The BFD | From the Desk of a Male Pale and Stale

Writing serves as a vital form of communication, enabling the transmission of ideas, information, emotions, and knowledge across distances and time. Its purpose extends beyond mere transmission; it allows for the preservation of thoughts, cultures, and histories. Through writing, individuals can articulate complex concepts, express creativity, educate, persuade, document events, and foster connections among diverse audiences. Writing provides a structured and permanent medium that transcends oral communication, facilitating deeper reflection, clarity of expression, and the dissemination of thoughts and messages to engage, inform, and influence readers across various contexts and generations…so I was led to believe when I was younger.

I recently reconsidered my beliefs after reading the Kiwibank “Sustainability Report,” which challenged my prior notions. While I’m unsure why I initially chose to explore this document, my curiosity often leads me to unexpected places. If you’re willing to invest around half an hour of your time without the guarantee of any benefit, you can access the report below.

kiwibank_sustainability_report2023 Download

The report emphasises “diversity, equity, and inclusion,” while alluding to “ESG” (Environmental, Social, Governance). However, their concept of diversity lacks depth in terms of diverse thinking, and achieving genuine equity seems impractical without acknowledging merit – crucial for success as a professional investor. Instead of delving into these aspects, let’s shift the focus solely to “inclusion”.

1News recently reported¹ that net migration for the year until October 23^rd, 2023, was 128,900 people. While some people were leaving, 219,200 people arrived as migrants. That is a whole lot of new readers seeking the benefits I initially espoused in my introduction. The majority of these people were Indian, Chinese, Filipinos and South Africans.

India is incredibly linguistically diverse, with Hindi and English serving as official languages at the national level. However, there is no single “Indian” language. There are 22 officially recognised languages in India, including Hindi, Bengali, Telugu, Marathi, Tamil, Urdu, Gujarati, Kannada, Odia, Punjabi, Malayalam, and others, as well as hundreds of regional dialects².

China: Mandarin (or Putonghua) is the official language of China and is spoken by the majority of the population. However, China is also linguistically diverse with numerous dialects and languages spoken across different regions. Other major languages include Cantonese, Wu, Min, Hakka, and others, which vary significantly in pronunciation and vocabulary³.

Philippines: The Philippines is also linguistically diverse, with Filipino (based on Tagalog) and English as the official languages. Additionally, there are numerous regional languages and dialects spoken across the country, such as Cebuano, Ilocano, Hiligaynon, Waray, Bicolano, and others⁴.

South Africa: South Africa has eleven official languages, reflecting its diverse population. Some of the major languages include isiZulu, isiXhosa, Afrikaans, Sepedi, English, Setswana, Sesotho, Xitsonga, siSwati, Tshivenda, and isiNdebele⁵.

According to the 2018 New Zealand census, the approximate numbers of people who identified with the following ethnic groups are:

Indian: 239,193 (4.7% of the population)⁶
Chinese: 231,387 (4.9% of the population)⁷
Filipino: 72,612 (1.5% of the population)⁸
South African: 71,382 (1.5% of the population)⁹

Or, in total, approximately 13% of the population conservatively speaking or, in numbers, approximately 650,000 people.

Many of these individuals, who may not have English as their first language, will work in New Zealand. Part of their work environment will involve elements such as contributing to retirement savings schemes, like those offered by organisations such as Kiwibank. Despite this, what would they comprehend from the sustainability report sent by Kiwibank if they were to read it? Here is an excerpt from Page 3:

Without a Maori dictionary, most people wouldn’t understand some important sentences in the document. It seems the document was crafted “by virtue signallers, for virtue signallers” and lacks inclusivity for those without Maori language skills, especially individuals who may find English challenging. As a native English speaker, I found the document poorly scripted for effective written communication purposes.

In recent years, many organisations and government departments, particularly those based in Wellington, have adopted an insular, self-governing approach regarding communications with excessive use of “virtue speak”, e.g. using “Aotearoa” as the sole identifier and to the exclusion of the name “New Zealand” (e.g. https://www.kiwibank.co.nz/about-us/who-we-are/diversity-equity-and-inclusion/ )

The document’s heavy use of “pidgin”, the mongrelisation of both English and Maori, undermines its effectiveness and inclusivity. While acknowledging the value of both appropriate English and Maori language usages, the document’s pretentious and highfalutin’ tone appears aimed more at impressing peers than at fostering an environment welcoming to diverse customers, resulting in a message that communicates poorly.

The end result of what can happen is seen in Papua New Guinea, where Tok Pisin functions as the lingua franca spoken by half the population, and reveals that while facilitating general communication, it often lacks the precise meanings and nuances of the source original languages; for example, Tok Pisin for ‘broken’ is “all-buggered-up”. Similarly, in New Zealand, where English is widely functional, distorting it by excessively mixing with Maori risks regressing effective communication.

My opinion is that the Kiwibank document exemplifies a prevalent trend in many organisations today – a shallow discourse and ideological pandering that undermines accurate communications. The document is a salutary example of the “mid-wittery” now so often on display in many organisations that have abandoned meritocracy in favour of political correctness.

The solution is to establish, what is called in marketing, a “style guide”. One that clearly outlines how and when the languages should be used. This guide would be prescriptive for all government departments. I have written such guides in the past and have found them enormously helpful, communicatively superior, and operationally cost-effective. If you would like I can do it for you; no doubt I would cost less than the multitude of consultants employed by the previous Labour Government to confuse us all with pidgin and exclude 650,000+ people from clear and concise communications.

References