Be Clear About Timeframes

In general, have a time or timeframe accompany any discussion about the future. For example, if you state that sales of the new widget need to increase by 10%, expect your audience immediately to ask, “How quickly does that change need to happen? ”

If you can’t offer a specific deadline, or even a specific timeframe or date range, you may want to employ a common trio: short term, medium term, and long term. Just how soon the short term is will vary by application. Short term might mean a couple of days, or the current quarter year, or a couple of years, but the short term is always less than the medium term and less than the long term.

The point is to consider helping anyone consuming your communication, analysis, proposal, or other information by setting a specific time, a time frame, or a relative time category.

Application

Sometimes, it is clear that you should act immediately, as in, “Please turn down the music.” Obviously, the person making the request does not mean for you to lower the volume tomorrow. In business, clear, specific, unambiguous dates and times are desirable. For example, “I will get to that soon” is not as helpful as “I will get to that within the hour.” and “We will strive to resolve your issues promptly” is not as clear as, “Our agreement requires that we restore service within 4 hours.”

Unfortunately, such precision is not always possible, in which case you should remove the potential for a mismatch in expectations by stating some broad date and time ranges. If that still is too difficult, use timeframe categories, such as the near, medium, and long term. Note this is similar to offering projections under different scenarios, such as conservative / pessimistic, moderate, or aggressive / optimistic.

For the short term, consider:

This issue is right in front of us.
I am talking about the here and now.
We are talking about right away, not 3 to 5 years down the road.
Actions need to be taken immediately, without delay.

For the long term, consider:

This is an issue that is over the horizon.
I am looking far into the future.
We are talking not about today or tomorrow, but 3 to 5 years down the road.
I am addressing not what is in front of us now; I am looking around the corner.

The point is to be as specific as you can. If you must be vague, with customers, investors, the media, etc., try framing the issue by offering three contrasting timelines, to prevent folks thinking you mean one kind of schedule or pace when you really mean another.

Further Reflection: Key Insights and Questions This Raises

1. Vague Timing Creates Mismatched Expectations That Damage Relationships The document contrasts “I will get to that soon” with “I will get to that within the hour” and “We will strive to resolve your issues promptly” with “Our agreement requires that we restore service within 4 hours.” The difference is clarity. When you say “soon” or “promptly,” different people hear different things. Your manager might think “soon” means today; you might mean next week. The insight is that vague timing doesn’t avoid conflict, it delays it. When deadlines aren’t explicit, people invent their own, then get upset when you miss the deadlines they imagined. Being specific feels risky because you’re committing to something concrete, but being vague is riskier because you’re setting yourself up for disappointing people.

2. Short/Medium/Long Term Means Different Things in Different Contexts The document notes that “short term might mean a couple of days, or the current quarter year, or a couple of years” depending on the application. In software development, short term might be this sprint (two weeks). In urban planning, short term might be five years. The key is that “the short term is always less than the medium term and less than the long term.” The insight is that these relative categories are useful precisely because they’re flexible, but you need to define them for your specific context. Don’t assume your audience shares your time horizon. A startup founder’s “long term” (three years) is totally different from a university administrator’s “long term” (ten years).

3. Three Timeframe Categories Force Clear Communication About Priorities The document suggests offering “three contrasting timelines, to prevent folks thinking you mean one kind of schedule or pace when you really mean another.” This is similar to conservative/moderate/aggressive projections. By explicitly naming short/medium/long term scenarios, you make people choose which they care about. The insight is that forcing yourself to categorize things by timeframe reveals priorities. If everything is “short term” (urgent), nothing actually is. If something is genuinely long term, labeling it that way helps people understand it’s not competing with immediate priorities. The three-category system prevents the trap where everything feels urgent because nothing has defined timing.

4. Specific Deadlines Work Best, But Categories Beat Ambiguity The document’s hierarchy is clear: specific times are “desirable,” but when “such precision is not always possible,” you should use “broad date and time ranges,” and if that’s still “too difficult,” use timeframe categories. This isn’t about being lazy with deadlines; it’s about matching precision to certainty. The insight is that fake precision is worse than honest ambiguity. If you genuinely don’t know when something will happen, saying “Q3” when you mean “sometime this year, hopefully” sets you up for failure. Better to say “long term” and be honest about uncertainty than to invent a deadline you can’t meet. Categories acknowledge uncertainty while still providing useful information.

· How do I push back when someone asks for a specific deadline but I genuinely don’t know? The document says specific deadlines are best, but sometimes I really can’t predict timing. If my manager asks “When will this be done?” and I honestly don’t know, should I give my best guess and risk missing it, or admit uncertainty and risk seeming unprepared?

· If my organization’s “short term” feels unreasonably compressed, should I adapt or push back? Let’s say I join a company where everyone treats “short term” as 24 hours and I’m used to thinking of it as a week. Should I adjust my pace to match their expectations, or try to reset their timeline expectations to something more sustainable?

· When defining timeframes for a project, should I under-promise to give myself buffer or be realistic and risk being late? The advice to be specific is good, but real projects have uncertainty. If I think something will take two weeks, should I say two weeks (honest but risky) or three weeks (safer but might look slow).