Life After PowerPoint!

In yesterday’s post I wrote that one of the best ways to avoid being boring is to be interested yourself in what you’re talking about (and about life in general).

And I mentioned a talk by a ranger at the Carlsbad Caverns about bats as an example.

Here’s another example. Bonnie Bassler is talking about bacteria. Bacteria! You would think — at least I would — that it’s one of the least interesting topics in the world. It’s certainly not a topic I thought I would be willing to listen to for 18 minutes. And yet once she started talking, she hooked me.

She was interesting for many reasons.

1. She used graphics well. Meaning she used few of them and they were illustrations that clearly depicted what she was talking about.
2. She was articulate. (I love listening to someone who speaks so clearly and fluidly.)
3. And she was clear. I, who barely scraped by my college chemistry and biology classes, understood everything she said.

But what made her most interesting is the fact that she herself was interested in what she was talking about. This woman loves bacteria. And it shows. And her fascination was contagious.

Check it out:

By the way, I loved her vocal pacing. Yes, she talked fast. But so what? To me it conveyed enthusiasm and vitality. And it never kept me from understading anything she said. I think her talk is a masterful example of a technical presentation.

What do you think?

“I don’t know the key to success,” Bill Cosby said, “but the key to failure is trying to please everybody.”

In like manner, I’d say I don’t know one key to success as a presenter — I can think of many — but I’m sure of this: The key to failure is to bore people.

When you bore people — whether you’re speaking to one other person or to a full auditorium — they’ll shut down. They will disengage. They will turn their attention elsewhere. They will stop caring, if they ever did in the first place. As a result, they will NOT do what you want them to. If you bore them badly enough, they will actively resist doing what you want them to.

To avoid boring people:

1. Be clear.
   The easiest way to bore people is to confuse them. Explain your ideas and your terms so your audience immediately (or almost immediately) understands what you’re talking about. Break your concepts down into parts (either elements of a whole or steps in a procedure) and work through them in a logical way.
2. Be relevant.
   Show your audience how your ideas affect them. People are already overwhelmed with too much information and with too many responsibilities. Their first line of defense is to disregard anything that doesn’t directly affect them. (Think of how you sort through your email every day. Do you read everything? Or do you trash items, whether they’re spam or not, that don’t have some direct effect on your life?)
3. Be brief.
   Studies show that people’s attention tends to drift after ten minutes. So you have two options. First, get in and out quickly. It’s amazing how much you can accomplish in a short — 10-minutes-or-less — presentation. Speak for 7 or 8 minutes and take questions for a couple of minutes. Or second, break your longer presentation into 10-minute chunks.
4. Be interested.
   Your enthusiasm — or lack of it — can be contagious. I’ve been fascinated by issues that I had no prior interest in simply because the speaker was so fascinated by them. I was, for example, enthralled by a talk by a park ranger at Carlsbad Caverns who was talking about bats. She didn’t inspire me to go out and learn more about bats, mind you, but she did give me a new appreciation for them.
5. Be physical.
   People have the physical capacity to remain engaged only for so long and under certain conditions. If they are jet lagged, if they have already endured three 10-hour days of training or of meetings, if are hungry or tired or struggling with the 2 PM blues, if they were bored to tears by the presenter who preceded you, give them a break. You can’t engage their minds when their bodies have thrown in the towel. Do something — postpone or reschedule your talk, provide a rest break or a snack, or have them stand up and stretch — to get people’s bodies reengaged.

What are your strategies or techniques for keeping people engaged? What do you do if you find that your audience’s attention is drifting?

Paul Tilich, a well-respected Protestant theologian of the 20th century, once said:

“The fatal pedagogical error is to throw answers, like stones, at the heads of those who have not yet asked the questions.”

My paraphrase is this: The fatal presentation error is to throw solutions, like stones, at the heads of those who have not yet realized the problem.

Figuring out why the audience would want to do what you want them to is the main question you have to ask yourself during the planning phase. And the easiest way to answer that question is to discover how your idea will help them solve a problem.

