Making Policy Documents Easy to Read

No one is waking up at 7am, sipping coffee, thinking, “Wow, I really hope someone explains holistic wealth architecture today.” People want clarity. They want content that feels like a conversation, not a lecture. They want to understand what you’re saying the first time they read it. Write like you're talking to a real person. Not trying to win a Pulitzer. - Use short sentences. - Cut the jargon. - Sound like someone they’d trust with their money, not someone who spends weekends writing whitepapers for fun. Confused clients don’t ask for clarification. They move on. Here’s how to make your content clearer: 1. Ask yourself: Would my mom understand this? If the answer is “probably not,” simplify it until she would. No shade to your mom, she’s just a great clarity filter. 2. Use the “friend test.” Read it out loud. If it sounds weird or overly stiff, imagine explaining it to a friend at lunch. Rewrite it like that. 3. Replace jargon with real words. Say “retirement income you won’t outlive” instead of “longevity risk mitigation strategy.” Your clients are not Googling your vocabulary. 4. Stick to one idea per sentence. If your sentence is doing cartwheels and dragging a comma parade behind it, break it up. 5. Format like you actually want them to read it. Use line breaks. Add white space. Make it skimmable. No one wants to read a block of text the size of a mortgage document. Writing clearly isn’t dumbing it down. It’s respecting your audience enough to make content easy to understand. What’s the worst jargon-filled phrase you’ve seen in the wild? Let’s roast it.

✋ 10 Things I Hate About Policies (and What We Should Do Instead) Let’s be honest: most corporate policies aren’t helping people make good choices. They’re long. They’re vague. They’re legally sound, but practically useless. I’ve worked in legal and compliance long enough to say this with love: most policies are written by lawyers for lawyers—not for the humans they’re meant to guide. Here are 10 things I hate about traditional policies—and what I believe we should do instead: 1. Written for lawyers, not people. They sound like a deposition transcript. Real people need real words. 2. Law citations before guidance. I don’t need to see “FCPA, UKBA, ISO 37001” before you tell me what to do when someone offers me playoff tickets. 3. “Including but not limited to.” The unofficial mascot of policy clutter. Retire it already. 4. The exception maze. Don’t bury nuance at the bottom. Acknowledge gray areas like grown-ups. 5. Training required just to understand it. If I need a course to decode the policy, the policy has failed. 6. All “don’ts,” no “do’s.” Fear-based rules freeze people. Clarity-based ones empower them. 7. Walls of text. White space is your friend. So are headers, visuals, and clean design. 8. Peanut butter approach. Stop sending the credit card policy to everyone. It’s lazy compliance. Target people who actually need it. 9. Undefined audience. Who is this for? Managers? HR? Everyone? I shouldn’t have to guess. 10. Assume we’ll figure it out—or else. Bad policies punish. Good ones guide. ✨ Want better policies? Start here: - Use clear language. - Show people what to do, not just what not to do. - Make it role-relevant. - Design it like you want someone to actually read it. Let’s write policies that help people make good choices—with confidence and clarity. #Compliance #Culture #PolicyReform #MakeGoodChoices #LegalDesign #HumanCompliance #Ethics #Leadership #UserExperience

If I had a dollar for every organization I've worked with where the SOPs were good, I wouldn't have a dollar. From my work with companies such as GSK, Novartis, and Pfizer, I hold that: 📋 SOPs must be functional above all else. Their purpose is to help people complete tasks successfully and safely, on time, with expected outcomes. ❌ But most SOPs fail because of: 1. Too Much Information • Every task 20+ steps • Information not concise or focused • Steps containing rationales (belongs in policy docs) • Poor titles that don't indicate task purpose Example of what NOT to do: "Please take a moment to review the testing documentation below." (It's not a favor—just write "Review the testing documentation") 2. Format & Language Issues ⚠️ • Walls of text without reading cues • No white space for visual breaks • Complex words where simple ones work ("utilize" vs "use") • Multiple actions crammed into single steps Real example of what NOT to do: "Remove one packet from the pouch and carefully add all contents to the water sample, swirl the sample until all the reagent dissolves into the solution." (That's 3 separate steps crammed into one!) 3. Structure Problems 🔍 • Steps not chronological • Sections bleeding into each other • Missing process mapping (critical for understanding flow) • Key information (like definitions) buried at the back ✅ The solution starts with three key principles: 1. Map Before Writing 🗺️Process mapping isn't optional; it's the foundation for any usable SOP (like your clinical trials, start with a protocol, not a prayer). 2. Write for Real Use ✍️One action per step, simple language (save the fluff for your cotton swabs). 3. Structure for Success 🎯Put key information where readers need it (hint: definitions belong up front, like your safety goggles). 💡 As I tell my pharma clients: "Will incorporating these concepts make your SOPs longer? Yes, sorry. Will it make them more usable? Yes, not sorry." ⚠️ Because in pharma, unusable SOPs aren't just inefficient—they're a compliance risk (or worse, accident) waiting to happen. Questions? AMA in the comments ⤵︎

Just reviewed your procedures, …and – well – they’re not good… ->they’re either too detailed, turning into a novel, or so vague they leave the reader scratching their head. The secret? Tailoring your procedures to your audience and hitting that "just right" level of detail. Here’s how I try to strike the balance… ->Write for the people executing the procedure. Are they experienced engineers, junior analysts, or cross-functional (HR, Accounting, etc.) teams? Use language and concepts they’ll understand. ->Avoid unnecessary theory or deep background and PLEASE assume a baseline of competence. Outline clear, actionable steps someone ->skilled in the art<- can follow without needing extra guidance. ->Include enough detail to prevent confusion or missteps, but not so much that your procedure becomes heavy to follow or maintain. ->Use concise, active language. Focus on tasks, tools, and outcomes. Every word should add clarity & value to execution. ->Have someone unfamiliar with the procedure try to execute it. If they ask for clarification, refine it. If they finish without questions, you’re close to “goldilocks.” When procedures are done right, they empower your team to act confidently and consistently. Start by writing a procedure to make a peanut butter and jelly sandwich, then have someone follow it and provide feedback. Iterate and improve. #ciso #dpo #MSP #compliance #procedures