Use the active voice. Nearly every writing handbook offers that standard advice.

The active voice (when the subject performs the action) is preferable to the passive voice (when the subject receives the action) because the active voice is more concise and direct.

Compare "I handled the account," for example, with "The account was handled by me."

To choose the active voice over the passive voice makes particularly good sense in business writing, where the preferred style is one of emphasis and vigor.

Well, it is good advice as far as it goes, but it doesn't go far enough. I would amend it this way: Prefer the active voice--unless you have a good reason to use the passive voice.

Here are five situations in which the passive voice is more effective than the active. Use the passive voice:

To emphasize the receiver of the action.

Compare "Our employees routinely disregard the new quality control procedures" with "The new quality control procedures are routinely disregarded by our employees."

The active voice would be preferable in a paragraph on the employees, whereas the passive voice would be preferable in a paragraph on the new quality control procedures.

The question to ask yourself is, where do you want your emphasis? When the receiver of the action is more important than the performer, use the passive voice.

To deemphasize the performer of the action.

Compare "Our engineers have installed a more powerful CPU to give you faster processing" with "A more powerful CPU has been installed to give you faster processing."

When there is no advantage in the reader's knowing the performer of the action, use the "truncated" passive voice, in which the performer--"our engineers"--is dropped from the sentence.

Likewise, when the performer of the action is either unknown or relatively unimportant, use the truncated passive. (Compare "Everyone `round the world heard the shot" with "The shot was heard `round the world.")

To avoid responsibility.

Compare "You mishandled the account" with "The account was mishandled." When the active voice seems indiscreet or calls unwanted attention to the performer of a negative action, use the "diplomatic" passive.

To create smooth connections between sentences.

Compare these two passages:

"Management must decide whether it will insist on more flexibility in hiring part-time workers. The likelihood that the unionized workers will strike should influence its decision."

"Management must decide whether it will insist on more flexibility in hiring part-time workers. Its decision should be influenced by the likelihood that the unionized workers will strike."

When the active voice breaks the flow of thought from the previous sentence, use the passive voice.

To maintain a consistent viewpoint or sequence of subjects.

Compare these two passages:

"Our auditors have reviewed our accounting practices and found them to be adequate. We should convey this to our investors. The capital they provide allows us to operate."

"Our accounting practices have been reviewed and found to be adequate. These findings should be conveyed to our investors, who provide us with operating capital."

When the active voice creates a disjointed sequence of subjects, use the passive voice.

So the next time you are criticized for using the passive voice--by either a human reader or a computer-programmed grammar checker--don't submit passively to the indictment. Ask your critic to comment on whether your use of the passive isn't justified under one of the five situations described above.

If your critic gives you a puzzled look or responds with a blank screen, you may want to stand behind your choice. After all, why would the passive voice exist if it served no useful function?