translation-reframing-audience-shift

Adapt content for different audiences while preserving core accuracy—changing tone, depth, emphasis, and framing to match audience expertise, goals, and context.

Invoke this skill when:

• Same information needs to reach audiences with different expertise (technical → business, expert → novice)
• Content tone/formality needs changing (formal report → casual email, academic → conversational)
• Strategic content needs tactical translation (vision → action items, why → how)
• Internal content goes external (company docs → customer-facing, jargon → plain language)
• Long-form needs compression without losing key points (detailed → summary, comprehensive → highlights)
• Medium changes (written → spoken, document → presentation, email → social media)
• Cross-cultural or demographic shifts (US → international, industry → industry, generation → generation)
• Emphasis needs shifting (highlight different aspects for different stakeholders)

Don't use when:

• Content is already appropriate for target audience (no translation needed)
• Creating entirely new content (not adapting existing)
• Simple copy-editing (grammar, spelling) without audience shift
• Translating between human languages (use language translation, not this skill)

Translation/reframing adapts content between audiences by preserving semantic accuracy (what is true) while changing presentation (how it's communicated). Four fidelity types:

1. Semantic fidelity (MUST preserve): Core facts, relationships, constraints, implications remain accurate

2. Tonal fidelity (adapt): Formality, emotion, register change to match audience expectations

3. Emphasis fidelity (adapt): What's highlighted vs. backgrounded shifts based on audience priorities

4. Medium fidelity (adapt): Structure, length, format change for different channels/contexts

Example: Technical incident postmortem → Customer status update

Original (Engineers): "Root cause: race condition in distributed lock manager under high concurrency (>5000 req/s). Null pointer dereference when lock timeout occurred before callback registration. Fix: added CAS operation with retry logic, deployed canary to 5% traffic, monitored for 2 hours before full rollout."

Translated (Customers): "What happened: Service slowdown on Jan 15, 2-3pm affecting checkout for some users. Root cause: Timing issue in our system under high traffic. Status: Fixed, monitored, and fully deployed. Prevention: Added safeguards to prevent similar timing issues."

What changed: Technical detail reduced, jargon removed, impact/status emphasized, customer concerns prioritized (what happened, is it fixed, will it happen again). What preserved: Timing, affected functionality, root cause category, resolution status.

Copy this checklist and track your progress:

```

Translation & Reframing Progress:

• [ ] Step 1: Analyze source and target audiences
• [ ] Step 2: Identify translation type and constraints
• [ ] Step 3: Apply translation strategy
• [ ] Step 4: Validate fidelity and appropriateness
• [ ] Step 5: Refine and deliver

```

Step 1: Analyze source and target audiences

Characterize both audiences using [Audience Analysis](#audience-analysis) framework (expertise, goals, context, constraints). Identify gap between source and target.

Step 2: Identify translation type and constraints

Classify as: technical↔business, strategic↔tactical, expert↔novice, formal↔informal, long↔short, internal↔external, or cross-cultural. See [Common Translation Types](#common-translation-types) for patterns.

Step 3: Apply translation strategy

For simple cases → Use [resources/template.md](resources/template.md) for structured translation. For complex cases (multiple audiences, high stakes, nuanced reframing) → Study [resources/methodology.md](resources/methodology.md) for advanced techniques.

Step 4: Validate fidelity and appropriateness

Self-assess using [resources/evaluators/rubric_translation_reframing_audience_shift.json](resources/evaluators/rubric_translation_reframing_audience_shift.json). Check: semantic accuracy preserved? tone appropriate? emphasis aligned with audience priorities? See [Validation](#validation) section.

Step 5: Refine and deliver

Create translation-reframing-audience-shift.md with source, target audience, translated content, and translation rationale. See [Delivery Format](#delivery-format).

---

Before translating, characterize source and target:

1. Expertise Level

• Expert: Domain fluent, comfortable with jargon, wants depth and nuance
• Intermediate: Familiar with basics, needs some context, appreciates balance
• Novice: No background assumed, needs analogies and plain language, wants practical takeaways

2. Primary Goals

• Decision-makers: Want options, trade-offs, recommendations, risks, timelines
• Implementers: Want specifics, how-to, constraints, success criteria
• Learners: Want understanding, context, mental models, examples
• Stakeholders: Want impact, status, next steps, how it affects them

3. Context & Constraints

• Time: Busy executives (1-page), deep dives (comprehensive), quick updates (bullets)
• Medium: Email (skimmable), presentation (visual + verbal), document (reference)
• Familiarity: Internal (shared context) vs. external (assume nothing)
• Sensitivity: Public (carefully worded) vs. private (candid)

4. Cultural/Demographic

• Language: Native vs. non-native speakers (idiomatic vs. literal)
• Generation: Communication norms (emoji use, formality expectations)
• Industry: Tech vs. traditional (pacing, references, assumptions)
• Geography: US vs. international (date formats, measurement units, cultural references)

Mapping exercise: Source audience is [expertise/goals/context] → Target audience is [expertise/goals/context] → Gap requires [translation strategy].

