When Shall Must Go: A Case Study of Plain Language Implementation in State Government

Despite widespread recognition of plain language principles and high-level state and federal policy commitments, implementing accessible communication practices in government agencies remains challenging. This experience report documents an in-process effort to introduce plain language practices within a state regulatory agency, chronicling the institutional challenges encountered even when attempting modest changes such as replacing”shall” with”must” in regulatory documents. The case reveals how organizational constraints—including multi-agency coordination requirements, resource limitations, competing priorities, and entrenched institutional practices—can effectively halt plain language reform efforts despite broad stakeholder agreement on their value. Our findings suggest that successful plain language advocacy requires not only linguistic expertise but also institutional knowledge and strategic change management skills, underscoring the need to prepare students to navigate complex organizational dynamics and develop strategic approaches to communication reform. For practitioners, it demonstrates the value of pursuing multiple simultaneous pathways—improving supporting materials within existing constraints while continuing to advocate for comprehensive reforms through coalition building, strategic timing, and multifaceted arguments that account for institutional realities.