Create Your Communications Experience

Leadership Communications - the Fundamental State

A leader grows into the "Fundamental State", according to Robert Quinn, and this is a concept we can apply to President Obama – and any new leader. In Obama's case, we could compare his effectiveness as a campaigner (Normal State) and his effectiveness as a leader now that he is President (Fundamental State). But maybe it's too soon in his leadership, but not too soon in his communications.

For we can apply the concept to speaking and communicating as well. We know that effective leaders are usually great communicators – the confidence of leadership often self-evident in confident behavior. This is generally true of Obama, with exceptions noted below. 

Robert E. Quinn is a University of Michigan professor who introduced the concept of the Fundamental State of Leadership – a heightened perspective, and one that’s inherent in all of us. Quinn's interesting concept appears in the Harvard Business Review, and it is relevant to business and politics…

“In the normal state people tend to stay within their comfort zones and allow external forces to direct their behaviors and decisions. They lose moral influence and often rely on rational argument and the exercise of authority to bring about change…the result is usually unimaginative and incremental – and largely produces what already exists. To elevate the performance of others, we must elevate ourselves into the fundamental state of leadership.”

We’ve all been there in our personal and professional lives – a time of crisis where we rise to the occasion and overcome the challenge. (For example President Bush leading us during 9/11, but not so much before or after.) If we force ourselves into the Fundamental State, rather than waiting for crisis to knock at our door, we'll get better and better. And so too is the case with communications. Quinn says that getting there requires a shift along four dimensions:

So, what does this mean for us as communicators?

1.   Don’t stick with what’s comfortable. Instead of standing in one place behind a lectern during a presentation, move and create energy. Actively pursue speaking engagements that push your comfort zone, where you can practice the behavioral skills of communication.

2.   Master the Natural Self – that special combination of your unique personality, mind, opinions and behaviors. Don’t become someone you’re not. Harnessing the Natural Self while communicating will increase your ability to connect with others, because you’re just being you – confident and relaxed.

3.   Create listener-focused messages. State early and openly the audience’s WIIFM – What’s In It For Me?, action steps and benefits.

4.   Read cues and adjust. Practicing is good, but not if you can’t adapt to external cues. Create an experience that’s specific to your audience – whether it’s one person, or one hundred.

 

Now in President Obama's case, let's hope his Normal State of communications (over dependence on the teleprompter, speaking in what I call 'Obama bursts', many 'ums' and 'ahs' in interview settings) will transform into the Fundamental State, where he can communicate more openly and skillfully, even though in unfamiliar territory.

The Green Light Approach

The Green Light Approach

Most successful people have a 'forward lean.'

In our Communicate To Influence program we draw a parallel to the Ready Position, a posture that comes from all types of athletics, where you are on the balls of your feet. You can't be back on your heels and be "ready" - ready to move fast in tennis, basketball, skiing - any sport. You have to always be fast on your feet to move in any direction.

In speaking, when you are habitually in the Ready Position you are physically and psychologically forward. You WANT to get out there and talk, and convince and influence - you can move!

My friend Ben Sottile has been CEO of several companies, and coined another name for moving forward that I've found very useful. He calls it the Green Light Approach. We all operate under one of the three traffic lights, and he advocates Green.

• Those who are ruled by the red light stop themselves - or never get started.
• Those who always see yellow are very cautious about making a move.
• But those who go for the green light are staunch advocates of their positions and DO move forward. While they certainly slow down if they see yellow - and stop at the red signals - they see life as a green light. Moving forward unless directed otherwise.

Same in communicating. Business would be vital and vibrant if more people had a forward lean and looked at communicating, much like life, as a green light.

The Visual Dominates - Mehrabian Revisited

There's been a lot of unfortunate controversy among communication professionals about Professor Albert Mehrabian's oft quoted research (below). It's good to have discussion though, for his research has altered the communicating landscape and has helped to get people out of the 'curse of knowledge.' Here are my thoughts and personal experience on the issue:

Mehrabian wrote the classic "Silent Messages" in 1981 (2nd Ed). From this book came the research that shows vocal and visual outweigh the verbal when you have a conflicted message. The weight is at the feeling level ('likability'), not at the informational level. His exact numbers were:

• Verbal      7%    (the word, or words, or message)
• Vocal     38%    (the sound of the voice)
• Visual    55%    (what people see)

For extensive background on the research detail and methodology see the links here. Olivia Mitchell did her usual thorough job of research also, although I disagree with her conclusions. And to not make this post too long, let me hit on what I think are the critical points.