Many presentations are designed just this way. It’s such a common format that it even has a name: “the problem/solution model.” But here’s the problem with the model — all too often presenters mention the problem in passing only to jump to the solution.

Here’s my suggestion instead. Make them hurt. Or at least make your listeners understand the problem and feel its pain.

Your proposal — your solution — will require people to invest some time or energy. You want them to do something with what you’re proposing, right? It will cost them. So they will resist, until and unless they realize how much the current situation — the problem — is already costing them.

So if you’re building your presentation around a solution, be mighty sure that your listeners understand the problem and feel its pain. Then, and only then, start talking about your idea, your solution. Just make sure that the pain (time, energy, etc.) of adopting and implementing your solution is less than the pain of not changing.

Do you spend much time talking about the problem and its associated pain? If so, do you have any suggestions or advice about how to do it well?

Photo courtesy of Martin Dougiamas at Flickr.

I believe that your message — your big idea, the structure, the stories, the images and metaphors, the words, the phrasing, the cadence, the rhythm, and sometimes even the rhyme — are what give your speech its greatest impact. (I’m taking for granted, mind you, that your message is in sync with who you are and with what you believe. And that it addresses the concerns of the particular audience you’re addressing.)

You can either write out your speech word for word, or outline it and talk it over again and again until you’ve refined and polished what you want to say and how you’re going to say it. It’s a rare person who can simply rough something out and wing it with any success.

All that preparation — either writing it out or talking it through repeatedly — is what makes memorizing your material relatively easy. For two reasons.

First, you’ve thought it through and it makes sense to you. The pieces tie together. It’s got an inner logic and flow. You believe it, you understand it, and you’ve internalized it. That’s 90% of memorizing. It’s what we used to call “learning by heart.”

And second, the words and phrases express just exactly what you believe. You’re not adopting someone else’s language or trying to sound impressive. You’re expressing your thoughts in a way that is both simple and clear, and if done right, elegant. If you’re having trouble remembering your main point, it’s probably because you haven’t expressed it well. Don’t berate yourself for having a poor memory. Try expressing your point in a way that makes more sense to you.

It only makes sense to memorize parts of your speech if (1) there’s a lot riding on it, or (2) you can recycle bits and pieces of it in later speeches.

Do you agree / disagree that content is what gives a speech the most impact? What are your thoughts about memorizing?

Photo, “Message in a Bottle,” courtesy of Mykl Roventine at Flickr.

Yesterday I wrote about the reasons why you should not memorize a speech. And then in my typical and, to some, irritating fashion of doing exactly what I tell other people not to do, I admitted that I memorize much  of most speeches I give. And I asked you to consider doing the same.

There are prosaic reasons for memorizing parts of your speech — like your opening and closing, for example — as I wrote yesterday. But there are other, less pragmatic reasons for memorizing what you want to say.

A word to hardnosed realists: I’m about to launch off onto a purely philosophical disquisition, a speculative inquiry.

A speech — a good one, at least — engages the memory and the imagination, the two most fundamental markers of what it means to be human.

Memory is our storehouse, a database of what we’ve experienced and learned. Without memory we are quite literally ignorant. We’re incapable of functioning, incapable of loving or of being faithful, incapable of gaining wisdom.

A speech engages our memories in two ways. First, it calls upon what is already stored there. We simply cannot understand, much less care about, something we have no — absolutely no — prior knowledge of. And, second, it adds to our memories. It gives us something — data, information, a way of thinking — we don’t already possess.

There’s a reason why, in Greek mythology, Memory (Mnemosyneis) is the mother the nine Muses, the patrons or personifications of the arts and sciences.

Our imaginations, on the other hand, are the capacity to create something new from what we already possess. Memory by itself locks us into doing the same things we’ve always done in the same way we’ve always done them. Imgination, like Red Bull, gives us wings. It sets us free to envision something new, something different.

