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.

Open Communication - Now and Forever?

 (UPDATE: See this clip from CNN 6/20/09, 4 days after I wrote the following post. They now call it "the Internet Revolution.")

The Iran protests and Twitter's hand in dramatically showing that an oppressive regime can no longer censor dissent may have changed communications forever.

Ahmadinejad's regime thought they had shut down all social media sites and Iranian ISP's even before the election. But they couldn't do it. With Twitter leading the charge, onsite observers sent hundreds of thousands of instant messages, videos and pictures through Twitter, Facebook and YouTube. The world perhaps watched even more intently because of this dramatic, historic and new communications experience - the perfect storm.

The Open Medium

Could a simple little message distribution system like Twitter have such profound change. I think so, and others like The Nation agree.

Twitter is the first truly open social media that I know of. Count the ways:

• In the news. Iran is not the first example of people flocking to Twitter to get their news immediately and unfiltered. The Miracle on the Hudson was just one of countless breaking news examples. And it was pressure from Twitter on the first day of the protests (last Saturday) that forced CNN to increase their coverage of the riots and discontent. 
• Open relationships. It's no coincidence that Twitter cannot be suppressed, technically as well as behaviorally. The culture of Twitter insists on open, not closed; free not censored; share not take. I personally am amazed at the real relationships I have built through Twitter with people from all walks and seasons of life: @speli (a new friend from the last week, several common interests including Iran), @ChrisSpagnuolo (acquaintance who became close friend), @Ed (an inspiring story, but for another time), @MichaelHyatt (top CEO who has become a friend with great insights/info), and the list goes on... Only because of vulnerability on both sides. Unique. Culturally driven.
• Those who succeed at Twitter are NOT those who Block their Updates. Twitter, and all Social Media, are for those who engage and share with others - insights, information, ideas, links, and actually, their lives. Blocked updates are an antithesis to Twitter - why take the time to join? There are other means of communicating privately - it's not on Twitter.
• Thus many corporations are going to have to change. As I've been advocating social media to high level clients and executives (often white, male and boomers) I've been talking to those experienced in control and hierarchy. I'll never forget the lesson learned several years ago, talking to a potential client (Fortune 100) who wanted us to help his direct reports be trained to write speeches and read them - so he personally could edit them in advance. We disagreed then. We didn't get that job. And it was in a different era, but many are still living in it.
• Philosophy in social media. Both Twitter and Facebook have made some decisions that backfired - and the immediate response from their millions of members changed their policies. Instantly. This is new - it used to take days and weeks to build pressure on media or institutions to change, if they even would change. Now it's instant, and responsive - open listening.

Perhaps communication has changed forever. It will be fascinating, and valuable for reasons beyond politics, to see how the Iran crisis plays out. My guess is that Twitter will go down as integral to the end result.

And more importantly, it may now be impossible for a repressive, censoring regime to succeed in any country. Or any company for that matter. How can you censor when people can connect openly with each other.

I think Twitter has changed the communications game. What do you think?

Interview on Speaking, Obama and Twitter

Good friend and communicator Chris Spagnuolo has a great blog called Edgehopper (that's his frog above) - and he was nice enough to interview me. In case you missed it:

Ten Questions with Bert Decker

(1) In your book “You’ve Got to Be Believed to Be Heard” you refer to “The New Communicators”. Can you explain what a new communicator is? Can you give an example of your favorite New Communicator?

New communicators connect with EVERY audience – no matter the setting – in:

• behavior

• content

• interaction

In our Decker Method courses we call it the messenger, the message and the medium – they all are one. A new communicator creates a communication experience that is energized and action oriented.

Three great New Communicators are Steve Jobs (business world), Guy Kawasaki (tech/author world) and Bono (celebrity world.)

(2) So, that covers the good communicators. Who would say is having the most trouble these days as a communicator and why?

• Richard Fuld, Lehman Brothers CEO – closed, arrogant and aloof when he testified to Congress.

• Caroline Kennedy – she lost her bid for the NY Senate seat with a monotone, halting delivery, unfocused message and a mess of ‘ums’ and ‘ahs.’

• Timothy Geithner – stiff and cold. He is not a good messenger for this very important and controversial message.

(3) There has been so much said about Barack Obama’s oratory skills in the past year. Would you consider Barack Obama to be a New Communicator?

