The curse of knowledge: why subject matter experts sometimes struggle to explain their advice clearly

Council staff are often asked to present advice on topics they know deeply. That expertise is essential. But it can also create one of the most common barriers to clear communication: the curse of knowledge.

The curse of knowledge is what happens when you know a subject so well that it becomes impossible to remember what it was like not to know it. You understand the background, the science, the process, the risks, the acronyms, and the technical language. Your audience may not.

This matters when presenting advice to elected members. Elected Members do not need every detail you know. They need enough information to understand the issue, test the advice, ask useful questions and make an informed decision.

How the curse of knowledge shows up

The curse of knowledge can show up in several ways.

One is over-explaining. Because you know all the complexity behind the advice, you may feel tempted to include too much background, process or technical detail. This can make your verbal introduction hard to follow, even when your report is sound.

Another is under-explaining. This may sound like the opposite problem, but it often comes from the same place. You may skip over something because it feels obvious to you. But what is obvious to a subject matter expert may not be obvious to an elected member hearing the issue for the first time.

Language is another common symptom. Acronyms, technical terms and internal shorthand may be efficient inside your team, but they can create distance between you and your audience. Even familiar words may have a specific legal, planning, engineering or financial meaning that is not immediately clear to a non-specialist.

I once saw this play out in a council meeting where staff were presenting a report on liquidity. During the meeting, an elected member asked what “liquidity” meant. The question revealed something important: if that term was central to the report, then at least one decision-maker had not fully understood the advice before the meeting.

Written language and spoken language are different

Another way the curse of knowledge shows up is when written report language is carried directly into the verbal introduction.

For example, saying:

“This process commenced two years ago.”

is accurate. But in a spoken briefing, it may be more conversational to say:

“Let me take you back two years to the start of this process.”

Good spoken advice does not need to be casual. It still needs to be professional, impartial and accurate. But it should sound like something a person would say, not something copied from the report.

How to get past it

The goal is not to “dumb down” your advice. It is to strip away unnecessary complexity so your key message is clear.

A useful first step is to talk to a colleague who has some understanding of your work, but not the same level of expertise. Ask them what they think matters most, where they got lost, and what they would need explained. They can often spot assumptions that are invisible to you.

Another helpful structure is:

What? So what? Now what?

In other words:

What is the key information?

So what does it mean, and why does it matter?

Now what needs to happen next?

This structure is especially useful when presenting data, policy analysis or technical findings. It helps you move beyond description and into meaning. Elected members usually do not need you to take them through every step of your thinking. They need to understand the significance of your advice and the decision or direction required.

Conversational language also helps. Phrases such as “in a nutshell”, “in other words”, “what this means is”, and “let me take you back” can make complex advice easier to follow. They signal that you are guiding the listener, not just delivering information.

It is also worth defining key terms as you go. This does not need to be heavy-handed. A brief explanation is often enough:

“When we refer to amenity in this report, we are talking about the qualities of a place that affect how people experience and enjoy it.”

This can prevent misunderstanding and make your advice more accessible.

Using AI to test your clarity

AI can be useful for testing whether your summary is clear. Rather than asking it simply to “make this better”, give it a specific role and clear instructions. For example:

Try this prompt:

I am preparing to present a council report to elected members. Please review the summary or verbal briefing below and help me make it clearer for a non-specialist audience.

Please:

1. Identify any jargon, acronyms, technical language or assumed knowledge.

2. Suggest clearer alternatives where needed.

3. Rewrite the summary using plain, professional and impartial language.

4. Organise it using the structure: What? So what? Now what?

5. Make sure it sounds natural when spoken aloud, not like a written report.

6. Do not add new information or change the meaning.

Here is the summary: [insert text] (Note - before you provide confidential reports to AI you need to check that your council's security settings allow for this)

A final check before the meeting

Before presenting your advice, ask yourself:

Would someone outside my team understand the key point?

Have I explained why this matters?

Have I made the decision or next step clear?

Have I removed unnecessary process detail?

Have I defined any technical terms or acronyms?

Clear advice is not less expert. In many ways, it shows greater expertise. It takes skill to understand a complex issue well enough to explain it simply, accurately and without losing what matters.