Any speech worth listening to bounces back and forth between memory and imagination, between the familiar and the fanciful, between what’s known and what’s original. And the bouncing back and forth is where magic happens.

Since a good speech engages the audience’s memory — I wonder — shouldn’t it also engage the speaker’s memory?

In future posts, I’ll return to firmer ground. And I’ll offer suggestions about how you can memorize parts of your speeches, if you so choose.

What do you think? Have I totally launched into woo-woo land, or am I onto something?

There are so many good reasons not to memorize a speech.

First, memorizing a speech can rob you of spontaneity, the ability to react in the moment to the audience and to any unforeseen event.

Second, memorizing a speech can put distance between you and your audience. It’s as if you’re reading from a teleprompter in your mind. You may be making eye contact with your audience, but you’re actually looking at them through a scrolling text in your memory.

Third, memorizing a speech can trip you up. When you’re nervous, your body prepares itself to fight or to run away by sending blood and oxygen to the large muscles. It diverts that blood and oxygen from the higher regions of the brain, which govern verbal skills and memory.  So you’re more apt to forget what you were going to say. Which makes you more nervous. Which makes you even less able to remember.

Those are some of the reasons why most speech coaches will advise you against memorizing a speech.

I, myself, often advise my clients against memorizing their speeches. And yet I memorize much, if not most, of every speech I give. And I’d like to suggest you consider doing so yourself.

Here are the parts of a speech I tend to memorize and recommend you memorize.

The Structure or Outline of the Speech
You should be able to remember the main points of your speech from your introduction through your main points to your conclusion.

The Transitions
The weakest points of most speeches are the transitions, how you segue from one major point to the next. (It’s the point where speakers most frequently forget what they’re going to say next.) So work out a sentence or two that connects one point to the next, and memorize it.

The Opening
The first words out of your mouth – okay, the first 30 or 40 words – are the second most important words of your speech. Don’t leave them to chance or to the inspiration of the moment. Work them out in advance, practice them, and memorize them.

The Closing
The last words out of your mouth are the most important words of your speech. They require even more attention than your opening.

The Stories
Stories gain their power and their punch, in part, by the right selection of detail, by phrasing, and my making every word count.

Key Phrases and Sentences
Every quotable line from every memorable speech – from “give me liberty or give me death” through “ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country” — was painstakingly constructed. If you want your main points to be clear, to have impact, and to be remembered, you need to craft them carefully and memorize them. (In Lend Me Your Ears, Max Atkinson examines four rhetorical techniques you can use to make audiences applaud and remember what you say.)

John Kinde, a humorist and professional speaker I admire, offers much the same advice in his article titled “Should You Memorize a Speech?”

One of the questions this raises is, of course, what I mean by memorizing. But that’s the topic for a later post.

Do you memorize any part of your speeches? Do you see any value in it? Does memorizing help or hinder?

Photo courtesy of National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism.

You’ve undoubtedly heard it claimed that the meaning of your message is communicated by:

• Your words — 7%
• Your tone of voice — 38%
• Your body language — 55%.

Well, don’t believe it.

Olivia Mitchell at Speaking about Presenting always has interesting and insightful things to say about presenting. She’s done a masterful job this week describing the research (performed by Albert Mehrabian in the 1960′s) that gives rise to that claim.

She’s also examined how the research has been misinterpreted and misapplied ever since. I couldn’t do justice to what she has written by summing it up, so please read for yourself her original post (be sure to check out the comments) and her follow-up post.

Max Atkinson, whose blog is also always worth reading, addresses the same study and rebuts its most common misinterpretations. See his comments on “Body Language and Non-Verbal Communication.”

Bert Decker offers his analysis, which differs from what both Olivia and Max write (and from what I believe). But it’s well worth reading.

My previous post in which I questioned the effectiveness of videotaping people’s presentations drew quite a response — entirely from speech coaches and trainers.

To a person they all extolled the value of taping presentations on the condition that it was done properly. (Properly = the coach / trainer sets the right tone, creates a safe environment, and provides supportive criticism.)