No, he’s a good orator, not a great communicator. I’ve reviewed him often (check out Bert’s review here) and it’s fascinating – Obama is President largely because of his 2004 Convention speech, but he STILL does not use the teleprompter well (here’s Bert’s detailed take on Obama’s use of the teleprompter) And when not speechifying, he usually communicates in a professorial manner, with a halting cadence, and also many ums and ahs. Occasionally he is energetic and open and light – but rarely. So ironically, the one who became President because of communication (read oratorical) skills needs to increase his connecting skills.

(4) If you could give one bit of advice to Mr. Obama, what would it be?

• Learn to use the teleprompter so it’s not a ping-pong match – 4 seconds to one side and 4 seconds to the other.

• Leave pauses instead of filling space with non-words.

• Vary rhythm and pacing of voice – energize not professorialize.

(5) You have become a fixture on Twitter in the past year (BTW, I love your Tweets). How do you see the rise of social media tools like Twitter and Facebook impacting communications over the next few years?

I see Twitter (not Facebook) as the dominant communication tool for both text and speaking. It’s a powerful business/personal communication medium in it’s current form as text only, and will become EXPLOSIVE with the right app (the new Nambu is promising – that’s the direction it will be going.) But it will change the face of the speaking environment.

(6) Do you believe there is going to be a new breed of new New Communicators who will use social media tools to connect with people?

Yes and no. First the no – the majority of people will use the text only email/Linked-in/Twitter etc as text only – will not incorporate it holistically.

And yes, the New Communicator will embrace the social media tools (Twitter mostly) in ALL of their communicating environments – but they will be smart about it, and understand there is a difference in text, voice and in person communications – learn the differences and use them intentionally. Most people communicate at the unconscious level – our goal is to make it conscious.

(7) It seems that a big buzz these days is about the use of Twitter at conferences and presentations. What are your thoughts on the rising use of Twitter during presentations?

Twitter is going to be very powerful in expanding (or disrupting) the conference and formal speaking environment. I blogged on that here – but more is yet to come. Big business (most of our clients) are not used to using Twitter in meetings and speeches, but no longer can anyone say ‘laptops down.’ People will Twitter whether you like it or not, so you have to incorporate that in your ‘experience’ and be intentional. Those who become good at it can enhance and expand their speaking – but it will be a rocky road for awhile. Those who use it well will succeed mightily.

(8) You attended SXSW in Austin, TX earlier this year. What were the top insights you gained at SXSW this year?

One of the most amazing conferences I’ve attended (out of thousands!) SXSW Interactive was peak energy, peak connections and peak engagement. 30 meetings going on at a time, 50-75% of people in most meetings/speeches were tweeting on laptops or cells. Podcasts and audios, twitpics and Flip videos and of course tweets were going out to the world by the thousands every minute. More and more conferences will become more like this.

Again, New Communicators must have not only the messenger and the message at peak performance, but also the medium.

Critical point though, that almost ALL neglect is getting video feedback and seeing themselves – so many at SXSW have distracting and nervous habits that it doesn’t matter how good their content or medium use is – they get in their own way. Observed behavior changes. The smart New Communicators at SXSW and all conferences will get themselves on video!

(9) What blogs are you reading most these days and why?

• Well, this one: EdgeHopper - Always well written and lengthy posts on relevant communication subjects – interactive media and personal behavior.

• Presentation Zen - Garr Reynolds is the leader (along with Nancy Duarte) of slide design and communications quality. His posts are in depth, and insightful.

• Seth Godin’s Blog – At first I didn’t like Seth’s text only posts, but then they grew on me for two reasons. They are short and pithy. 80% of them are original and thought provoking. (Pareto’s Law comes into play.)

(10) Who are your favorite follows on Twitter and why?

@ed – a very unusual man of integrity, insight and influence that I have gotten to know well on Twitter.

@OliviaMitchell – great communication research, tips and blog.

@Mashable – always good, up to date links and info on Twitter and the tech world.

But it’s a very tough question because there are so many Twitterers AND blogs that are good. [Chris' note: If you want to follow Bert on Twitter, and I highly recommend it, he's @BertDecker]

(And Chris on Twitter is @ChrisSpagnuolo )

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...

Don't Communicate Well - and You're Out...

"Caroline Kennedy Flubs Her Coronation" was one of many headlines.

