Active Voice Makes Technical Writing Clearer, Not Less Formal

Active voice isn’t the villain of technical writing. In fact, many readers—myself included—prefer it because it points straight to the action and who’s doing it. Yet a familiar misconception sticks around: “Active voice is less clear.” If you’ve ever heard that line in a meeting or a classroom, you’re not alone. The truth is simpler—and a lot more useful—than that idea suggests.

Let me explain by sketching the two sides in plain terms.

What active and passive voice actually do

• Active voice: The subject performs the action. Example: The technician updated the firmware. The sentence is about who did the work, and what happened is clear and immediate.

• Passive voice: The action is done to the subject. Example: The firmware was updated by the technician. The focus shifts to the action and the recipient, not so much to who did it.

Misconception: active voice makes things hazy

The belief that “active voice is less clear” usually comes from a mix-up about clarity and formality. Clarity isn’t about the grammar label, it’s about who’s doing what and how quickly readers can grasp it. In many technical contexts, the subject—the actor—belongs right up front. That makes the purpose of the sentence obvious in the first breath, which helps readers avoid backtracking.

Why active voice often shines in technical content

• Direct accountability: When the device user, the engineer, or the operator is named as the doer, readers know exactly who is responsible for the action. That reduces ambiguity.

• Concise communication: Active sentences tend to be shorter. If you’re documenting a procedure, fewer words usually mean fewer chances for misinterpretation.

• Readability preference: In most modern documentation, especially user manuals, people skim for the steps. Active voice supports crisp, action-oriented steps that guide the user from one action to the next.

A quick contrast can be revealing

• Passive, lengthy version: The data were collected by the researchers during the test, and the results were analyzed using a standard statistical method.

• Active, crisp version: Researchers collected the data during the test and analyzed the results with a standard statistical method.

Notice how the active version is tighter and easier to scan? That’s the payoff for readers who are trying to complete a task or understand a process quickly.

Where the misconception tends to pop up

• Formal tone worries: Some think passive voice looks more formal or polite. In truth, formality isn’t a license to bury the agent. If anything, the formality question is better addressed by word choice, structure, and precision, not by a default switch to passive.

• Perceived length: People assume passive sentences are longer. They often are, but that extra length isn’t inherently better—it can be a drag on clarity if it obscures who’s doing what.

• Scientific writing habits: In many scientific papers, passive voice appears more common, but even there, readers benefit when the action and agent are clear. The trend in many fields is moving toward active voice for practical writing, even in research reports.

Practical tips to use active voice well

• Start with the actor: If possible, lead with who does the action. “The technician” or “The user” or “The system”—name the agent up front.

• Keep the action visible: Choose verbs that show exactly what happened. Prefer “install,” “update,” “verify,” “monitor” over softer verbs like “conduct” or “perform” when they don’t add precision.

• Chunk steps clearly: In procedures, you’ll often see sequences like: “Open the panel. Press the reset button. Confirm status.” Each step is a compact active clause that’s easy to follow.

• Balance is key: Some sentences naturally call for passive voice, especially when the doer is unknown or irrelevant. For example, “The device is inspected every 12 months” suits a maintenance policy where the focus is the action, not the person.

Common pitfalls and how to avoid them

• Overdoing it: Not every sentence needs to be in active voice. A well-balanced document uses a mix, prioritizing clarity. If the passive makes the action clearer or the agent irrelevant, it’s okay to use it.

• Jargony overexplanation: Replacing passive with active just to hit a rule can lead to awkward, stilted prose. Your goal is clarity, not grammar theater.

• Vague agents: If the subject isn’t clear, an active sentence can still feel clunky. In that case, specify the agent or reframe the sentence to highlight the action and the object.

How to spot when passive voice creeps in (and fix it)

• Look for “by” phrases: If you can remove them and keep meaning intact, you probably can switch to active voice.

• Watch for long noun phrases: If a sentence starts with a long noun phrase and ends with a verb, consider reordering to front-load the actor.

• Check the focus: If the object of the action is the most important thing the reader needs to know, you might still keep it passive. If the actor matters more, switch to active.

Real-world vibes: writing for manuals, guides, and safety notices

Think about the kind of documents people rely on in daily work. A field guide for technicians, a safety bulletin, or a software setup wizard all benefit from active voice. Consider these quick transformations:

• Passive: “The software is installed by the technician after the device is powered on.”

• Active: “The technician installs the software after powering on the device.”

In safety notices, where urgency matters, active voice can be especially effective: “Disconnect the power before you open the panel.” It’s direct, it’s memorable, and it reduces hesitation.

Common-sense guidelines that feel natural

• Know your audience: If you’re writing for end users, lean toward active voice to help users perform actions smoothly. If your audience is internal reviewers who care about process rather than who did it, you can mix.

• Keep sentences short but not choppy: Short sentences are easier to read, but a few longer sentences with a clear subject can carry nuance—just be sure they’re easy to parse.

• Use plain language: Active voice shines when paired with concrete verbs and straightforward nouns. Replace vague terms with precise ones whenever possible.

• Edit with readers in mind: After drafting, read aloud. If a sentence feels heavy or awkward, it’s a good candidate for rewording into active voice.

A few micro-examples you can reuse

• Passive to active in a user guide:

• Passive: “The device is powered on by the user after the boot sequence.”

• Active: “The user powers on the device after the boot sequence.”

• Passive to active in a troubleshooting note:

• Passive: “Logs are reviewed by the technician to identify errors.”

• Active: “The technician reviews the logs to identify errors.”

• Neutral policy line:

• Passive: “Updates are applied by the system during maintenance windows.”

• Active: “The system applies updates during maintenance windows.”

The bottom line: active voice is a practical ally for clarity

There’s no magic formula that makes technical writing clear by default, but active voice is a reliable tool in your toolbox. It helps readers quickly identify who’s doing what, which is essential when they’re trying to accomplish a task, diagnose an issue, or follow a safety instruction. The misconception—that active voice is less clear—often comes from a misread of how sentences are put together. Clarity isn’t about sticking to a single voice; it’s about choosing the voice that makes the action visible and the steps easy to follow.

If you’re ever unsure, a simple checklist helps:

• Is the agent clear at the start of the sentence? If not, can you put it there?

• Does the sentence convey who did what in as few words as possible?

• Would a user benefit from a brisk, action-forward line, or is the action so abstract that a passive construction is preferable?

Give yourself permission to lean into active voice where it serves readers. It’s not about being “too direct” or “less formal.” It’s about making instructions, checks, and explanations feel natural and usable. And in the end, that’s what good technical writing is all about: shaping information so readers can do what they need to do, with confidence and a sense of direction.

A final thought—because this is a living craft, not a rigid rulebook: balance your voice like you balance a recipe. A pinch of active here, a dash of precise passive there, and a clear line of action powering the whole piece. When you do that, readers don’t just skim the page; they actually understand it on the first pass. And isn’t that the goal we’re all aiming for?