Business letters and pitfalls

Press, Volume CXI, Issue 32803, 31 December 1971, Page 11

Business letters and pitfalls

(By

JUDSON BENNETT)

A local authority recently sent out more than 2000’duplicated letters to firms in the area offering them the possibility of grants and subsidies if the companies manufactured a certain category of products.

After what they considered to be a pretty generous offer, the authority was dismayed to find the response was almost nil. And those firms who did reply did so ’in rather shirty terms.

Finally, the reason was traced to the circular letter. It contained this sentence: “If you will send us a sample of your product, we will determine its practical value, if any.”

Not the best way to solicit co-operation and good feeling. Yet the tone of the letter, and the unintentional antagonism it disclosed, was by no means exceptional. For in this age of fast, slick, communication, the business letter largely remains as stiff and formal as it was in the days of the industrial revolution.

In a recent survey, commissioned by an industrial group, it was found that, when an important sale had been missed, the letters written by the executives handling the negotiations were to blame in at least 40 per cent of cases.

Is it any wonder that an increasing number of firms are urging their executives to meet a potential customer face-to-face or use the telephone, rather than conduct a deal by letter? “The agreement can be committed to paper afterwards, or a shorthand writer can sit in on the meeting,” says Bernard Batrick, a London management consultant. “Anything to stop that man, who is so interesting when you meet him, becoming nearinarticulate when he dictates a letter.”

Bernard Batrick cites a recent case of two company chairmen meeting to discuss a possible merger. During the negotiations they met socially, and were soon on “John and Joe” terms.

No deal Then it was necessary for John to write Joe a letter clarifying a point. It began: “J. W. Smith Esq. Dear Sir . . . ”

Says Batrick: “When they next met, a lot of the initial formality had returned to the discussions. It can’t have been entirely coincidence that the deal didn’t come off.” Why do most of us find it so difficult to write a letter which is both businesslike and pleasant?

The best letters are written as we would talk, without any artificial formulae and yet phrases like “beg to advise,” “esteemed favour,” and “I trust that we can effect a sale” still appear in the majority of business letters.

“Thousands of typist-hours could be saved by cutting out these silly expressions which create a barrier between the writer and the reader,” says Bernard Batrick.

So it’s perhaps not surprising that, in both Europe and America, experts are being brought in by big corporations to encourage frankness and informality. There is even a move afoot to get rid of the “Dear” in “Dear Sir.”

Why, it is argued, should you call a man “dear” when you are about to complain that his company has been negligent with your order? In fact, why call anyone “dear” except your relations, wife or sweetheart? One alternative being tried is a letter in memo form. At the top you put "From: J. Smith. To: W. Brown.” Then you begin the letter. Usually the traditional for-; rnulae are followed because no-one has bothered to think up an alternative. For instance, a young executive began a letter for his employer: “In reply to your letter calling our attention to the fact that we sent the wrong number of

men’s shoes, we would like to state, at this stage,'that we would apologise for the error.”.

Sent back to prune all the unessential words, he came back with: “The error is entirely our fault and you can be certain it won’t' happen again. Please tell us what we can do to put matters right.” The letter, duly sent, restored good relations between the firms.

The first principle of good business-letter writing can be illustrated by two letters recently sent by contractors tendering for concreting work from a local authority. One firm wrote: “We can offer the job at a special price because we are entering a slack period and would otherwise have to lay off men.”

The second firm said: “We can offer you a good solid job which will not crack for at least 20 years.” This firm got the job. They had followed the golden rule of thinking of the reader’s problems, not their own.

Be positive The managing director of a national transport network says that only about one in 20 job applicants can write a convincing letter with what the experts call an “upbeat accent.”

This means an emphasis on the positive. So many simply begin: “I am interested in your job because the money is better than in my present one.”

Most of the antagonism caused by business letters comes from well-worn phrases being used without a thought for what they really mean. For instance, a letter from a chain-store to customers complaining of articles broken on delivery read: “As you claim the goods you ordered arrived damaged, we will have to replace them.”

This indicated a reluctance to shoulder the responsibility for the breakage, plus a sneaking accusation of dishonesty implied in “you claim.”

When this was finally spotted, the letter was replaced by one which read: “We are sorry the goods you ordered arrived damaged. Of course, we will replace them immediately.” Government departments, despite improvements, are still notorious for stiff, stilted letters, dripping with jargon.

Recently, after a dispute with a jobbing builder over his income-tax had dragged on for nearly three months, a London tax official finally telephoned the man and discussed the matter with him.

The dispute, which up to then had involved over 20 letters and forms, was settled in four minutes.