It was bound to happen. If not by her own accord “for personal reasons,” Caroline Kennedy would have no doubt eventually been ousted from consideration to replace Hilary Clinton as New York Senator.

There were great expectations to be sure. She has a remarkable legacy. She has class and integrity. She is intelligent. And indeed she is passionate about her causes, including recent support of newly elected President Obama. But, when it comes to thinking on her feet and being articulate under pressure, she fails miserably. As a result, it leaves her constituents doubting her and her ability to take on the office.

Another great case for the power of communications. More than ever before, today’s leaders – whether politics, business, sports, or philanthropy – must have it. Many people think that with the right title, the right credentials, and/or the right subject matter expertise – that communications becomes secondary, something that doesn’t require attention and focus. But they must – we must – understand how we come across, conquer our weaknesses and enhance our strengths.

Think of Caroline Kennedy and you can see how poor communications can be devasting. On the other hand, think of what being an outstanding communicator can do for you! President Barack Obama for example...

The Inauguration Speech - Pro and, yes, Con

President Barack Obama gave a great Inaugural speech today. Yet it was not legendary. Here's why - on both counts:

Pro

• Content. It was well written, struck the right note of hope and opportunity in the midst of very serious and difficult times.
• Rule of Three. If this was going to be a long post, I could take a page or two listing the oratorical devices he used effectively. Particularly the Rule of Three.
• His delivery was strong of voice and cadence. He is a master of cadence and oratory.

That said, expectation was his enemy. The great majority loved his speech, yet so many expected so much from the great orator that some were disappointed.

Con

• There was no memorable phrase that will stick with us. This man, this time and this occasion cried out for an elevated, singular moment like:

               "Ask not what your country can do for you..."
               "We have nothing to fear but fear itself..."
               "I have a dream..."

• For a master of rhythm and cadence, I felt President Obama did not use his pauses and applause moments with his usual skill. He didn't "work the crowd" in crass language, although I admit it's not easy to work a crowd of a couple of million people. And yet, such a crowd and an event as this can be combined to generate an unusually feverish pitch. The crowd was satisfied, but not elevated.
• Teleprompters. Obama could use the teleprompters more skillfully - and not just look side to side. If he varied his 'reading' rhythm he would be able to vary both his eye contact, his facial expression (not one smile) and his voice.

President Obama's greatest speech has yet to come.

Tonight I'm going to post some additional clips (in a new service and internet capability!) and show :

• The Most Momentous Moment
• The Most Singular Moment
• The Most Memorable Moment

Master Speakers King and Obama

Martin Luther King's Speaking Style, and Barack Obama

As we celebrate Martin Luther King's birthday, we are reminded what a great man he was, and what a great communicator. I have posted before on his speaking style and the use of the great rhetorical and oratorical devices like alliteration, repetition, the 'rule of three' and 'set 'em up and knock 'em down.' His birthday is a great day to take the time and see his entire 17 minute speech here, or at least the short clip of his famous "I have a dream" ending here.

One of the best articles written on Dr. King and his speaking impact and style was by Mark Oppenheimer in the Wall Street Journal. But what I want to post on today is the 'communication experience' that Dr. King created whenever he spoke, and was epitomized with his "I have a dream..." speech at the Lincoln Mall in 1963. We can learn a lot from it, and from some comparisons - particularly to Barack Obama.

Many people think Dr. King read his speech, but he did not. He DID have a written text, and he referred to it a few times during the first 11 minutes, but he NEVER read his speech. And as Mark Oppenheimer says, "...he speaks brilliantly without notes for the remainder of the speech. It's like a streetball alley-oop, showing what he can do without even trying." Although that perhaps diminishes the import of Dr. King's historic moment, Mark also mentions how "...he had used elements of the speech in hundreds of sermons (and speeches) over nearly 20 years."

I think Martin Luther King was in a zone. He knew the importance of the event, and while very conscious of what he was doing, he KNEW that he was truly creating an experience not only for the masses at the mall, of which they were an active part of that experience, but for the millions for the ages.

Now, could you imagine what would have happened if he actually DID read his speech. Or used teleprompters. What would the experience have been...

Barack Obama

When he won the Iowa primary, Barack Obama gave a great speech. Some said it was his greatest, that it was historic, and a classic speech. But he used teleprompters.

