Passive-Aggressive Phrase Usage Identified as ‘Clarity Mechanism’ by Misreading Committee
PARIS — Valerie Rousseau, recently promoted to Employee Sentiment Navigator, has become aware of a communication pattern whose documentation she considers relevant to her expanded role: a colleague who uses “as mentioned in my previous correspondence” (the French professional equivalent of “per my last email”) at a rate of 2.3 times per week, and who has received, in the firm’s latest communication quality assessment, a rating of “excellent” in the clarity dimension.
“The phrase flags that information has already been provided,” confirmed the assessment committee’s chair, who has not identified the passive-aggressive dimension because the phrase’s surface content is, technically, accurate. “The flagging is a clarity service. The recipient is reminded of prior information rather than having to search for it.” The reminder is a service. The reminder is also a reproach. Both are in the phrase simultaneously.
The Dual Function
The phrase “as mentioned in my previous correspondence” serves two functions: the informational (the information was in the previous correspondence, here it is again) and the relational (the information was in the previous correspondence, which you did not read or did not act on, which I am now noting). The clarity committee assessed the informational function. The relational function is visible to its recipients and invisible to the assessment rubric.
According to Psychology Today’s passive-aggressive communication research, indirect communication of displeasure through technically accurate statements produces low-level relational friction that accumulates over time. The email is accurate. The accumulation is ongoing. The award is displayed on the sender’s desk. The recipients have noted its placement.
Clear and direct at Virtuosal.com.