They disagreed with my assertion that taping increases people’s nervousness. They said that, on the contrary, it boosts people’s confidence. People see (and hear) themselves and think “I’m not as bad as I thought.”

There’s no real agreement among them about whether taping people puts more emphasis on delivery than on content.

Most of them — okay, all of them — absolutely see value in videotaping.

Since so many of my peers think so highly of taping presentations — one of them can’t even imagine a speech coach not doing so — I decided to do some research.

I went on line in search of peer-reviewed articles, figuring that someone must have studied the questions I raised. And lo and behold I found — and read — quite a few pieces. (I’ve included the links to the articles and dissertations below, for your reading pleasure.)

All of the pieces come from academia. Academicians studied the use of videotaping in beginning-level college speech classes under a variety of conditions. (Those conditions did not, for the most part, match the conditions my peers consider essential.) The studies are dated. Some of them are at least 40 years old. And, as with most academic papers, the authors drew tentative conclusions and then immediately listed a number of qualifications.

All of the studies report that students who were videotaped increased their confidence, sometimes significantly — with two exceptions:

1. Beginning students who were taped at the start of the course tended not to become more confident, and
2. Students who were highly anxious about giving speeches tended not to become more confident. On the contrary, they tended to become more anxious and, as a result, to speak less well.

Most of the studies report that students who were videotaped improved their delivery.

The studies that examined other factors conclude that students who were videotaped did not significantly improve the content or intelligibility of their speeches.

Two studies report that students who were videotaped rated both their instructors and their classes more favorably than students who weren’t videotaped.

So I can understand why other coaches and trainers tape their clients. Doing so clearly helps most people become more confident and improve their delivery. With the right people and under the right conditions, videotaping is a valuable tool.

That’s not to say, mind you, that I’ll start videotaping my clients more frequently.

Over the years — decades, really — of teaching, professional speaking, and coaching, I’ve come up with a theoretical model, an approach, and a set of tools that I use. The entire package is idiosyncratic, mind you. It’s based on my experience, education, training, outlook, strengths, preferences, and personality. I’ve also developed a very specific client profile. My approach doesn’t enjoy universal acclaim, sadly, or work with everyone. But it helps the clients I attract achieve their goals.

Videotaping is one tool in my toolbox. It’s a tool I use only occasionally, but at times it is exactly the right tool.

Here are the links I promised:

Providing Feedback on Student Speeches: The Research on Effective Oral and Written Feedback Strategies

Effects of Videotape on Performance, Attendance, and Attitude in the Fundamentals of Speech Communication Course

Instructional and Extracurricular Use of Video-Tapes

The Effects of Videotaping on Student Performances in the Basic Communication Course

Communication Apprehension and the Use of Video-Tapes

Videotaping: Relationship between Communication Apprehension and Self-Concept

Effects of videotape on attendance and attitude in the fundamentals of speech communication course

A Comparative Study of Audio and Video Taping Techniques as Teaching Tools for Self Discovery in the Basic Speech Course

The impact of self-directed videotape feedback on students’ self-reported levels of communication competence and apprehension

An Experimental Study of the Relative Pedagogical Effectiveness of Videotape and Audiotape Playback of Student Speeches for Self-Analysis in a Basic Speech Course

Photo courtesy of deeners at Flickr.

2 Types of Clients Who Benefit from Being Taped

Sometimes I think I’m the only speech coach who has a bias against videoing clients. But there are two types of clients I do video and whom I think benefit from being taped.

First, there are the accomplished speakers who want to fine tune their delivery. They have already mastered skills and strategies that I consider more important than delivery. They are confidently and comfortably themselves in front of an audience. They connect with their audiences in a way that wins their trust. And they consistently have a powerful message — an idea that has the ability to change people’s lives, expressed in just the right words. Letting them see themselves in action — videoing them and reviewing it with them sometimes in slow motion or in fast forward –can help them get even better.