Now I listed Barack Obama as the #1 Best Communicator of 2006, because it was his communicating that got him into the Presidential race in the first place. And his later New Hampshire acceptance speech was a great speech, and I said so at the time, but only gave it a 9 out of 10 because he truly was reading a speech. Look at his eyes as he looks from left to right to left, at the two teleprompter paddles and not at the audience. (In teleprompter speaking you want several focal points which include the audience.) Although very few viewers perceive at the conscious level that he is actually using teleprompters, at the unconscious level it makes a difference in how they feel. They do not get wrapped up in the experience of Obama like they do with Dr. King. Although Obama very successfully uses many of the oratorical devices of Dr. King, he is not LIVING his speech like King was - you can't live it when you read it.

However, that is changing. Barack Obama is gaining experience fast, and in the terms of Malcolm Gladwell's book "Outliers" - Obama is very quickly surpassing the 10,000 hours and/or 10 years to mastery. He gave a masterful Presidential acceptance speech, was #1 on my Top Ten Communicators of 2008 list, and the headline in this morning's paper "Speech Of A Lifetime" illustrates the extraordinary anticipation for his inauguration speech.

The Age of Oratory

Although the age of oratory may seem irrelevant to today's business communicators, we can learn a lot from the best, Dr. Martin Luther King. We can learn how to have a script, and not abuse it. We can learn how to be prepared, yet have a message that comes from the heart. And we can learn by watching a master create a communication experience that changed the course of a nation.

Happy Birthday Dr. King!

The Top Ten Best (and Worst) Communicators of 2008

This Annual List of Top Ten Communicators of 2008 highlights the best (and worst) from business, politics (big this year), entertainment, sports and the professions. Take a look to see how communication skills helped make or break these notable individuals:

THE BEST

1.    Barack Obama
As his star continues to rise, there’s just no contest for #1 Best Communicator.
And it’s not just because he was elected President that he deserves #1, but that he was elected President BECAUSE of his communications ability. President Elect Obama is the first repeat at #1 (2006) and for the same reason. He vaulted from obscurity on the strength of his words and speeches at the 2004 Democratic Convention, and just kept talking. To date he hasn't really done much except communicate. Shows you how important that skill is. One of the greatest modern orators, we’ll now see if he can replace Bill Clinton as “the great communicator” while in office.

2.    Tim Russert
He was one of the best, and we’ll miss him.
One of our best TV journalists died this year, and he would have made this list without the posthumous honor. Russert was personable, energetic and open but also tough, incisive and smart. Meet The Press, and Network TV News will never be the same. His son Luke Russert was eloquent in his eulogy, and maybe there will be more…

  3.    Randy Pausch
An unknown, until he gave one speech about his mortality.
“The Last Speech” of 48 year old Professor Randy Pausch has deservedly received an amazing 8 million views on YouTube by 2008. This popular Professor took the stage at Carnegie Mellon late in 2007 to announce that this would be his last speech. He was dying of cancer. And this one singular moment remains a classic communication masterpiece – in addition to the emotion without maudlin, Pausch is funny, energetic and fully engaging. He did continue to speak in smaller settings until his death on July 25, 2008, and his communicating led to the best selling book “The Last Lecture”.

4.    Colin Powell
Always great, in 2008 he gave the interview of the year.
Colin Powell has always been a great communicator, and thereby a great leader. He is on the Top Ten this year for his masterful press conference when he endorsed Barack Obama. Clear, strong and in control in a Q&A with Tom Brokaw, Powell gave Obama perhaps the final boost he needed. It came from a highly respected communicator who himself could perhaps have been President had he chosen. He communicates like a President should.

5.    Mike Huckabee
The one repeat from last year – he can’t be held down.
Governor Huckabee deserves his repeat on the Top Ten Best list (he was #1 in 2007) because of what he continued to accomplish with his speaking style and quick wit. He did two new things of note in 2008: Became an upset winner and viable candidate for the Presidency before his ‘value proposition’ did him in. Then he went on to be a conservative spokesperson with a national TV Show on Fox, called “Huckabee”. I hunch he will continue to thrive because he communicates well in any setting.

 6.    John Chambers
A remarkable businessman who’s speaking ability drives his company.
It’s good to have a businessman on the Best list in this economically woeful year. Cisco CEO John Chambers is a remarkable communicator who has led the evolution of Cisco Systems into the "human network." As a spokesperson for the industry. He is articulate, an advocate (and on issues beyond business), and a highly respected innovator (such as in this 3D Telepresence demo from India). When government leaders and Presidential candidates want to align with a powerful business person, they call on Chambers.