---

Technical ↔ Business

Technical → Business:

• Remove: Implementation details, jargon, code, algorithms
• Add: Business value, customer impact, cost/benefit, competitive advantage
• Shift emphasis: How it works → Why it matters, Metrics → Outcomes
• Example: "Reduced p95 latency from 450ms to 120ms via query optimization" → "Pages load 3x faster, improving customer satisfaction and conversion"

Business → Technical:

• Remove: Marketing language, vague goals, buzzwords
• Add: Requirements, constraints, acceptance criteria, technical implications
• Shift emphasis: Vision → Implementation details, Outcomes → Metrics
• Example: "Delight customers with seamless experience" → "Reduce checkout flow to 2 steps, target 95% completion rate, maintain PCI compliance"

Strategic ↔ Tactical

Strategic → Tactical:

• Remove: High-level vision, market trends, abstract goals
• Add: Specific actions, timelines, owners, dependencies, success metrics
• Shift emphasis: Why → What and how, 3-year vision → This quarter's plan
• Example: "Become data-driven organization" → "Q1: Instrument 10 key user flows. Q2: Train PMs on analytics. Q3: Establish weekly metrics review."

Tactical → Strategic:

• Remove: Granular tasks, individual tickets, daily activities
• Add: Themes, rationale, business alignment, cumulative impact
• Shift emphasis: Individual work → Portfolio narrative, Tasks → Outcomes
• Example: "Fixed 47 bugs, added 12 features, refactored auth" → "Improved product stability and security foundation to support enterprise customers"

Expert ↔ Novice

Expert → Novice:

• Remove: Jargon, assumptions of prior knowledge, complex terminology
• Add: Analogies, definitions, examples, "why this matters"
• Shift emphasis: Nuance → Core concepts, Edge cases → Happy path
• Example (Medical): "Idiopathic hypertension, prescribe ACE inhibitor, monitor renal function" → "High blood pressure without clear cause. Medication helps blood vessels relax. Regular kidney checks needed."

Novice → Expert:

• Remove: Over-explanations, analogies, hand-holding
• Add: Precision, technical terms, caveats, edge cases
• Shift emphasis: Simplified model → Accurate complexity
• Example: "Make the button easier to click" → "Increase touch target to 44×44pt per iOS HIG, add 8pt padding, ensure 3:1 contrast ratio"

Formal ↔ Informal

Formal → Informal:

• Tone: Third person → First person, Passive → Active, Complex → Simple
• Structure: Rigid sections → Conversational flow, Citations → Casual mentions
• Language: "Furthermore, it is evident" → "Also, you can see"
• Example: "The organization has determined that remote work arrangements shall be permitted" → "We're allowing remote work"

Informal → Formal:

• Tone: Contractions → Full words ("we're" → "we are"), Casual → Professional
• Structure: Loose → Structured sections with clear headers
• Language: "Stuff's broken" → "System experiencing degradation"
• Example: "Just shipped this cool feature!" → "Released enhanced functionality for improved user experience"

Long-form ↔ Summary

Long → Summary:

• Structure: Inverted pyramid (most important first), bullet points, highlight key decisions/actions
• Remove: Supporting details, full context, exhaustive examples
• Preserve: Core findings, recommendations, next steps, critical caveats
• Ratios: 50 pages → 1 page (50:1), 1 hour → 5 min (12:1), Comprehensive → Highlights

Summary → Long-form:

• Add: Context, methodology, supporting evidence, alternative perspectives
• Structure: Introduction → Body → Conclusion, Multiple sections with subheadings
• Preserve: Original key points as outline, Expand each with detail

---

Before finalizing, check:

Semantic Fidelity (CRITICAL):

• [ ] Core facts accurate? (No distortions or omissions that change meaning)
• [ ] Relationships preserved? (Cause-effect, dependencies, constraints intact)
• [ ] Caveats included? (Limitations, uncertainties, edge cases mentioned when relevant)
• [ ] Implications correct? (What this means for audience is accurate)
• [ ] Verifiable? (Expert in source domain would confirm translation is accurate)

Audience Appropriateness:

