Forbid the use of "impact"

[getsnoopy]

I've noticed that impact is allowed as a noun, though not as a verb (which is good). This is problematic since the word is corporate jargon used to inflate claims, so it's proscribed by many style guides when used figuratively (it actually just means "crash force").

Ignoring this proscription, even when it's used figuratively, it means "strong/violent/marked effect". Many people seem to not realize this, and write things like:

• significant/profound impact. This would read as "significant/profound strong/violent/marked effect", which is just redundant and silly.
• little/low impact. This would read as "little/low strong/violent/marked effect", which is an oxymoron.
• has no impact. This would read as "has no strong/violent/marked effect", which implies that the thing being referenced still has (albeit not-so-strong) effects. This leads to questions in the reader's mind about what these effects could be, since it's basically always the case that the writer never specifies those secondary effects, which only serves to confuse readers or send them on a wild goose chase.
• What is the impact of X? / What impact will X have? This would read as "What is the strong/violent/marked effect of X? / What strong/violent/marked effect will X have?", which is a leading question (akin to the primary school insulting question, "When did you come out of the closet?"). If it's already known that X will have a strong/violent/marked effect, then the question is pointless. And if it's not known, then it's presumptive to ask the question in such a way that it assumes X can only have strong/violent/marked effects. This also serves to only confuse readers.

All in all, there's basically no reason to use this word (unless, of course, an actual impact is meant, which is quite rare in technical documentation, especially in the software/hardware world). There's a perfectly good alternative to use that not only isn't laden in controversy but is also unambiguous in its meaning: effect.

As such, the word impact should be deprecated in its entirety, and people should be pointed towards using either effect (for the noun) or affect (for the verb). This is already in line with other technical style guides.

---

Document Details

⚠ Do not edit this section. It is required for learn.microsoft.com ➟ GitHub issue linking.

• ID: 97bed656-38bc-2dd6-4de2-72a2c48bdb2f
• Version Independent ID: 998971a9-c4bd-d76b-db5e-fe8d3bdace9c
• Content: impact - Microsoft Style Guide
• Content Source: styleguide/a-z-word-list-term-collections/i/impact.md
• Product: non-product-specific
• GitHub Login: @pallep
• Microsoft Alias: pallep

[Jay-o-Way]

I'm thinking the word impact has (erroneously) become a synonym with effect

Wiktionary mentions (indeed)

4. (figurative, proscribed) A significant or strong influence or effect.

and

• There are some who find the figurative noun sense problematic, with a low threshold for labeling such use as overuse (cliché). In defensive editing, the solution is to replace the figurative noun sense with effect and the verb sense with affect, which nearly always produces an acceptable result. (Rarely, a phrase such as "the impact of late effects" is better stetted to avoid "the effect of [...] effects".)

[getsnoopy]

Well as the entry mentions, it defines it (despite being proscribed) as "significant/strong influence/effect", so the word is still problematic in all the other ways that I mentioned. As such, it doesn't really belong in professional documentation where clarity and proper language use is important and expected.