7.    Sarah Palin
A remarkable woman in a remarkable rise to celebrity.
She electrified the public with her speaking ability and galvanized the Republican base. But I was even more impressed at her confidence under pressure. Several times. She was mocked by the media after McCain picked her as her choice for VP, until her acceptance speech when she wowed the country. After some missteps she was again counted out by the media and most others, until her electrifying speech at the Republican Convention. As a pure speaker on a national stage – whether using the teleprompter or not - she is surprisingly the best of all the candidates, including Obama. It’s the other communicating where she falls short. (See the Worst list below.)

8.    The New Communicators – Nancy and Garr, Seth and Guy
There’s a new breed of communicator, and they are leading a vanguard.
There are those who speak well, and also use the new tools of communication in creating a new paradigm for connecting and influencing in a shrinking electronic world:
•    Nancy Duarte and Garr Reynolds – both are best known for their design brilliance, but in 2008 they have exploded in impact with books and blogs. Nancy has written ‘Slide:ology’ and Garr has written ‘Presentation Zen’ – and both books are amazing best sellers that have revolutionized the business presentation business. Although they deal with design, both books are different and more profound – they deal with communicating messages effectively. PowerPoint will never be the same thank goodness. And Nancy and Garr are now in high demand on the ‘professional speaking circuit’ as well because they also communicate with excellence face-to-face.
•    Seth Godin and Guy Kawasaki – both are guru’s in the tech/internet/social media  space, because they are brilliant, speak brilliantly and funny, and then cast their influence further through books and blogs, tweets and tele, speaking and showering pithiness wherever they go. I’m amazed when I ask a business client if they’ve heard of Seth and his book ‘Tribes’, or Guy and his book ‘Reality Check’ (or any of their many other books) and I sometimes hear the response, “Who?” If you haven’t heard of any of these four, you will soon. And seek them out. They are the new communicators, coming at you in all media.

9.    Tina Fey
How could she not be on the Top Ten Best list? 
Tina Fey is not only a top comedienne, a brilliant writer and producer of the Emmy winning series “30 Rock” but a sought after celebrity. Newsday even called it "The Year of the Fey." And though she became a household name in 2008 because of her uncanny Sarah Palin parodies on Saturday Night Live, she was on the rise well before. She is always real, natural and honest, and she will be a communicating force in the future, and probably beyond television.

10.    Anderson Cooper
He’s one of a kind – leading a new breed of journalists.
Hard hitting yet compassionate. Personable yet objective. Anderson Cooper is incisive and engaged (images of Anderson Cooper being blown about in a hurricane come to mind). And above all he’s savvy. Cooper not only speaks with no hesitation, he can control a loud group of CNN spin-doctors with a light touch. When he does a set piece, it is a conversation rather than a lecture. He’s come far, and should go even farther.

___________________________________

The Ten Worst Communicators of 2008

1. George Bush
When George Bush speaks, nobody listens.
That is perhaps the greatest tragedy of this Presidency – the Bully Pulpit is gone. And it basically has been missing since shortly after September 11, 2001, President Bush’s one moment in time of powerful communicating. In the few weeks on and after 9/11 he was authentic, strong and powerful. He felt our pain and communicated leadership. But soon after he slipped back to the shrugs and smirks, and tangles of syntax and grammar. It perhaps reached a nadir in the response to Katrina. Such is not the communications of a leader. Having so little influence this past year, it is sad to put our President as the #1 worst communicator of 2008.

2. Richard Fuld
More than a poster child.
The CEO of Lehman is more than the poster child for the greed that was a big cause of our financial mess of this past year. Richard Fuld is also incompetent as a communicator, and not only gave a terrible visual impression in his congressional testimony, but what he said was as bad as how he looked. When you have made $430 million dollars you don’t act arrogant, nose uplifted, as your company goes broke. You don’t parse obtuse PowerPoints on national television, and not reap the consequences. A sad day for business, and a devastating day for Lehman Brothers.

 3. Rod Blagojevich
The hair, and everything else.
Well, appearance isn’t everything, but why the long hair (a 50 year old trying to be an 18 year old), and then the obfuscation, then the maneuvering. To say nothing of the eye dart and fidgety manner on camera. Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich is fighting the charges of corruption, and looks like he will drag it to the bitter end. So we’ll probably see more of the stark comparison of the communications and the manner of the pursued, Blagojevich, with the pursuer, Federal Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald, who is excellent in manner and content.