Second, there are speakers who think they don’t need to improve but do. You can’t watch a video of yourself giving a speech — even, or especially, if you think you’re a great speaker — without seeing your flaws. So when I work with clients who have been referred to me but who think they don’t need help, I video them and let them see themselves in action. (I’ve only had to do this twice in all my years of coaching, by the way.) On both occasions the person relented. I’d like to say they became willing clients, but all I can say is they became less resistant.

3 Reasons Not to Video a Presentation

1. Taping makes you more self-conscious / less confident.

Can you watch a video of yourself giving a speech and not cringe? I can’t. And neither can most of the people I work with. Listening to our own voice on tape is painful enough. (Our voices always sound higher and less resonant on a recording.) But seeing and hearing ourselves can be unnerving.

The most common response to watching ourselves on tape – the dominant takeaway – is a version of “I suck.” Am I really that fat? Look at the stupid expression on my face. What am I doing with my hands? Why am I rocking back and forth on my feet? I’ll never wear that outfit again. Can you believe how many times I say “You know”?

And this experience usually isn’t helped by the person or by the people reviewing the tape with you. Experienced coaches try their best to help you see what you’re doing well, not just the “things you might want to work on.” But if you’re like most people, you’ll only hear and remember – and brood over– the negative.

It only gets worse if you’re taped in a class or a training session and made to review the tape along with everyone else. Your fellow participants usually don’t focus (or comment) on your strengths. They tend to zero right in on what doesn’t work. They’re not trying to be critical or negative. They think they’re being helpful. But they’re confirming or intensifying your self-appraisal: You suck.

So here’s the problem. Becoming more self-conscious tends to make you less confident. And becoming less confident tends to make you a less effective speaker.

It’s my job as a speech coach to build your confidence – not to tear it down — by giving you the tools, skills, and mindset to make you a more effective speaker.

2. Taping emphasizes externals.

Looking at yourself on tape giving a presentation only lets you observe — and focus on — externals: How you look and move and sound. It doesn’t get to the heart of the matter: What you’re thinking and feeling and experiencing and wanting to accomplish.

But if you change what you’re doing on the outside without addressing what’s going on inside — what’s motivating or giving rise to your actions — any change you make is going to be, at best, temporary, and, at worst, artificial.

If you see yourself, for example, pinching your elbows to your sides while swinging your arms in and out (what I call “the flapping chicken”), you may work on not doing that. But doing so doesn’t address the deeper question. Why are you doing something in front of the audience that you don’t normally do? If you’re nervous, maybe you should focus on developing your confidence not on how you move your arms. Because when you’re at ease, you will tend to move more naturally. (Also, the more attention you give to a physical action, the less attention you’ll give to your audience or to your message.)

There’s usually a reason why you do what you’re doing. It may not be a great reason or a logical reason or a helpful reason, and you may not even be aware of what it is. But it’s your reason. And until you understand it and change it, you can’t change your actions. At least, not for the long haul.

3. Taping overvalues delivery.

OK, here’s where I part company with most speech coaches. I think delivery is one of the least important elements of a speech.

There are four elements of a great speech, according to Demosthenes: 1) the person of the speaker, 2) the event itself, 3) a compelling message, and 4) a masterful delivery.

Of course, delivery is important. Great ideas can wither and die because they’re poorly delivered. And stupid ideas get more attention than they deserve because they’re well delivered. So delivery is important. It’s just less important than other elements — elements that don’t get observed while reviewing a video.

Be authentically yourself and earn the right to speak through your experience, education, and character. Know and care about the audience — when and where and why they’re gathering and what they want from you. Craft and polish a message that is worthy of attention. If you do those things, I think your delivery will — for the most part — take care of itself.

Surely I’ve said enough to stir up some controversy. What do you think? I’m sure there are legitimate reasons to video a presentation and review it that I’ve overlooked. What are they? Are there other reasons not to video a presentation? Does delivery deserve more respect than I’m giving it?

Photo courtesy of thparkth at Flickr.