1. Mehrabian's research was only on the inconsistent message! When your message and your tone and your look are one, are congruent - Mehrabian is irrelevant. He was measuring what the listener judged more important in 'liking' (and thus trusting, believing, being open to) when there was inconsistency and incongruence between the message and the behavior. This is the critical issue.

2. Many say that Mehrabian's findings mean content is worth 7% of the message and 'body language' is worth 93%. Totally wrong. The research was not at the information level. It was at the feeling level. And it just measured what channel the listener liked (trusted, believed) more than the other. Many bloggers have pointed this out by now - so hopefully at least that misinterpretation should be put to rest.

3. The visual dominates! The most important takeaway is that when there is an inconsistent message, the listener will overwhelmingly judge the visual cues more as to whether they like (trust and believe) the speaker. And realize all this happens at the unconscious level.

Let me amplify:

Dr. Mehrabian Interview
When I interviewed Dr. Mehrabian at his UCLA offices in Los Angeles in May of 1981 on his findings, I learned a lot.

Here is one of his quotes from my June, 1981 newsletter (no blogs in those days):

    "It's true we say that non-verbal is more important than the verbal when it comes to conveying emotions and attitudes. Now I cannot say to you non-verbally that my check book is in my desk drawer at home on the left hand side. That's information.
    "So we have to be very careful to make that distinction. But when we are talking on the emotional level, attempting to be persuasive, getting across information in an important way, here the non-verbal elements of our speech become more important in the impact that we have."

Which leads into one of my favorite findings:

People buy on emotion and justify with fact

In my book "You've Got To Be Believed To Be Heard" I write about the importance of the emotions - the feeling level - in all our communications. It is very powerful, and works at the First Brain (emotional brain, limbic system) level. And as I point out in my book, the eye sensory input is by far the most important nerve pathway to the emotional First Brain (25 times larger than auditory). Not only does the visual dominate, visual cues have a direct pathway to the unconscious brain.

In his book "Blink," Malcolm Gladwell talks about the adaptive unconscious (First Brain), and how important the enormous visual input is in making immediate and unconscious decisions. (In the first 2 seconds a police officer may have to decide to shoot or not - Gladwell calls it Thin Slicing.) We make those same decisions in communicating - in whether to believe someone or not.

So when you meet someone for the first time, the visual will dominate, and likability will be important to your openness to the person. If you don't like someone, you will tend to neither trust nor believe what they say. Likability has been proven to be the most significant factor in electing Presidents, or in any voting for that matter. (See also Tim Sanders book, "The Likeability Factor.") We tend to discount emotionally and unconsciously those we don't like. Doesn't matter how important or true the message is, it will tend to not be heard. Thus Mehrabian's findings are important to point the way to being better communicators.

Overcoming the 'curse of knowledge.'

In Chip Heath's great book "Made To Stick" he talks about how we - our society and all of us as communicators - are caught up in the 'curse of knowledge.' Starting in our academic system we are taught information reigns supreme - if we say the words people will get them. But it just isn't so. It takes more than words.

Mehrabian points the way for overcoming the 'curse of knowledge.' But there are so many other examples and proof points (I could write a book...  well actually, I did.) Suffice to say, when we speak we create a communications experience where people WILL get our message if we are trusted and believed. And enthusiastic and confident. And we connect and engage. If we are congruent with our message. And unfortunately most people communicating in business aren't congruent - when they are nervous, lack confidence, or otherwise sabotage their message with inappropriate vocal and visual cues. Those cues are what will be believed at the feeling, liking and unconscious level. That is what Mehrabian's research shows. And if you want a visual and vocal example, look at these clips from people who are at first nervous and then gain confidence.

The ladder is leaning against the wrong wall.

Much of the criticism of Mehrabian in recent blogs comes from his methodology - he was using still pictures, he combined two different experiments, etc. These interpretations miss the point. I think most statistical research can be faulted in some way - and as Mark Twain said, "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." But what is the essence of the findings? It is that the visual dominates at the feeling (liking) level, and that is the dominant factor in establishing trust and credibility. Which is critical in getting any message across.

I'll close this post with my personal experience that I think totally verifies Mehrabian. I founded Decker Communications, Inc. 30 years ago this year. We have trained and interacted with well over 100,000 people in 1 and 2 day "Communicate To Influence" programs. I have personally been involved with tens of thousands of our clients in coaching and training.