4. Elliot Spitzer
The tragic fall of a Governor who can actually speak quite well.
Tragedy occurs when a character is brought to ruin caused by his own weaknesses. NY Governor Elliot Spitzer’s fall as a rising star was never more apparent as in his 'mea culpa' speech, where he had not planned to resign. He was anything but resigned in manner. What was evident was his hubris and arrogance in communicating that he did 'something' without acknowledging breaking the law consorting with prostitutes. And to have his wife sadly standing by as he shows no humility – now that’s a tragedy.

5. Roger Clemens
Another fall from grace.
It seems that 2008 was a year with many falls from high platforms (and we haven’t even included John Edwards who was a Presidential candidate.) Although perhaps not as serious as Elliot Spitzer but just as sad was the case of baseball hero Roger Clemens, one of the greatest pitchers of all time. When Clemens lied to the Congressional panel about his history with his trainer, steroids, and then later about consorting with young women – there were millions of young boys who lost a hero. We need our heros, and we need them to speak the truth with confidence. This baseball great tried to speak with confidence on this national stage of congress, but he faltered, and it did not ring true.

6. Sarah Palin
Sarah Palin was both the best, and the worst.
From the stage and platform, and when well prepared, Sarah Palin is a great communicator. (She’s on the Top Ten Best List). But when she is either unprepared or caught off guard, she is a disaster. This is very unusual, and I can’t remember seeing it on this big a scale. Palin is actually good in an interview when she knows her subject (as in this clip with Maria Bartiromo talking about Alaska gas exploration). But millions now have seen her unprepared with Katie Couric, where she picks the wrong things to say. It’s a matter of judgment that did her in, as she chooses confidently but glibly. And this includes making a televised statement at Thanksgiving with a backdrop of a farmer preparing a turkey for slaughter. Palin is a paradox – a study in contrasts. It will be interesting to see where she goes from here.

7. Dan Rather
Rather is finally rousted.
Likability is paramount, and Dan Rather never had it. Think of likability and trust – they go hand in hand, as in Walter Cronkite. On the other hand we have Rather, who in both communication style and affability is curt and distant, and ultimately made a mistake that finally forced him out. And the only reason it took so long was the CBS brass for some reason kept him on in spite of diminishing ratings. (Katie Couric caught off guard comments on him.) His story of lack of communication connectedness is featured in my newly revised book just out, “You’ve Got To Be Believed To Be Heard.”

8. Al Davis
This man is grim.
Al Davis owns the Oakland Raiders, and he is grim. He could afford to be grim and distant from the press when he was winning, and he was. Now the Oakland Raiders are losing - badly, over many years with a record six seasons of 11 plus losses – and Al Davis is firing his coaches annually. And with vitriol. He looks, sounds and acts grim. People can be forgiven for making mistakes, but Al Davis is on this list because in never acknowledging his mistakes he is acerbic, closed, and arrogant. And looks like he is wrong too.

9. Rosie O’Donnell
This woman is grim.
Rosie O’Donnell is grim, and that’s not good for a comedienne. Rosie should be Rosie, but she not only gets caught up in mud slinging battles with her peers (past) on The View, and Donald Trump, and the media, she is vitriolic in her diatribes on political issues. Her face shows anger and intolerance. She has a good vocabulary but it doesn’t take her very far. Her new show Rosie Live premiered in November and bombed. Her popularity continues to diminish as her humor dims.

10. John McCain
A man of character but not of communication.
Although John McCain might not have won the presidency even if he was as good a speaker as Barack Obama, he still could have done much better. Sure it was tough to overcome the burden of Iraq, the economy and the unpopularity of George Bush. But when you’re counted down and out before you’ve picked your Vice Presidential choice, something else is wrong. And then when your VP choice of Sarah Palin so overwhelms your candidacy because of HER communications, you know where the problem is. It’s sad too, because McCain was so much better in his concession speech and after the campaign, when he could just be himself. Just think what might have happened if he had communicated with the same naturalness during the campaign.

Why Caroline Kennedy Needs Speaking Game

Caroline Kennedy wants a Senate seat, after years as a behind the scenes celebrity. But to succeed she must undergo a major change in her communication style if she is to become credible.

