Episode 06: Why Technical Experts Struggle to Communicate What They Know

Posted on September 30, 2026 by Rowell Mariano

In the previous episode of The Backstage: Beyond the Classroom, we talked about the 4As of High-Quality Learning: Alignment, Architecture, Application, and Assurance. We looked at quality beyond the learning event itself and asked whether what people learn actually sticks, becomes usable, and is supported by systems that make quality more consistent.

This time, I want to move to another capability that I believe organisations need to pay more attention to. I have worked with many people who are technically very good at what they do. Engineers, IT professionals, scientists, accountants, executives, subject matter experts, and people from highly specialised fields can spend years developing deep knowledge and capability. They know their craft. They can solve difficult problems. They can see things that someone outside their field may never notice.

But ask some of them to explain what they know to someone else and something changes.

The knowledge is there. The expertise is there. The challenge is communicating it in a way that another person can actually understand.

I want to be clear that this does not apply to every technical expert. I have met highly technical people who are also excellent communicators. But I have also seen many technically brilliant professionals struggle when they have to present to a client, explain an idea to senior management, teach a new employee, mentor someone, or speak to an audience that does not have the same technical background.

The problem is not necessarily that they lack confidence. In many cases, they are very confident in their work because they know they are good at what they do. The issue is that technical expertise and communication expertise are two different capabilities.

When You Know Too Much

One of the reasons experts struggle to communicate is actually because they know a lot.

When you have spent years working in a particular field, your brain processes information differently from someone who is encountering the subject for the first time. Terms that feel basic to you may be completely unfamiliar to somebody else. Connections that seem obvious to you may require several steps of explanation for a novice.

Recent research provides an interesting example of this. Coon et al. (2026) examined differences between experts and novices and found that expert speakers did not always sufficiently adjust their communication even when they knew that their audience was inexperienced. The authors connect this with the long-standing idea of the curse of knowledge, where knowing something well can make it difficult to imagine what it is like not to know it.

I have seen this happen many times. The technical expert starts speaking and assumes that everyone understands the terminology being used. The explanation becomes very detailed and very precise because accuracy is important in technical work. The problem is that while the expert is moving quickly from one idea to another, the people listening may already be lost several minutes behind.

The expert continues speaking. The audience continues listening. There may even be a few polite nods. But inside someone’s head, the reaction may simply be, “What exactly did that mean?”

Communication happened, but understanding did not.

Jargon Can Sound Impressive Without Creating Understanding

Technical language has a purpose. In many professions, jargon allows specialists to communicate accurately and efficiently with one another. I am not suggesting that technical terminology should disappear. The question is whether the person listening understands the language being used.

A 2025 study by Cruz and Lombrozo involving nine experiments and 6,698 participants found something particularly interesting. Scientific jargon could make explanations feel more satisfying to laypeople even while making those explanations less comprehensible. In other words, a technical explanation can sound substantial and impressive without necessarily helping people understand it better (Cruz & Lombrozo, 2025).

That is why simplifying does not mean removing the intelligence from the message. It means removing unnecessary barriers around the intelligence.

For me, one sign of a very good expert is the ability to explain something difficult in a way that feels light and understandable without losing the important substance. The person does not need to prove expertise by making everything sound complicated. The depth is still there. What changes is the way that depth is translated for somebody else.

Experts Can Forget What It Felt Like to Be New

There is another reason why technical experts sometimes struggle. They have already forgotten what it felt like to be at the beginning.

Every expert was once a beginner. There was a time when they did not know the terminology. There was a first tool they struggled to use, a first project they did not know how to approach, a mistake they made repeatedly, or an idea that took time before it finally made sense.

That former beginner can actually be useful when communicating with people who are still learning.

A very recent study by Zhang (2026) looked specifically at what happens when experienced advisers reconnect with what the researcher calls a “beginner’s mind.” Across studies involving managers and musicians, advisers who mentally returned to their own novice experience were able to give more concrete advice that novices considered more useful and more worth adopting.

I find that very relatable. If you are explaining something to someone who is new to your profession, ask yourself what you did not understand when you were starting. What did you wish someone had explained to you? What mistake did you make because nobody told you something important? Those experiences can become examples and stories that make technical knowledge much easier for another person to absorb.

The mindset should not be, “I struggled before, so you should struggle too.” If you already know something that could help another person move more effectively, share it.

