Vol. 2 No. 4 (2015): Journal of Leadership and Management

Writing for Leaders How to Translate A Solid but Stolid Message into a Compelling and Cogent Masterpiece

Simon A. Moss
Dr Simon Moss Charles Darwin University Casuarina Campus, Ellengowan Drive Casuarina NT 0810, Australia e-mail: simon.moss@cdu.edu.au
Published June 26, 2015
How to Cite
Moss, S. A., & Morris, M. (2015). Writing for Leaders How to Translate A Solid but Stolid Message into a Compelling and Cogent Masterpiece. Journal of Leadership and Management, 2(4). Retrieved from http://leadership.net.pl/JLM/article/view/61


Many professionals, from academics to executives, have not acquired the capacity to write correctly, cohesively, concisely, or convincingly. This paper attempts to redress this shortfall, at least partly. First, this paper delineates the four key objectives that writers should pursue while they construct their arguments. Specifically, past studies, extracted from an array of fields, shows that readers are more likely to trust and appreciate arguments that are written unambiguously, simply, and concisely as well as aligned to the conventions that epitomize credibility. Second, this paper demonstrates that authors of scholarly articles do not always achieve these objectives. Indeed, these authors often violate the principles that have been formulated to fulfill these objectives, such as including a noun phrase after the word this. Finally, this paper stipulates the principles that writers, including scholars and managers, should follow, prioritized in order of importance.  


  1. Adriaanse, M. A., de Ridder, D. T. D., and de Wit, J. B. F. (2009). Finding the critical cue: Implementation intentions to change one’s diet work best when tailored to personally relevant reasons for unhealthy eating. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35, 60-71.
  2. American Psychological Association (2010). Publication Manual of the American Psycholog-ical Association (6th ed). Washington, DC: Author.
  3. Csapo, M. (1981). Comparison of two prompting procedures to increase response fluency among severely handicapped learners. Journal of the Association for the Severely Handicapped, 6, 39-47.
  4. DePino, C. (2013). Excuse me, your participle's dangling. Rowman & Littlefield Education.
  5. Ellemers, N., Van Rijswijk, W., Roefs, M., and Simons, C. (1997). Bias in intergroup percep-tions: Balancing group identity with social reality. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 186-198.
  6. Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117-140.
  7. Fiedler, K., Lachnit, H., Fay, D., and Krug, C. (1992). Mobilization of cognitive resources and the generation effect. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 45A, 149-171.
  8. Fiedler, K., Nickel, S., Asbeck, J., and Pagel, U. (2003). Mood and the generation effect. Cognition and Emotion, 17, 585-608.
  9. Fowler, H. R., and Aaron, J. E. (2004). The little, brown handbook (9th ed.). New York: Pear-son Longman.
  10. Gal, D., and Rucker, D. D. (2010). When in doubt, shout! Paradoxical influences of doubt on proselytizing. Psychological Science, 21, 1701-1707.
  11. Gollwitzer, P. M., and Sheeran, P. (2006). Implementation intentions and goal achievements: A meta-analysis of its effects and processes. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.). Advances in exper-imental social psychology (Vol. 38, pp. 69-119). New York: Academic Press.
  12. Hogg, M. A. (2005). Uncertainty, social identity, and ideology. In S. R. Thye and E. J. Lawler (Eds.), Advances in group processes (Vol. 22, pp. 203-229). San Diego, CA: Elsevier.
  13. Hogg, M. A. (2007). Uncertainty-identity theory. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experi-mental social psychology (Vol. 39, pp. 70-126). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
  14. Hogg, M. A., Adelman, J. R., and Blagg, R. D. (2010). Religion in the face of uncertainty: An uncertainty-identity theory account of religiousness. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14, 72-83.
  15. Hogg, M. A., Sherman, D. K., Dierselhuis, J., Maitner, A. T., and Moffitt, G. (2007). Uncer-tainty, entitativity and group identification. Journal of Experimental Social Psycholo-gy, 43, 135-142.
  16. Igou, E. R., and Bless, H. (2014). The conversational basis for the dilution effect. Journal of Language And Social Psychology, 24 (1),25-35. doi: 10.1177/0261927x04273035
  17. Kolln, M. J., and Gray, L. S. (2012). Rhetorical grammar. Longman.
  18. Kruglanski, A. W., Pierro, A., Mannetti, L., and De Grada, E. (2006). Groups as epistemic providers: Need for closure and the unfolding of group-centrism. Psychological Re-view, 113, 84-100.
  19. Ling, J., and van Schaik, P. (2004). The effects of link format and screen location on visual search of web pages. Ergonomics, 47, 907-921.
  20. Miller, B., and Attridge, M. (2011). Pathways to career and leadership success: Part 1 – A psychosocial profile of $100k professionals. Journal of Workplace Behavioral Health, 26(3), 175-206. doi: 10.1080/15555240.2011.589718
  21. Moss, S., and Fleming, A. (2010). Success at university: What they haven’t told you. Tilde Press.
  22. Nordhielm, C. L. (2002). The influence of level of processing on advertising repetition effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 29, 371-382.
  23. Oppenheimer, D. M. (2006). Consequences of erudite vernacular utilized irrespective of ne-cessity: Problems with using long words needlessly. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 239-156.
  24. Petty, R. E., and Cacioppo, J. T. (1984). The effects of involvement on responses to argument quantity and quality: central and peripheral routes to persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,46, 69-81.
  25. Petty, R. E., and Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and periph-eral routes to attitude change. New York: Springer-Verlag.
  26. Petty, R. E., and Wegener, D. T. (1999). The elaboration likelihood model: Current status and controversies. In S. Chaiken and Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual-process theories in social psy-chology (pp. 37-72). New York: Guilford Press.
  27. Price, P., Smith, A. R., and Lench, H. C. (2006). The effect of target group size on risk judg-ments and comparative optimism: The more, the riskier. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 382–398.
  28. Reber, R., and Schwarz, N. (1999). Effects of perceptual fluency on judgments of truth. Con-sciousness & Cognition: An International Journal, 8, 338-342.
  29. Rubin, D. L. (Ed). (1995). Composing social identity in written language. Routledge.
  30. Spencer, L. (2014). Writing well in the 21st century: The five essentials. Rowman & Littlefield Publisher
  31. Strunk Jr., W., and White, E. B. (1999). The elements of style (4th edition). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
  32. Trenga, B. (2008). The curious case of the misplaced modifier. Writer’s Digest Books.
  33. Webb, T. L., and Sheeran, P. (2007). How do implementation intentions promote goal attain-ment? A test of component processes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 295-302.
  34. Williams, J. M., and Colomb, G. G. (2010). Style: Lessons in clarity and grace. Longman.
  35. Yagoda, B. (2013). How to not write bad. Riverhead Trade.
  36. Zemach, D., and Lynn, S. (2008). Writers at work: The essay student's book. Cambridge University Press.
  37. Zukier,H. (1982).The dilution effect: The role of the correlation and the dispersion of predic-tor variables in the use of nondiagnostic information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 1163-1174.