| I desperately wish there was more awareness of military writing styles in the civilian world. - They're organizations that have existed for as long as their countries. - They're incredibly large. - They have to communicate critical information to a very diverse set of readers. - They iteratively update their approaches, over decades, often in direct reaction to the most stringent real-world tests. ... how could we not learn something from the systems they're currently using? My favorite nuggets are (1) the glory of BLUF (bottom-line, up front; or an executive summary of everything to follow), (2) including a formal intent preface to any document (to guide writers and readers in what to include/exclude), (3) thoroughly defining terms (to avoid "we're using the same word with different meanings" problem), and (4) rigorously structuring information into separate sections. Which isn't to say militaries get everything right all of the time. They do tons of stupid things. But dismissing or ignoring them as a source to cherry-pick best practices is shortsighted. |
> ... how could we not learn something from the systems they're currently using?
You haven't noticed the aversion to the military, especially the US military, around here or in "academic" circles?