That is part of what expertise is for.

Knowing Your Subject Is Not the Same as Knowing Your Audience

A technical expert may also struggle because the communication begins with the subject instead of the audience.

The first question is often, “What do I need to explain?” I think another question should come before that:

Who am I explaining this to?

Knowing your audience matters because people do not enter a conversation with the same level of knowledge. Some may have no background at all. Others may know a little. Some may already be highly experienced. In a mixed audience, all three may be sitting in the same room.

McCarthy and Grant (2025), drawing on a systematic review of 1,360 science communication studies, found that the idea of “audience” itself is more complex than simply identifying demographics. Audience knowledge, values, interaction, diversity, and context all shape how communication should be approached.

That means the technical truth does not need to change, but the way you communicate it probably should.

If you are speaking with another expert, you may be able to go deeper into methodology and technical details. If you are speaking with executives, they may need to understand implications, risk, choices, and what decision needs to be made. If you are speaking with clients, the question may be how the technical issue affects them and what they should do next.

Good communication is not simply saying what you know.

It is deciding what the other person needs from what you know.

When Expertise Stays With One Person

There is also an organisational consequence when experts cannot transfer what they know.

One of the first things that happens is dependency. If only one person understands the process, system, technology, or technical task, that person becomes the only person who can do it. Whenever there is a problem, the organisation goes back to the same expert.

Eventually, expertise can become concentrated inside individuals or teams.

That can contribute to knowledge silos. Argote (2024), in a review of research on knowledge transfer within organisations, notes that knowledge does not automatically move successfully between people or organisational units. Transfer is influenced by the opportunities available to share knowledge, the characteristics of the knowledge itself, the mechanisms used to transfer it, and people’s motivation to do so.

This is why communication is not only a “soft skill” issue. It can become a capability issue for the organisation.

If expertise cannot move beyond the expert, it can become a bottleneck.

I Can Help You Say It, but I Cannot Give You the Expertise

I remember working with people on communication and public speaking, and I would sometimes tell them something very simple. I can give you techniques on how to communicate what you know, but I cannot give you the technical knowledge of your profession. That part is yours to develop.

In a way, when I work with someone who is already technically strong, I am actually happy because the most difficult part is already there. The knowledge exists. The person knows the profession, understands the work, and has experience to draw from. What we now need to work on is how that expertise can come out clearly when the person speaks.

I have worked with people from different backgrounds, including executives and highly technical professionals. Some already know exactly what they want to say. What they need is help with how to say it, how to structure it, how to make it understandable, and how to connect with the people listening.

That distinction matters because we should not expect communication training to manufacture expertise.

You still need to know your craft.

But once the expertise is there, communication skills can help other people benefit from it.

From Technical Expert to Expert Communicator

Based on the patterns we have discussed, there are six things I would encourage technical experts to consider when they need to communicate what they know. I call this the EXPERT Framework.

E: Establish Your Intention

Before thinking about your slides, your opening line, or how confident you sound, know why you are speaking.

What do you want the audience to understand? Are you trying to teach them? Help them make a decision? Explain a technical risk? Mentor them? Get support for a recommendation? Help them perform a task?

Your intention determines what information matters.

A technical expert can easily share everything because everything feels important. Clear intention helps you decide what the audience actually needs.

If the people listening leave knowing a lot of facts but still do not know what any of those facts mean for them, then the communication probably did not achieve its purpose.

X: eXamine Your Audience

Ask what your audience already knows.

Do they have no knowledge of the subject? Some knowledge? Are they experts themselves? Is the group mixed?

Do not assume prior knowledge simply because you are speaking to professionals. Even people working in related technical fields can have very different levels of familiarity with terminology and concepts.

The more you understand where people are starting, the better you can decide where your explanation should begin.

P: Put It Simply

Simplifying technical knowledge does not mean making it inaccurate. It means communicating the essential idea in a way that people can follow.

Use plain language when plain language will do the job. If a technical term is necessary, explain it. Do not use five specialised terms when two simple sentences would communicate the same idea.

There is a difference between technical depth and technical heaviness.

A strong expert communicator can retain depth without making the audience carry unnecessary complexity.

E: Explain Through Examples and Stories

Technical knowledge becomes easier to understand when people can see what it looks like in a real situation.

Use cases. Share a short experience. Walk through an actual problem. Explain what happened, what you did, what did not work, and what you learned.

