Consider, if you are very bored, what you would name a reptillian strategy for making subordinates write shorter emails to you. Wait. First imagine you're a "thought leader" in the dungeons of The Management Center. Would you have picked "One-Handed Emails?" Ever in a thousand years of bad ideas? No, I bet you wouldn't have.
I'm reading Fred Brook's The Design of Design. (Brooks is the author of the more famous The Mythical Man-Month.) It tackles the commonalities of all design processes, though he is focused on fairly technical ones. I am reading it both as a sometimes-progammer and as a graphic designer. Brooks addresses work in teams, and this is something I've been thinking about in my professional life. One thing has struck me so far. Brooks views design as a fundamentally iterative process, which agrees with my thoughts and experience -- but I had not seen iteration in the same places.
The right way to punctuate a sentence is to use our common stock of marks to their fullest, intentionally selecting them for the meaning that's intdended.
Long strings of adjectives can decorate a noun, but there are three choices about how they are punctuated: they can be left alone, given commas, or combined with hyphens.
One of the more recent educationist fads has been learning styles: verbal, visual, kinesthetic, etcetera. These have been promulgated through universities and into elementary- and high-schools. Students are eager to identify their type, and teachers are supposed to provide instruction that matches up; to do any less is to oppress by preferring some students and their innate qualities more than others (never mind that to teach in 8+ ways would still mean that each student gets non-preferred methods 80% of the time).
Professional fields can be divided into two groups on the basis of how easily skill is assessed. That difference cascades into many other aspects of the professions and governs much about work life within them. It will determine how important other factors are, like pedigree, fame, and luck.