"Quarterbacking" in the arena of international business

November 3, 2015 12:34 PM

I work in a large company with offices around the world, but with head offices in North America. Today, as I was reading a policy update, I came across the usage of the term "act as a quarterback". To me, this idiom seems to be a little biased towards North American workplaces (especially given that my company has a presence outside of North America), and can easily be replaced by "coordinator". But I'm not sure if I should let it go or to ask the copywriter of the release to consider using a different term to eliminate unconscious bias (and in the unlikely event that I do contact the copywriter, what would be the best approach) so I would like to see how everyone on Metafilter thinks. Thank you in advance!
posted by Tsukushi to Work & Money (31 answers total)

englishman here - would have assumed that was equivalent to a full-back. would not have understand it meant coordinate.
posted by andrewcooke at 12:37 PM on November 3, 2015 [1 favorite]

Good call. Cut the term and use something more straightforward. "Act as coordinator." "Act as the central manager." "Lead the team."
posted by Mo Nickels at 12:39 PM on November 3, 2015

Yeah, I would mention it. It is pretty idiomatic and probably unclear outside of north america.
posted by GuyZero at 12:42 PM on November 3, 2015 [1 favorite]

I'm American and I wouldn't understand that phrase immediately.
posted by samthemander at 12:46 PM on November 3, 2015 [10 favorites]

The term doesn't bother me, but I'm North American.

As for this: "But I'm not sure if I should let it go or to ask the copywriter of the release to consider using a different term to eliminate unconscious bias" -- is your job related to the company's policy updates or copyrighting? If so, and if the issue bothers you, go ahead and raise it, probably via email. If not, I'd suggest taking this off of the "things I care enough about to try and change" list and spending your energy elsewhere, since that would be the approach I'd take. Particularly since we're talking about a policy update and not, say, a total rebranding.
posted by craven_morhead at 12:49 PM on November 3, 2015 [2 favorites]

I don't think it equates to coordinator. I would say "spearhead" perhaps. Good idea to change it.
posted by SLC Mom at 12:50 PM on November 3, 2015 [1 favorite]

Best answer: Even within North American offices, that phrase would be less likely to be meaningful to women and to immigrants from some cultures so relying on this kind of knowledge can exclude those groups. (cite p. 244-245)
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 12:51 PM on November 3, 2015 [9 favorites]

Best answer: I'm a technical writer. Our manuals get translated into many different languages. I once went to a workshop where the instructors adamantly said don't use American idioms like "hit it out of the park," ever. Because the translators could possibly not know what you're talking about, and could possibly translate it in a very strange way. (We have enough trouble with translations as it is: recently, we had someone translate "paddles," as in hospital defibrillator paddles, to a word that meant boat oar.)

Contact the copywriter, explain politely that this won't make sense to non-Americans, remind him/her that they're writing for an international audience. Americans have enough trouble with their reputation abroad, we don't need to add to it.
posted by Melismata at 12:53 PM on November 3, 2015 [6 favorites]

Yeah, it definitely doesn't imply coordinator. Leader would be a better fit.
posted by nolnacs at 12:54 PM on November 3, 2015 [2 favorites]

If you wanted to keep it a bit allusional, it could be "Act as the Captain" or "Act as the team captain." But coordinator is probably better.
posted by thecaddy at 1:04 PM on November 3, 2015

Australian here. No idea what the phrase would mean.
posted by deadwax at 1:07 PM on November 3, 2015 [1 favorite]

If you're reviewing this before its release, I'd say a simple email saying you're not sure folks outside the U.S. will know what the phrase means and you'd suggest something more neutral. I'm a writer in a corporate setting and I would absolutely not take umbrage with that recommendation.
posted by that's candlepin at 1:11 PM on November 3, 2015 [1 favorite]

UKian. No clue. Would assume you wanted to actually refer to the leader of a family or gorillas.
posted by runincircles at 1:21 PM on November 3, 2015

I'm North American and would never have known that this meant "coordinator." Definitely suggest contacting the copywriter, since it shows regional bias (important) and sport-fan bias (admittedly less important, but I mean...).
posted by schroedingersgirl at 1:46 PM on November 3, 2015 [2 favorites]

Best answer: As a datapoint, I edit documents that never leave North America and this term comes up surprisingly often. We strike it every time because it's an awkward cliche, regardless of bias. It should go back to the copywriter for another, more appropriate term.
posted by mochapickle at 1:56 PM on November 3, 2015 [2 favorites]

If the audience is English-speaking businessmen I wouldn't sweat it -- I hear Brits and Aussies use "quarterback" and "hit it out of the park" confidently and correctly by all the time. An audience less likely to be fluent in American sports, maybe switch it.

The sports metaphors that really gets you in trouble are false cognates. "Punt" is a famous one -- it means "make a bet" in the UK but in America it means "give up the ball to the other side because you failed to advance sufficiently."
posted by MattD at 2:01 PM on November 3, 2015

As someone who works in internal communications, this is something I'd definitely want feedback on. If my company has offices in more than one country (or more than one location within a country, or lots of remote workers), I see it as my job to make sure things are communicated just as effectively to all groups within the organisation, and that includes clarity and understandability of idiom.

Whether or not the feedback will be received well or acted on entirely depends on the culture of your company (is there an accepted skew towards prioritising the US HQ and treating other locations as satellite/second-class/forgotten offices? if so, they might not care)? It also depends on the temperament of the person doing this work in your organisations. But if it were me, I'd be glad someone pointed it out.
posted by terretu at 2:04 PM on November 3, 2015 [1 favorite]

Australian/Brit - I have some idea from TV (like, at least I know what a quarterback is whereas my mother sure wouldn't) but really wouldn't have caught the nuance.

