Financial‑times researchers flag a growing habit among U.S. public companies: stating actions are taken “with intention.” An AlphaSense scan found only 37 such mentions in Q1 earnings calls, but the frequency appears to be climbing. The trend surfaced across firms from Molson Coors to a faux Spanish lager named Madrí, prompting questions about corporate rhetoric and can sway analyst sentiment in quarterly reports.

Earlier uses seemed innocuous, such as Eastman Kodak’s Antonio Perez in a 2006 call, where “with intention” merely signaled a deliberate outcome. Modern examples, however, read like buzz‑speak: Chipotle, Starbucks, Levi Strauss, Best Buy, Gap, Tapestry and Hasbro all deployed the phrase, often without substantive detail, eroding credibility, raising doubts about the authenticity of their strategic narratives.

Analysts warn the jargon masks operational risk; saying a move is intentional offers no guarantee of strategic rigor and shifts blame onto “errors” rather than poor planning. Investors monitoring earnings calls should treat the phrase skeptically, focusing on concrete metrics instead of polished language. The uptick suggests a communication trend, not a substantive shift in governance. Stakeholders should demand clearer accountability.