To my knowledge, there has not been an exception to:

• every participant coming in content-burdened and behaviorally-challenged in some way, exhibiting an inconsistent message.
• every participant gaining confidence and conscious control of behavioral skills - vocal and visual - that allowed them to give a more consistent and powerful message.
• ...and finally, there has not been an exception to any participant who did not agree with the substance of Mehrabian's findings after learning of the research intellectually, and then spending some time observing themselves on video, with feedback and coaching - and seeing how important a congruent message was.

Professor Albert Mehrabian has provided a great service to communicators who learn of, and apply, his work. Let not misinterpretations of that work diminish the importance of Mehrabian.

But PowerPoints are NOT Your Presentation

With all the recent emphasis on the design of your PowerPoints (Keynote for the Mac), it's time to revisit the fact that your visuals are NOT your presentation. You and your Point of View are the centerpiece. I think that the emphasis on PowerPoints (we'll call them PP for brevity) is because 2008 WAS a great year for great design with the publication of Garr Reynolds' book "Presentation Zen" and Nancy Duarte's "slide:ology" (both still best sellers on Amazon.) Make no mistake that having powerful and visual support materials is critical to your impact. But it's still your impact - it's not a PP.

Keep in mind that we're talking here about in-person presentations, not PP 'decks' that are designed to be used as a written report. Also, many major conferences think 'decks' when they ask their speakers to send in their PowerPoints in advance. Why? They are NOT their presentation! (This just happened to me, and I did it because the client IS the client. But it misses the point of the experience.)

Unfortunately we find that in about 95% of the cases for most speakers in business today their PP's are the centerpiece of their message. They create their content around their PP's, rather than figuring out what they want to say, and then using PP's, (and videos, and exercises, and SHARP's, etc.) to SUPPORT their presentation.

When it comes to persuasive impact in our communications, it is not through technology, but only with it. YOU are always the centerpiece of your presentation, and no graphically dazzling slide should ever replace you. Nor Twitter stream for that matter.

With all the advances in technology, we must continuously emphasize the critical importance of human confidence in the delivery as well as in the tools of delivery - the primary tool being yourself. With greater "high tech" we need a corresponding increase in "high touch." Think of using videos - embed them in your PPs. And experiment with a live Twitter stream - this can be distracting in a more formal speech but is great for tech/breakout/collaborative sessions. And remember that with this advanced technology and the many more options available for visual support, your confidence and control as the centerpiece has to be even more skilled.

Think of Steve Jobs and why his presentations are so powerful. (He led our Top Ten Communicators of 2005 list, even before the famous iPhone announcement, and was on the list most years since.) While he uses elegantly simple slides and perfectly timed and executed demos, he remains the center of the presentation. Often, (as at the top of the screen here) he will completely clear the screen (using a black slide - that's the way to do it) to keep the audience's attention on his energy, on his enthusiasm, and on his words. Not the PowerPoint's. (Or Keynote's in this case.)

Remembering that you are the presentation, develop visuals that enhance your point of view. After all, visuals are important:

• "I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand."    Cicero
• 55% of likability - critical component of trust - comes through the visual behavior of the speaker Mehrabian
• A 500% average increase in retention occurs when visuals are used in a presentation
• 83% of what we know is learned by seeing and observing

For your own personal and visual impact, see yourself on video. And when you get to support, for great tips on presentation design, check out Garr Reynold's blog Presentation Zen and Nancy Duarte's blog slide:ology.

Always keep in mind that you are your most important visual aid. Train yourself first so that you have a confidence that never quits in the face of new technology. And then add great design.

It's All About Them: How to take "you" out of the message

@kellydecker back here this week, inspired to write another post.

 

“It’s not you…it’s me.”

 

Relationship wise, maybe you’ve been the receiver of that message, or in George Constanza’s case, you invented it. One of my favorite Seinfeld moments below:

 

We’ve ALL actually been there – in fact, in our business communications, we’re guilty of being on the sender side. And it’s one of the single biggest problems with communications.

 

When we present (in a meeting, conference call or formal presentation) we think it is about us, and not about them. It’s not as if we consciously try to focus on me, me, me, but it sure comes off that way. It rears its ugly head in many ways. Maybe you’ve got a start-up, or a new product, or you’re trying to convince your exec team to pursue your initiative. You use those opportunities to prove yourself. In the words of Stuart Smalley, “You’re good enough. You’re smart enough. And gosh darn it, people like you.” So there you are with YOUR agenda in mind, why YOU think it’s great, and what it will do for YOU. And you’ve got a presentation that has nothing to do with listener.

