light. From Scottish islands to American shores, the message remains equally powerful. For those of us connecting capital to climate solutions, there's a valuable lesson. Sometimes the most compelling investment case isn't found in ROI projections, but in making climate risk tangible and personal. What communication methods have you found most effective when explaining climate risk to skeptical stakeholders?

We had a beautiful customer newsletter... and no one cared. Up until the end of 2023, we had a highly designed version of the newsletter. It looked great, but it took a ton of time to pull together. Every send required custom images, specific copy lengths, and with no real guardrails on content, we tried to include ✨everything.✨ And it did… fine. But not fine enough to warrant the time it required and no clear strategy, so we stopped doing it. This year, I relaunched our customer newsletter — and doubled our engagement score and click-through rates. Here's the 4 steps I took to do it: 1️⃣ I redefined the purpose. The newsletter needed to be a valuable touchpoint for account managers — something that kept customers informed and encouraged them to explore more of the Lattice ecosystem through features, events, and content. Not salesy. 2️⃣ I scrapped the overly designed template and went plain-text. The emails now come directly from Account Owners (because who’s Kerry Wheeler anyways?). 3️⃣ We segmented our customers into three key groups and tailor content to each one based on what’s most relevant to them. 4️⃣ I implemented strong content guardrails. Every send now includes just two of the most relevant product updates, events, and resources — and it must be actionable today (no “coming soon” teasers). The results? Open rates held steady at ~50%, but engagement took off. Click-through rates more than doubled, and we’ve heard great feedback from both customers and AMs on how the newsletter has kept them informed and engaged.

Conservationists like to think facts speak for themselves. They don’t. In a world where allegiance often trumps evidence, who delivers the message often matters more than what’s being said. The same data, spoken by a nurse instead of a scientist, can land differently. In Amazonia, credibility travels along social lines. Farmers listen to agronomists, not activists. Urban families may heed pediatricians warning about heat-related illness before they trust an NGO ad. Pastors, teachers, and co-op leaders often reach places journalists and policymakers cannot. Matching voice to audience isn’t a branding exercise; it’s simply being honest about how people decide what to believe. That realism also means differentiating the message without diluting it. Indigenous leaders remain central, both as stewards and as narrators of success on their lands. Yet many who influence the forest’s future—like mayors, truckers, ranchers, and small business owners—don’t identify with Indigenous causes. Messages typically work best when they’re tailored to their audience: stewardship told as rainfall insurance for farmers, public-health policy for city dwellers, and fiscal stability for mayors who need predictable budgets. The goal isn’t to make everyone an environmentalist; it’s to make the forest relevant to each person’s daily choices. None of this can be faked. Trust is borrowed first and earned slowly. It grows when people see that acting on information pays, as in lower bills, steadier harvests, clearer skies, or fewer fires. For communicators, the task is to equip credible messengers with verified, usable material: sermon guides, WhatsApp videos, radio spots, farm bulletins, and committee briefs. Over time, authority shifts from the messenger to the message itself. What saves the forest, in the end, may not be a single voice but a variety—each carrying the same plain facts: e.g. protecting forest keeps rain falling; law in the Amazon means law at home; standing forest cools the air; healthy ecosystems make for healthy economies. Repetition stops being spin and starts being education. Once that logic comes from trusted voices, it no longer sounds like activism. It just sounds obvious. [I contributed a section on how to communicate about the Amazon for 'The Endangered Amazonia' report, published by COICA ORG this week. This is the second of three parts summarizing my contribution. This one is titled, "Why the messenger matters in efforts to save the Amazon] 👉 The report: https://lnkd.in/gpZs8JBW

Want your words to actually sell? Here’s a simple roadmap I've found incredibly helpful: Think of crafting your message like taking someone on a mini-journey: 1. Hook them with curiosity: Your headline is the first "hello."  Make it intriguing enough to stop the scroll.  Instead of just saying "Email Marketing Tips," try something like "Want a 20% revenue jump in the next 60 days? (Here's the email secret)."  See the difference? Promise + Specificity = Attention. 2. Tell a story with a villain: This might sound dramatic, but hear me out.  What's the problem your audience is facing?  What's the frustration, the obstacle, the "enemy" they're battling?  For the email example, maybe it's "wasting hours on emails that no one opens."  Giving that problem a name creates an instant connection and a sense of purpose for your solution. 3. Handle the "yeah, but..." in their head: We all have those internal objections.  "I don't have time," "It costs too much," "Will it even work for me?"  Great copy anticipates these doubts and addresses them head-on within the message. 4. Show, don't just tell (Proof!): People are naturally skeptical.  Instead of just saying "it works," show them.  Even a simple "Join thousands of others who've seen real results" adds weight. Testimonials, even short ones, are gold. 5. Make it crystal clear what you want them to do (CTA):   Don't leave them guessing!  "Learn the exact steps in my latest guide" or "Grab your free checklist now" are direct and tell them exactly what to do and what they'll get.  Notice the benefit in the CTA example: "Get sculpted abs in just 4 weeks without dieting." And when you're thinking about where you're sharing this (LinkedIn post, email, etc.), there are different ways to structure your message. The P-A-S (Problem-Agitate-Solution) or A-I-D-A (Attention-Interest-Desire-Action) frameworks are classics for a reason. The core difference I've learned? Good copywriting isn't about shouting about your amazing product. It's about understanding them – their challenges, their desires – and positioning your solution as the answer in a way that feels like a conversation, not a sales pitch.