When NATO Spelling Is So Last Year
“B as in Bravo…
No, not D…
Sorry, B as in Bravo.”
If you’ve ever worked in sales, customer service, or a call centre, you’ve lived this moment more times than you can count.
For decades, the NATO phonetic alphabet has been the unofficial glue holding together bad phone lines, accents, and awkward spelling exchanges. It was clever. It was practical. It was also designed for radio operators in the 1950s.
In 2026, it’s showing its age.
The hidden cost of spelling things out on calls
Spelling an email address or name over the phone seems harmless. Normal, even. But it carries real, measurable downsides:
- Calls take longer than they should
- Momentum drops while details are repeated
- Customers feel awkward or embarrassed asking for repeats
- Agents burn cognitive energy on transcription instead of problem-solving
- Errors creep in — especially with unfamiliar names or domains
Most lost deals and failed service interactions don’t end with a clear “no”. They quietly die during moments like this.
Accents, language, and inclusion (the part mission statements skip)
Many organisations proudly talk about diversity and inclusion. Fewer stop to examine whether their systems actually support people from different cultural and linguistic backgrounds.
If your process assumes:
- Clear audio
- Shared accents
- Confidence spelling English words aloud
Then it works best for only a narrow slice of people.
For everyone else, it adds friction — or worse, quiet disengagement.
True inclusion isn’t about slogans. It’s about making it easy to be understood without effort or embarrassment.
Why NATO spelling feels outdated now
The phonetic alphabet was a workaround. A smart one — for its time.
But today:
- We all have browsers in our pockets
- Typing is faster and more accurate than speaking letters
- People expect digital support alongside voice, not instead of it
If someone still needs to say “underscore”, “double-u”, or “dot com” three times in a row, that’s a sign the workflow hasn’t evolved.
Workarounds feel normal… until you remove the need for them.
A simpler approach: let people type, not struggle
Modern call support doesn’t need to replace voice. It just needs to support it at the right moment.
Tools like EOV6 introduce a temporary, secure chat alongside a live call so that:
- Names, emails, and numbers are typed once
- Details are confirmed instantly
- The call keeps its momentum
- Data disappears when the session ends
No accounts. No downloads. No long explanations.
Just clarity, when clarity matters most.
Calls will always drop. Confusion doesn’t have to
Phones cut out. Accents vary. Background noise happens.
Relying entirely on voice for critical details is no longer necessary — and increasingly, it’s a risk.
The question isn’t whether NATO spelling still works. It’s whether it should still be the default.
Final thought
If your customers still have to spell their email address like they’re calling in an airstrike, your system hasn’t caught up with reality.
Progress doesn’t always look dramatic. Sometimes it’s just removing friction we stopped noticing.