 

A recent HarvardBusiness.org article on framing notes, “Individuals tend to focus on their own particular needs and on matters relating to their specific areas of expertise. In so doing, they may lose sight of the details that matter for the project they are currently working on.” In other words, you’re just too focused on you to worry about them.

 

Last Saturday I failed miserably doing this with my four-year-old. He came into my room to hang out as I was getting ready for a busy day with the kids. (Let me just take a moment to say that I really value my very rare alone time – those 20 minutes in the morning is one of those few calm, zen-like moments that I have all to myself.) I’m therefore none too happy with the intrusion, and say, “I REALLY want to finish getting ready alone right now, please go wait in the family room.” If I’m him, I’m thinking “That’s nice. What’s in it for me?” I shoulda coulda woulda said, “If you wait in the family room, I can get ready much more quickly so that we can go to the park sooner.” Same thing goes for your next pitch.

 

Focus on your listener. Now, really focus. Listeners are the centerpiece of our Decker Grid system – whether it’s 1, 15, 54 or 322 people to whom you’re speaking. Before you come up with the big “So what?” of your message, you should do a careful analysis of your listener. Ask a few questions:

1. Who are they? Why are they here?
2. How do they feel about you or your subject?
3. How will they support or challenge your idea?
4. Are they data or business (initiative) driven?
5. What’s in it for them (not just as a team or corporation, but individually as well)?

Once you’ve answered these questions, come up with the top three adjectives that describe your listener – things like: resistant, open, hostile, skeptical, friendly, budget-conscious, etc. Now you can think about the big picture, and the approach that you’ll use to move that specific listener from information to influence.

 

When it comes to communications, remember, “It’s you, it’s not me.”

 

BTW, Duarte Design does a great audience mapping exercise as part of their work as well – because they get it! It’s mentioned in their blog here.

The Teleprompter Strikes Again - A Tale of Two Leaders

Kelly Decker here - guest blogging today.

I'm a relatively new fan of Shel Holtz's blog, arriving there from somewhere the Twittersphere. Shel is a PR guru and writes extensively on communications and technology. Over the past week, he's been blogging on the Dominos debacle that you've probably seen, or, if you're like me, you heard about it and had no interest in actually watching someone stick cheese up their nose (but, if you're in the mood, you can see it here).

Shel's Wednesday post focused on the public apology by Domino's USA President, Patrick Doyle. He comments on the content of the apology specifically, and that it is unfortunately inconsistent with the facts of how Domino's actually handled the situation, and therefore is inauthentic. But even worse, and the reason for this post, is to point out the behavior that makes it inauthentic. And who is to blame?...The teleprompter.

Bert has blogged about the how the TP can kill a communications experience - and most notably for Obama - read about it here and here. And this is hilariously supported by at least 12 different Twitter profiles of Obama's Teleprompter - go ahead and do a Twitter search for "teleprompter" (my fav is @BOTeleprompter).

Back to Doyle...here's the apology: 

Two BIG problems here:

1. Lack of eye communication. The whole challenge we have as communicators is to engender trust and believability. Our listeners - one or 353,466 in this case (the number of views as of today) - must believe in us for our message to have impact. Eye communication is the #1 behavioral skill because it either makes or breaks our connection with that listener. Doyle should have been looking directly at the camera - addressing his audience to connect with them. Instead, he was talking to someone over in the corner of the room who was just making sure that he stuck to the script.

2. Corporate speak. It's a two-minute speech on which someone likely spent at least one sleepless night, followed by endless reviews by Legal, PR, Marketing, and others. Domino's customers just needed to hear something real - just talk to them.

Now, let's contrast this to another highly publicized corporate apology - this from David Neeleman, past CEO of JetBlue for major service issues in February of 2007. You'll find an almost polar opposite experience - mostly because he's not reading a thing. (Unfortunately this is clearly evidenced by his terrible ums and uhs - btw, please don't model this - it's the only significant hiccup here.) He looks directly at his audience, tells it like it is, and has a fantastic close asking for your trust and business.

So what? You may be sitting there saying, "Good thing I don't use a teleprompter." But these takeaways are applicable to you. Here's what you can do:

1. Mind your multitasking. We're sidetracked more than ever these days, and too often we're tweeting or emailing, or focusing somewhere else than on someone who is standing in our office or cube trying to discuss an issue. Guess what...you're Patrick Doyle. Put down the Blackberry/iPhone/etc., turn toward them and look them in the eye.