• [ ] Expertise match? (Not too technical or too dumbed-down for target)
• [ ] Jargon level right? (Explained when needed, used when understood)
• [ ] Goals addressed? (Decision-makers get options, implementers get how-to, learners get why)
• [ ] Tone appropriate? (Formality, emotion, register match audience expectations)
• [ ] Length appropriate? (Respects audience time constraints)

Emphasis Alignment:

• [ ] Priorities match audience? (Highlight what they care about)
• [ ] Details at right level? (Enough for understanding, not overwhelming)
• [ ] Actionability? (If audience needs to act, next steps are clear)
• [ ] Framing effective? (Positive/negative/neutral matches context and goal)

Medium & Format:

• [ ] Structure fits medium? (Email = skimmable, presentation = visual, document = reference)
• [ ] Formatting helps comprehension? (Headers, bullets, bold for key points)
• [ ] Accessibility? (Clear for non-native speakers if needed, links/references provided)

Cultural/Demographic:

• [ ] Idioms/references work? (Avoided US-centric idioms if international audience)
• [ ] Examples relatable? (Audience can connect to scenarios)
• [ ] Assumptions explicit? (Don't rely on shared context that target lacks)

Minimum Standard: Use rubric (resources/evaluators/rubric_translation_reframing_audience_shift.json). Average score ≥ 3.5/5 before delivering.

---

Create translation-reframing-audience-shift.md with:

1. Source Analysis

• Original audience: [Expertise, goals, context]
• Original content: [Brief excerpt or summary]
• Original tone/emphasis: [What was highlighted, how it was framed]

2. Target Analysis

• Target audience: [Expertise, goals, context]
• Translation type: [Technical→Business, Strategic→Tactical, etc.]
• Key constraints: [Length, medium, sensitivity]

3. Translated Content

• [Full translated version]
• [Formatted for target medium—bullets for emails, sections for docs, etc.]

4. Translation Rationale

• What changed: [Jargon removed, emphasis shifted to X, details reduced, analogies added]
• What preserved: [Core facts, key implications, critical caveats]
• Why: [Audience expertise gap, time constraints, medium requirements, cultural adaptation]

5. Validation Notes

• Semantic fidelity: ✓ Core facts accurate
• Audience match: ✓ Tone and depth appropriate for [target]
• Emphasis: ✓ Highlights [audience priorities]
• Limitations: [Any unavoidable compromises, e.g., "Some nuance lost for brevity"]

---

"So What?" Test (Technical → Business): Every technical detail answers "so what?" - "Migrated to Kubernetes" → "Auto-scale during traffic spikes, 30% cost reduction" | "OAuth 2.0" → "Enterprise SSO, removes adoption barrier"

"How?" Test (Strategic → Tactical): Every goal answers "how?" - "Improve satisfaction" → "Response <2hr, add help center, NPS survey" | "AI-first company" → "Train PMs (Q1), hire 3 ML engineers (Q2), pilot feature (Q3)"

Analogy Bridge (Expert → Novice): Familiar → Unfamiliar - "Git branching" = essay draft versions | "Microservices" = food trucks not one restaurant | "API rate limiting" = nightclub capacity

Inverted Pyramid (Long → Summary): Most important first - Lede (1-2 sentences) → Key details (2-3 bullets) → Supporting (optional depth)

Code-Switching (Cross-Cultural): Replace cultural references - "Home run" (US) → "Big success" (neutral) | "Fire hose" idiom → "Overwhelming info" (literal) | MM/DD/YYYY → YYYY-MM-DD (ISO)

---

Resources:

• [resources/template.md](resources/template.md) - Structured translation workflow
• [resources/methodology.md](resources/methodology.md) - Advanced techniques for complex/nuanced translation
• [resources/evaluators/rubric_translation_reframing_audience_shift.json](resources/evaluators/rubric_translation_reframing_audience_shift.json) - Quality criteria

Key Principles:

• Preserve semantic accuracy - Facts, relationships, implications must remain true
• Adapt presentation - Tone, depth, emphasis change for audience
• Match audience needs - Expertise level, goals, context, constraints
• Test with "would expert confirm?" - Source domain expert validates translation accuracy
• Test with "can target act on it?" - Target audience can understand and use it

Red Flags:

• Semantic drift (facts become inaccurate through simplification)
• Talking down (condescending tone to novices)
• Jargon mismatch (too technical or too vague for audience)
• Missing "so what?" (technical details without business impact)
• Missing "how?" (strategic vision without tactical translation)
• Lost nuance (critical caveats omitted for brevity)
• Cultural assumptions (idioms, references that exclude target)
• Wrong emphasis (highlighting what you find interesting vs. what audience needs)