I think a 'hey, by the way' type of email to the person who wrote it would be reasonable. We're often blind to what people do and don't understand and I don't mind people pointing out they don't understand expressions I use (eg 'much of a muchness' was totally confusing a colleague and I was so glad she said so).
posted by kitten magic at 2:12 PM on November 3, 2015 [1 favorite]

You know what, on review, the other responses have convinced me. I'm now in favor of a quick email to the copywriter.
posted by craven_morhead at 2:25 PM on November 3, 2015

I would have assumed it meant "backing the team up", ie a supporting role. So exactly the opposite of what it means. Maybe it's more obvious from the context, but if not I would change it.
posted by tinkletown at 2:26 PM on November 3, 2015 [1 favorite]

"Coordinator" doesn't confer the exact same meaning. A quarterback is more of a leader and decider than a mere "coordinator."

You want something like "director."
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 3:02 PM on November 3, 2015

This may be obvious to you but I would avoid using the phrase "unconscious bias" or even the word "bias" at all in my communication. You don't need to take the chance that the author will get defensive because they feel accused of being biased. Just let them know that the phrase "quarterback" may be confusing to readers who are unfamiliar with American football and suggest an alternative.
posted by metahawk at 3:58 PM on November 3, 2015 [4 favorites]

Best answer: It's horribly American and Canadian, those being the primary nations that play Gridiron football. The QB is the leader of the offense and the primary factor in the success of the offense.

If you are not familiar with Gridiron Football, it's a nonsense statement. It's fine if everybody lives in the US, probably fine if there are also Canadians, but it completely falls flat for the other six billion people on the Earth.
posted by eriko at 4:28 PM on November 3, 2015 [2 favorites]

It is an extremely common term in some sectors understood by all regardless of their sports acumen. It's also a bit corporate jargon-y, so the world wouldn't be worse off for using "lead" or "coordinate" or whatever. OTOH, if the doc is for a local office, odds are good everyone knows and uses the term.
posted by jpe at 8:12 PM on November 3, 2015

Another metaphor, although one a little more unversally grokked, would be "orchestrate." I think that gets all the facets of it.
posted by jpe at 8:14 PM on November 3, 2015 [1 favorite]

American here, would also not understand the reference, and quite honestly would find it offensive. (Like it implies I'm not leadership material if I don't care about sports.)
posted by Gable Oak at 9:42 PM on November 3, 2015 [4 favorites]

Another person born and raised in America who has no clear sense of what "quarterback" means in this context. I spent most of my life in a city with no football team or regional loyalty to some other football team, so while I know that quarterback is the name of one of the guys on a football team that is the extent of my knowledge. I might also be willing to assert that he is, like, definitely one of the top guys on the team because I can't think of many other names for football team members. You may quote me on that if you like. It is not a universally understood reference.

In fact, I have occasionally used the term basing my usage on others' usage of same, and this thread is making me think maybe I misunderstood the connotation and made myself sound like a doofus.
posted by town of cats at 10:56 PM on November 3, 2015 [3 favorites]

Response by poster: Thank you everyone for the feedback!

Some more information on the policy update (actually a memo / FAQ), and the department that I work in:
1) the document is regarding updated procedures for engaging a particular Business Support Area. The passage reads: "Your (Business Support Area) contact will act as a quarterback and will guide you through the (business support process) to ensure all the appropriate stakeholders are engaged as required."
2) the document explicitly references government agencies in Europe, Australia and Asia, so my assumption is that its audience extends beyond North America.
The policy update memo applies to a line-of-business in my company, and I work in IT / software development to support said line-of-business. And by the way, said line-of-business is male-dominated--and I've become aware of feminism and privilege issues (including inclusionary/exclusionary language) through attending affinity groups for women in technology. So values-wise, I'm inclined to go beyond my job position and poke my head into something that I'm not really involved in, but I'm just a little unsure if it would sound too confrontational for me to do so.

The policy update memo doesn't list a copywriter, but has contact information for the Business Support Area; in addition, the corporate intranet where the memo is posted has contact info for the Communications department for the line-of-business. If I do send an email, should I address it to the Business Support Area (at the risk of sounding like I'm complaining about something peripheral to the policy) or to Communications (at the risk of sounding like I'm passive-aggressively ratting out the Business Support Area)? (In either case, I would address the issue as one of regionally biased wording, without making suggestions as to how the passage should be worded--turns out the term "quarterback" actually is more nuanced than I expected. )
posted by Tsukushi at 7:48 AM on November 4, 2015

You lose nothing by just changing it to ""Your (Business Support Area) contact will guide you through the (business support process) to ensure all the appropriate stakeholders are engaged as required."
posted by mochapickle at 7:54 AM on November 4, 2015

Response by poster: I have sent an email to the Business Support Area that the policy change pertains to.
I asked them if it's possible to rephrase the policy update document to remove the "act as a quarterback" phrasing, and asked them to let me know if I should direct my inquiry to a different department.

Maybe the policy update document will not be amended, but at least I know I've tried to do my part.

Thank you to everyone who has helped answer my question! Really appreciated it.
posted by Tsukushi at 11:42 AM on November 5, 2015

Just one further point, because I don't think it's been mentioned above, and I work for a similar company. The corporate style guide for your company probably, if it's any good, specifically advises against sporting metaphors - because they don't translate well, either to translators who aren't familiar with the sport, or the reader. In the unlikely event that this escalates in some way, hunt out the corporate style guide and see if there's anything specific.
posted by DancingYear at 2:53 PM on November 5, 2015