2. Be plain-spoken. The higher stakes a meeting or presentation, the more formal our tone, and we (our personalities) get completely lost in the process. Think conversational, and talk that way. You'll be more authentic, and only then will your message (the content you spent so much time on) be heard.

10 Steps to Make Your Meetings Better

Meetings - We all have 'em, can't live with 'em, and can't live without 'em.

BNET did a video interview with me on some key points to communicate more effectively through meetings.

Here are some additional tips we give to our clients at Decker Communications, Inc., where we train people to communicate effectively - I call them the 10 Steps to Better Meetings:

1. Cut the meetings you have in half. Cut the time of the meetings that remain in half.

This assumes you are the leader of the meetings. Unproductive talk and time will fill the space of long meetings - The Peter Principle in action.

2. Have an agenda.

Bullets only, direction driven, not "update" driven. It also helps to distribute in advance by email if you have time and access.

3. Be on time.

Start on time. Model your time at the beginning so people know you respect their time. Don't wait for stragglers, and don't catch up items for late comers (unless it happens to be the boss.)

4. Be controversial.

Not outlandish, but stimulate robust dialogue. The reason most meetings are boring is because most meetings are boring. As the meeting leader, it's up to you to make it interesting.

5. Have a focus, a Point Of View.

Meetings should not be primarily for updates and information exchange, but for action, discussion and direction.

6. Use intentional eye communication.

As a leader, look at everyone or they won't feel included. And when you want someone to speak up more, glance at them. Skillful eye communication can direct and influence without words.

7. Be energetic – voice, gestures.

The Shadow of the Leader. Your enthusiasm will drive others. And if you're not the leader, the more energy and interest you show the more likely you will become one.

8. Avoid Blackberry Abuse.

(See Bonus #1 below.) If you are not encouraging Twitter in your meeting, you must be interesting. If the meeting and you are interesting, people won't go to Twitter on their own, or their IM's and emails on their iPhones and Blackberrys. Set your ground rules for what you want to accomplish, and then accomplish it by relevance, vitality, energy and interest.

9. Drive to action steps.

Meetings should create actions, not informational data dumps. Be intentional.

10. End with a bang, not a whimper.

Most meetings peter out. Not only end with an action step(s), close it off with an upbeat quote, story or video clip. Be creative - and your meetings will be too.

Bonus #1: Decide whether or not you want to encourage people to Twitter during the meeting or not. (See Speakers - Be Aware Twitter Is Coming) It can be an interesting and engaging tool, or it can be a total disruption. Be intentional. Be smart.

Bonus #2: Get a Flip Video and record your meetings on video or DVD - put one up in the back of the room to see how you and others interact and behave. Observed behavior changes.

Bonus #2: Buy and read "Death By Meeting" by Patrick Lencioni, a great speaker and consultant. There is a plethora of good advice and concepts in his book that will change the way you run your meetings.

Obama Needs A Communications Coach, not a Speech Coach

OK, OK, Obama is a great communicator!?!

At least that's the general consensus. And I had him as #1 on our Top Ten Communicators of 2008!

So why do I say he needs a communications coach? He doesn't need a new speech writer - actually he has one of the best and that is where his strength is - his words and oratorical skills. But oratory is not all there is to communicating, particularly in these desperate times where trust is so important in our leaders. And this is where he needs a communications coach. He didn't ask, but here's some free advice:

• Less professorial, more leader - President Obama looks, acts and sounds like a leader in most of his formal speeches (except for his use of the Teleprompter, and see below.) But in his informal communication settings he reverts to his professorial background - measured slow phrases and long answers. Practice in improv and spontaneity skills would be great (not that I expect a U.S. President is going to do that.) But increasing thinking-on-your-feet mental agility would help.

• Get skilled with the teleprompter - Obama's preference is to always speak from a prepared text, written for him in most cases, so he is reading someone's words. And almost always by Teleprompter - it's a part of his traveling package. And he looks like he is watching a slow moving ping-pong game whenever he speaks in a formal setting. He looks to the left for 4 seconds, then to the right for 4 seconds, and so on. (More examples here.) Watch him Tuesday night. No variation - which shocks me. It also shocks me that not that many people notice when I mention it. But they will - it becomes monotonous and distracting, and over time the unconscious will become the conscious in the public's experience of Obama's speech reading. (Unless he reads this and gets some training - teleprompter use can be seamless.)

