This paper examines competing perspectives on what constitutes effective business writing. It contrasts Katie Muldoon's argument that good business writing should be brief, organized, accurate, and conclusive with Davies and Birbill's more complex view that workplace writing demands vary by context, company, and purpose. The paper draws on research into metacognition and knowledge transformation to argue that no single set of writing traits applies universally across all business contexts, from client presentations and web content to internal memos and HR directives.
Muldoon (2001) notes that business writing is not always done as well as it should be. She argues that good business writing should be "brief, organized, accurate, and conclusive."
However, others in the field view the question of what business writing should be as more complex. Davies and Birbill (2000) note that we may be wrong to assume people can learn everything they need to know about business writing in school. This background knowledge and competency — called metacognition — is vitally important, as it forms the basis for all writing. Davies and Birbill (2000) suspect that for some people, the challenge lies in learning how to apply general writing skills to the specific demands of business contexts.
In addition, they note that different companies require different kinds of writing skills. They list multiple new forms of writing demanded in today's businesses, including email and website content. They argue that the question of how well business people can write may be a multifaceted problem, and they suggest that learning to write in school may not translate perfectly into being able to write for business purposes once school is finished.
"Research on knowledge transformation complicates Muldoon's framework"
While these qualities would be valuable for a presentation to clients, the purpose of some internal writing might be to raise questions rather than to answer them. The tone appropriate for website text might differ markedly from that of a sales pitch or a directive from Human Resources.
Taken together, these perspectives suggest that no single standard governs all business writing. Muldoon's qualities remain useful benchmarks in certain contexts, but Davies and Birbill's broader, contextually sensitive framework offers a more complete account of the diverse writing demands that modern workplaces place on professionals.
You’re 76% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 1 section.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.