Sometimes the most useful thing an expert can say is, “I struggled with this too when I first started.”

That one statement can immediately make the expert more relatable to people who are still learning.

Stories do not replace technical knowledge. They give people somewhere to connect the knowledge.

R: Read and Respond

Communication is not simply talking until you reach your last slide.

Look at the people listening. Are they responding? Are they asking questions? Do their expressions suggest that they are following you? Can they relate what you said to their own situation?

A nod can be useful feedback, but it does not always prove understanding. When the information matters, interact with the audience. Invite questions. Ask them what they think. Let them explain an idea in their own words. Listen to what they are saying back to you.

Good technical communication is not only about explaining.

It is also about checking whether your explanation landed.

T: Train Your Delivery

Finally, practise how you communicate.

Technical competence develops through repeated use, and communication is no different. Voice, pacing, volume, pauses, eye contact, body language, structure, and how you move through an explanation can all be improved through practice.

There is a popular communication statistic associated with Albert Mehrabian that is often simplified into the idea that words account for only 7 percent of communication, with the rest attributed to voice and nonverbal behaviour. That is not what the research established. Mehrabian’s work dealt specifically with communication of feelings and attitudes, especially when verbal and nonverbal signals conflicted, so the 7-38-55 formula should not be treated as a universal rule for technical communication (Mehrabian, 1971). The more useful lesson is simply that:

Your delivery should support your words rather than work against them.

You can know your subject very well and still benefit from practising how you deliver it. That is not a weakness in your expertise. It is simply another capability you are developing.

The Best Expert Is Not Necessarily the Loudest Person

One thing I would not want this article to suggest is that every technical expert needs to become a highly polished public speaker.

That is not the goal.

Someone can be naturally quiet and still be an excellent communicator. Someone else can be highly confident, highly visible, and very comfortable speaking but have very little substance behind what is being said.

Communication skill does not replace expertise.

What we are looking for is the balance between the two.

The strongest expert communicators I have encountered do not necessarily sound spectacular. Sometimes they sound like they are simply having a conversation with you. They use basic language. They tell a relevant story. They explain something difficult without making you feel that it is difficult. They listen. They adjust. And somehow, when the conversation ends, you understand something that previously felt complicated.

There may be nothing spectacular in the way they speak, but the impact can be spectacular because people leave with knowledge they can actually use.

Making Expertise Transferable

This is also one of the areas we work on at Talent Academy International. There are professionals who do not necessarily need another technical program because they already know their subject. What they need is support in communicating that expertise more clearly, whether they are presenting, facilitating, mentoring, speaking with clients, working with leaders, or transferring knowledge to other people.

The objective is not to change who they are or turn every expert into the same type of speaker. It is to give them techniques that allow the expertise they already have to become more understandable, relatable, and useful to other people.

Because the technical knowledge still has to come from the expert.

What communication development can do is help that knowledge travel.

Expertise Has More Value When Other People Can Use It

Technical experts spend years developing what they know. That knowledge deserves to create value beyond the individual who possesses it.

The challenge is that expertise does not automatically come with the ability to explain, teach, influence, mentor, or transfer. Those are communication capabilities, and like other capabilities, they can be developed through intention, audience awareness, simplification, examples, interaction, and practice.

If you are technically excellent, you already have something valuable to share. The next question is whether the people around you can understand it, remember it, and do something useful with it.

Because expertise should not stop with the expert.

That is another capability worth developing in the backstage, beyond the classroom.

References

Argote, L. (2024). Knowledge transfer within organizations: Mechanisms, motivation, and consideration. Annual Review of Psychology, 75, 405–431. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-022123-105424

Coon, J., Etz, A., Scontras, G., & Sarnecka, B. W. (2026). How novices interpret generalizations and how experts use them. Cognitive Science, 50(3), e70196. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.70196

Cruz, F., & Lombrozo, T. (2025). How laypeople evaluate scientific explanations containing jargon. Nature Human Behaviour, 9, 2038–2053. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-025-02227-0

McCarthy, E., & Grant, W. J. (2025). What are we talking about when we are talking about the audience? Exploring the concept of audience in science communication research and education. Public Understanding of Science, 34(4), 408–423. https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625241280349

Zhang, T. (2026). Back to the beginning: Rediscovering a beginner’s mind enhances advice provision to novices. Academy of Management Journal. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2023.0816