• Less ums, more eyes - In interview settings particularly, and other informal communication situations he has a lot of non-words (ums and ahs) and his eyes cast down more often than not. These are not the hallmark behaviors of a leader. Pausing and looking directly, always, will correct these confidence leaking distractions.

Watch him Tuesday night - he does not yet approach Reagan or Clinton, yet with a little coaching...

Sully: Authority and Authenticity

Eloquent in his brevity in his first speech (21 seconds long) after the 'Miracle on the Hudson' crash landing, Capt. Chesley 'Sully' Sullenberger just had his first lengthy interview on '60 Minutes.' His legend continues.

There are many perspectives to analyze, laud and talk about when we consider this unique hero. It's the intention here to emphasize how the 'communication experience' Sully creates is that which reflects the man accurately. It is so rare that happens when a man or woman is NOT trying to make a 'presentation.'

He was uniquely brief in his first (of many) ceremonies honoring him, which reflects perhaps why he was also uniquely brief in his communications with the air traffic controllers when under intense pressure to pilot his aircraft to escape disaster. And he did it.

"I was sure I could do it," he said to Katie Couric in the interview - and we believed him. And we believed him throughout this long (for him) interview. (See complete 60 Minutes here.) When Sully said he had to 'force himself to use his training to force calm on the situation' Katie asked, "Was that a hard thing to do?" Sully replied, "No, it just took some concentration."

So cool, so task oriented (thank God) and so even in temperament. Is he a machine? No - and I (we) teared up along with him when his eyes filled as he reflected on the human lives involved, and the humanity effected by this epic event.

Captain Chesley Sully Sullenberger is a hero, deservedly so. He is uncomfortable with carrying this mantel, by his own admission And yet he acknowledged that this is a time where we want and need heroes - men and women of character and integrity that we can look to for guidance. People need to be inspired by role models who have authority and authenticity, and Sully Sullenberger has that. And he communicates that.

I truly hope that he sees his role now not in flying airplanes, but in using his new platform to teach us a thing or two about discipline, teamwork and leadership. I hope he continues to motivate people in his communications - he is so naturally good at it. Brief yet always making a point, getting out of his own way, and showing a slight smile with great eye contact. He connects. With authority and authenticity.

Sully, we want more...

Six Don'ts for the End of Your Presentations

Seth Godin had a nice post today on "Sorry, we're out of time." But there's more to it than that:

Even strong speakers can undercut a whole presentation with multiple endings, or a few seconds of wobbly indecision at the end.  Those last few seconds amount to the last important picture people remember of you.  Watch your body language.

Not even Patrick Henry’s “Give me liberty…” line can bail you out if you act nervous, disgusted, insincere or hurried.  For example:

1. Don’t step back.  If anything, take a half-step toward your listeners at the end.  Don’t step back verbally, either, by softening your request to “I surely hope something…” or worse, “There seems to be a need…”  Keep saying “we” and “you” to the end.

2. Don’t look away.  Some people harken back to the last visual-aid, as if for reinforcement.  Some people look aside, unwilling to confront listeners head-on at the last words, the murmured “thank you,” or the instant of silence that follows.  Stay with them.

3. Don’t move on the last word.  Hold still for a half-beat after the “you” in “thank you.”  You don’t want to look anxious to get out of there.  If anything, you want to let people know you’ve enjoyed being with them and are sorry you have to go.  Don’t rush off. 

4. Don't raise your hands.  In our seminars, we recommend “clean and firm endings” to actually show people you’re finished.  You must “let them go” visually.  If you keep your hands up at waist level, you look as if you have something more to say.  You’re still “holding them.”  (You can see this same phenomenon in one-on-one seated conversations:  the person whose hands are up still “holds the floor” and the listener will not begin talking until the hands themselves are finished.)  In speaking, think of yourself as the gracious host or hostess as you drop your hands with an appreciative “thank you.”  That image prompts you to be warm and natural. 

5. Don’t rush to collect your papers. Or visual aids, or displays.  Stop and chat with people if the meeting is breaking up, then begin to tidy up in a calm, unhurried manner.  Otherwise you might be contradicting your calm, confident demeanor as a presenter.

6. Never blackball yourself with a critical grimace, a shake of the head, eyes rolled upward, a disgusted little sigh.  So what if you’re displeased with yourself?  Don’t insult your audience by letting them know you were awful; they probably thought you were pretty good.  Remember the audience only gets what you give them. One lip curl in those last three seconds can wreck 30 minutes of credibility.

So as the @Jack, the founder of Twitter says: "Close with precision!"