Context is how much information people need in order to understand whatever you are saying.

What too little context is like

We all know people who provide too little context.

These are people who tell you a story like this:

“I was in line at the store and this woman said that I needed to move up. But then another woman who worked there said that the line was over there. So she pointed to the next aisle as if she should go over there. And I turned to go, but she waved to me and said that I could go in front of her.”

Who’s doing what now?

This story has too many unknown women in it, so it is hard to follow what is happening.

The storyteller hasn’t provided enough context for us to follow.

In this case, we would need some small definition of each “she” to help us follow along, like customer and worker:

“I was in line at the store and this customer said that I needed to move up. But then a woman who worked there said that the line was over there. So the worker pointed to the next aisle as if the customer should go over there. And I turned to go, but the worker waved to me and said that I could go in front of the customer.”

Once each “she” is defined, the story is easier to follow.

We need just enough context to understand it.

What too much context is like

We all also know people who provide too much context.

Their version of the story would have too many irrelevant details that would bore the listener:

“I was in line for the self-checkout at 12:38pm on Tuesday at the grocery store by my house, you know, the one on Main St. And this woman, she had clearly just been at the gym or something because she was wearing black leggings and a red t-shirt, well, not exactly red, maybe wine colored or maroon, that’s a color, right?, that said something like I love the mountains on it, and her sunglasses were so big, they literally blocked like half of her head and…”

So far we’ve got a great description of this one person, but we have no idea which of these details, if any, are relevant to the story.

And the story itself is unclear.

With too much context, readers find it difficult to identify which information is important and which is irrelevant. They typically don’t spend the energy to figure that out because the writer hasn’t done that kind of organization or prioritization either.

How context affects professional communication

In our professional space, too little context often happens because the writer assumes the reader knows something they don’t.

For example, does your workplace use abbreviations? Do new employees know all those abbreviations from day 1? Typically not.

This is why the standard use of an abbreviation is to write out its meaning the first time you use it. That defining practice helps ensure that the reader always knows what the abbreviation means and how it is being used in the document.

It isn’t fair for us to write messages that assume the reader has the same information that we do. If they had the same information, we probably wouldn’t need to write the message in the first place.

Question #1 for context

This is why the first question to ask ourselves about context is “What does the reader absolutely need to know?”

If they need to know an abbreviation, then define it. If they need to know who is responsible, then name the person. Whatever information they absolutely need has to be provided in the message they are reading.

And too much context often happens at work when the writer wants to give the reader all the details. Typically the writer is an expert who is overly invested in the entire situation and thinks the reader needs to know everything the writer knows in order to take action.

But most of us don’t want to be experts in all the things that we know other people are experts in. We just want to know what we need to know to do our jobs.

And we need messages that help us prioritize and organize information so that we can act on.

One key piece of this is formatting the content so it is easy to read. Because most people are not reading every word in our work messages.

They are skimming.

So which words appear on the left side of the screen after white space are more likely to be seen than words that appear a few lines into a paragraph, especially if they end up on the right side of the screen.

Ultimately, the writer has to determine what information is essential and what is unnecessary.

Question #2 for context

Which is question #2 for context: “What is not essential?”

What is not essential might be words. A short cut for taking out unnecessary words includes removing really, very, only, just from your writing wherever possible and deleting -ly words where you can. You can’t always take these words out, but they are easy ones to look for and make a choice about.

What is not essential might be whole sentences and ideas. Sometimes this content is harder to eliminate because we as the writer think that all the content is useful, or we wouldn’t have written it.

The key is to think about the content from the reader’s perspective.

What do *they* absolutely need to know from our message? And what information doesn’t affect the request we are making of them?

I sometimes play a game to delete content by trying to keep removing words until a) the content all fits on one screen without any scrolling down required and b) every line is over 50% full.

Based on a) this blog post is too long. But blog posts are expected to be longer than one screen because of the type of document they are and the fact that the reader doesn’t *have* to read them.

And if I were playing the game to make every line more than 50%, I would be looking to eliminate words until the word “them” in the previous paragraph fit on the previous line. For example,

“Based on a) this blog post is too long. But blog posts are typically longer because of the type of document they are and the fact that the reader doesn’t *have* to read them.”

You can see that I changed “expected to be longer than one screen” to “typically longer” so that the word “them” is now ¾ of the way on line 2 instead of hanging over onto line 3.

It’s a fun game! (for word nerds)

Question #3 for context

The third question that helps us ensure our messages have the right amount of context essentially looks at whether our message will be successful based on what we have written.

Will the reader be able to do what I want them to do and will they be motivated to do it based on what I have written?

Being *able* means that they have enough information to understand the request and how to execute it. For example, if the outcome I want from this blog post is for you to sign up for my newsletter, then I haven’t provided enough information to get you take that action. The blog post hasn’t mentioned my newsletter at any point (up to now) and hasn’t provided any information about where you would enter your email address. So you would not be *able* to sign up for my newsletter based on the content of this blog post.

And being *motivated* means that you have helped the reader understand what will happen when they take the action you want them to take. Understanding the outcomes of our actions is directly linked to our willingness to take those actions. If I know what will happen, and I want that to happen (or I am responsible for making that happen–as we typically are at work), then we are more likely to take action. At this point, I haven’t provided any specific motivation about why you should sign up for my newsletter, so you probably wouldn’t be very motivated to do that.

But if I explained that my newsletter often provides specific guidance on how you can write faster and more effectively at work–that what you will get by signing up is concrete suggestions for the writing you do every day–you might be more likely to sign up. If I say what you will learn–like questions to ask yourself to ensure you’ve provided the right amount of context to your audience–and that providing the right amount of context will ensure that people at work do what you want them to do and trust you as a fellow employee…those outcomes might be motivating to you so that you would want to sign up for my newsletter and get more suggestions on the regular that would support you as a writer for your job.

Providing the right amount of context can be tricky because we all have different knowledge and interest levels. But thinking about how much the reader already knows, what they need to know, and what can be left out will help you better gauge the content that should be in your messages.

Goldilock’s keys to context

To check whether your content provides the right amount of context, remember to ask yourself these questions as you review (and revise) what you have written:

What do they absolutely need to know?
What is not essential?
If I want x outcome, *why* should they do it and *how* should they do it?

Goldilocks and context: how to get the amount of content just right