This is not an election. Gov. Paterson of New York makes the sole appointment when Hillary Clinton likely gives up her seat in about a month. But the Governor of New York will rely on polls, popular opinion and credibility. So it might as well be an election since Caroline has claimed she WANTS the seat, and the media is all over the story. And right now Caroline does not have the "chops".

Years ago I worked in Bobby Kennedy's Presidential campaign, and got to know something of how the Kennedy family worked. Caroline took after her beautiful and elegant mother Jackie Kennedy. John Jr. took more after his father and the rest of the Kennedy clan. Now Caroline wants to switch roles. I don't think she can do it without a communication face lift.

Here she is announcing her interest in the Senate seat last week, and doing so in an affable and attractive way. But with hesitation and uncertainty - not in the forceful way she needs right now. After all, we know she's affable and attractive. But is she strong? Is she a leader? Can she take the heat? And can she inspire and motivate people to accomplish things? Make a judgment here in an interview, and here in a platform speech...

Specifically, Caroline Kennedy needs to show confidence, strength and leadership in her speaking:

• Eye Communication. Look at people. As individuals. She glances down and her eyes flit about.
• Pause. Give emphasis on certain words and phrases. Get rid of non-words - the ums and uhs of uncertainty. Replace fillers with a pause.
• Stand Tall. She doesn't exactly slouch, but she doesn't fill a room. She needs some forward lean.
• Forceful voice. Lose the monotone. Bring in the enthusiasm. She should project more, breathing from the diaphragm.

We also know for the last 40-plus years she has shied away from publicity and the camera. She can't continue to do this as she did last week - make a statement and run. She has to show grit and answer reporters directly. She has to make news, not shun newsmedia. And she has to be eager to talk, not appear reluctant.

Perception is reality in the eye of the perceiver. How the public, and Governor Paterson, view her as she communicates is how they will judge her ability. Look at Sarah Palin - written off and mocked in the early days, before she spoke at the Republican Convention. Then she was viewed as the savior of the Republican party. Sarah Palin was compelling because of her speaking, Caroline Kennedy is not. Caroline Kennedy needs a similar signature moment - and perhaps she would be well served to create one.

Credentials? Not so important. Look at Barack Obama - President not because of accomplishments, but because of communication ability. Caroline can overcome the lack of experience in government by making a forceful case for the experience she does have, on Boards, in organizations, and her family experience in politics. Forceful is the key word, because the resume is thin. But Barack did it. She can - if she gets a communications face lift.

Blagojevich - Communications of The Pursuer and the Pursued

Interesting communications in the Blagojevich scandal. Patrick Fitzgerald is the U.S Prosecuting Attorney who announced the charges, and he is good, and a solid communicator.

On the other hand, likely soon to be ex-Gov. Blagojevich is not very believable in his first defense here. Why?

First of all, when you have the truth (apparent) on your side, you would tend to speak with conviction and certainty. When you are lying, or uncomfortable with what you are saying, it tends to show in behavior. Here's how:

Patrick Fitzgerald:

• Firm voice, solid eye communication with reporters, serious and calm facial expression
• Straightforward recitation of facts, strong Point Of View, mentions team indicating thoroughness
• Consistent - Fitzgerald has been through this before - see this blog post as he prosecuted Scooter Libby. He projects the same confidence and certainty, and was named one of my Top Ten Speakers in 2005 for his communications.

Gov. Blagojevich:

• First of all the hair. Now it shouldn't matter that much, but it does. First time I saw him and I wondered - toupee, or if not, why not a haircut. Remember "Blink" and Malcom Gladwell's 'Thin Slicing'. In the first two seconds we make a lot of judgments based on appearance.
• Hair aside, Blagojevich is jumpy, eyes darting, with a bit of a smirk. Glib is a word I'd put in his descriptive cloud. Says arrogance to me.
• His content is weak - not believable in the face of such serious charges. Lot of repetitive concepts with lot of non-words (ums and uhs).

This said, we can be deceived. Pathological liers who actually BELIEVE they did not do wrong, or justify their behavior so THEY think it is accurate, if not truthful, can look like they are telling the truth. (eg: "I did not have sexual relations with that woman!") But it is very hard to feign false confidence and certainty.

At least Patrick Fitzgerald does not have to worry about feigning or obfuscating. Blagojevich - a different story.