Transportation 8 (1979) 1 -2 © Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company, Amsterdam - Printed in the Netheflartds

EDITORIAL

Do We Really Need So Much Jargon?

The problems confronting decision-makers concerned with the plan- ning and operation of our ground transportation systems have grown steadily more complex as society has become increasingly aware of its social and physical environment, and of the constraints on the world's natural resources, and thus the potential for continued economic growth. Largely as a conse- quence of these developments, transportation planning and engineering, once the preserve of engineers, now involves a wide variety of disciplines.

Unfortunately, each discipline-has its own jargon, and its own assumed threshold of basic knowledge. Jargon and expectations of thresholds of com- prehension save time, and sometimes avoid misunderstanding, when used within a discipline. Insofar as they serve these purposes they can have real advantages. They can also, deliberately or by chance, create barriers for out- siders wishing to obtain an appreciation of the work of that discipline, or research community, so that they, in their turn, can do their job more effec- tively.

The problems of jargon, and of expected thresholds of knowledge, are becoming very noticeable in transportation. Gaps between disciplines do not seem to be narrowing, while those between research and practice seem to be widening. If the community at large is to benefit properly from the infusion of new skills and the considerable funds now devoted to research, all those working on the various aspects of transportation must learn to communicate with each other much more effectively than they do today. They must also learn to appreciate the problems and attitudes of others. Unless they have that understanding, transportation is likely to become a battleground with each group defending its own viewpoint and its own territory, and we shall all be the loosers.

We must, however, avoid the development of a new esoteric language embracing all the disciplines concerned with transportation. Transportation directly affects communities, and the public have increasingly let it be known that they want to know about and influence what is happening; this is their fight. The real need is, therefore, to learn to express technical matters simply and concisely. There are sufficient examples to demonstrate that this can be done, but regrettably many skilled technicians seem to be inarticulate.

Learning to communicate openly and effectively would be of consider- able benefit to the profession at large, it would also help to close the gulf between research and practice. There is, however, a need to improve the

appreciation which each part of the profession has of the circumstances and needs of the other parts. Research in transportation should be primarily directed towards both the resolution of problems perceived by professionals and politicians in day-to-day planning and operations and the identification, and resolution, o f possible future problems. It is thus essential that practi- tioners communicate their needs to researchers, and those who administer research funds. While research cannot be expected to resolve every problem completely, it is of little benefit to the community if the funds available for research are not effectively used because researchers are not made properly aware of needs.

Researchers also have a responsibility. Not only do they need to improve their communications with practitioners, they also need to demonstrate how their ideas can be put to the best practical advantage. Many products of re- search are not in use today, not because they are unsuited to practical re- quirements but because their potential users do not understand them. The research community at large needs to pay much more attention to the packaging of its products, the conversion of good theory into every-day practical tools. Sometimes central government agencies themselves share responsibility for the lack of, or slow, implementation of new techniques because of their own conservativism , but if researchers can successfully communicate with practioners, the pressure for change will come from the grass roots as well as the ivory towers.

Martin G. Richards