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 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.

Lie To Me - is a lie!

The Fox TV show that is surprisingly popular is based on a lie. Ironically, it is called "Lie To Me."

The primary reason I'm compelled to write this is because the producers use the credibility of communications giant Paul Ekman to promote an untruth - that you can tell whether people are lying. You can't!

I have great respect for Paul Ekman, one of the foremost researchers and experts in facial expression. Heck, I have a signed copy of his book "Unmasking The Face"  that I reference in my book "You've Got To Be Believed To Be Heard," and have read and follow his research. I was surprised that he lent his name to the show as the "expert" because he knows you cannot tell when people are lying.

And that's what the show would have us believe. Lightman, the hero and expert who always walks around with his head cocked to one side peering intently into 'suspects' eyes, will say "You're lying" to someone, and of course they immediately crumble. That's fiction. Or Lightman will glance at someone and say who is angry, hostile, repressed, etc. All Hollywood.

In one segment Lightman sees one of his subjects rub his eye with his middle finger, plays it back magnified to his cohorts and says, "There, see the repressed anger." Then there are three quick cuts of Obama, Bill Clinton and John McCain all shown with their middle fingers rubbing their lips or face as if they are all showing the same emotion. Compelling, but inaccurate.

Here is a promo that shows an interpretation as truth, which is specious at best. Crows feet MIGHT mean a full smile - they might also be wrinkles.

The show is well done, highly produced, and is entertainment if you like that sort of thing. But my concern is that people will give a LOT more credence in reading facial expression and body language with a CERTAINTY than is actually the truth.

You can become expert at discernment, and when trained you can tell when someone is nervous or lacks confidence or is 'shifty' etc. Even untrained you'll have a pretty good feeling - but it can very often be wrong. Video feedback is a marvelous tool for learning more about reading ourselves and others - and that's our business of course. And having been in this business and the film making business for 30 years, I've learned something about real behavior, deception and theatrics. But personally, I cannot tell with a certainty a lie or even a half truth. Neither can Paul Ekman. And neither can Lightman - the actor.

I've been meaning for weeks to write this post, and I have Tivo the show planning to cut clips to show my points, but it's on tonight (Obama couldn't preempt Fox I just found out) so it's timely now. Watch the show if you haven't, and treat it as the fiction that it is. Unfortunately, I continue to watch it with a stomach churning emotion that too many people will treat this fiction as fact.

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.

Four Voices from SXSW

Speaking and Twitter dominance

The experience of South by South West (SXSW) in Austin is like the Wild West - it's the frontier of Social Media converging with traditional conference, dominated by Twitter. After experiencing it, I've modified my opinions since my last Twitter post here, and more will be coming on that (for a very good post on this subject today see Mark Ivey's blog.)

First, four important (read 'Rock Star') voices from SXSW on the question "Is Twitter distracting, additive or what?" I recorded our conversations spontaneously on my iPhone - here are highlights:

@Armano     - (Listen to iPhone recording here)

• Good thing, not a bad thing
• Speaker can broadcast his/her message
• When I tweet in conference, use it as notes
• Tweeting causes disconnect but you store up info and come back to it

@GuyKawasaki     - (iPhone recording here)

• Very good for speakers, can reach thousands through tweets
• I like big numbers!
• Tweeters disconnect - It's like taking notes
• Not too distracting for me as a speaker. But embarrassing when I'm speaking and someones sees a live tweet from one of my surrogates...

@Pistachio     - (iPhone recording here)

• Tweeters can take over a conference - last SXSW
• Great as back channel, speakers can see what audience wants
• Opens up ways to broadcast our content world wide in seconds
• Tradeoffs - can distract speaker, be rude, discount audience
• Can connect with individuals in room and conference
• One more things for corporations to assimilate, change "laptops down" policy

@ChrisBrogan     - (iPhone recording here)

• Important to be able to free flow and multi-task well
• Many conversations can take place at the same time, all can express themselves
• Note taking useful for in house audience
• Real audience is the thousands outside the conference room
• Twitter is like hamburger helper for the conversation - makes a little go a long way
• We'll learn to speak in 'twitter bites' (as Chris Brogan does!)

There's a unanimity of opinion by those who are in the Twitter elite of course, and I share their enthusiasm for the possibilities. But there's another side to the story in the traditional and more bureaucratic business world - which is perhaps 80% (or more) of the business population. They still think Twitter is the answer to the now irrelevant question, "What are you doing?" (The other day I asked the CEO of a billion dollar investment banking firm how he used Twitter and he said "What's Twitter?")

More to come on this important communication experience, and Twitter tips for the mainstream business population...

@BertDecker

Speakers – Be Aware, Twitter is Coming

Business speakers (and leaders, keynoters, politicians, Pastors and, well, everyone…) need to be aware that like it or not, Twitter is coming to their speaking experience.

Be Aware, and Beware!

There's been a lot of buzz - and new insight - into what to do about people twittering while you are speaking. Olivia Mitchell did an outstanding guest blog on Laura Fitton's Pistachio site, and the next day on Chris Spagnuolo's Edgehopper, wrapping up a busy week with her own summary post. All great food for thought - but let's not get carried away. The "back channel" will only be useful in a small number of communicating environments - at least for the next year or so. Here's why:

The great majority of Twitterers, and bloggers for that matter, are early adopters, and tech/social media savvy. They probably would be lost without their computers/PDA's/phones (I know I would.) However the majority of the business world uses the tools, but don't lose themselves in the process. And I'm afraid that the thrust of the current Twitter buzz advocating twittering during speeches will cause an expectation of good communication that will not be met – and will lead the majority of people (like most of our clients) down the wrong path.

Now there ARE great new possibilities, particularly with high tech audiences like at SXSW, and others. So there’s the good, the bad and the ugly.

Let’s start with the ugly:

•    Until there was Twitter, there was only ‘Blackberry Abuse,’ which we blogged on awhile back. Here it was rude for people to go to their Blackberrys (or PDA's/iPhones) during a meeting or speech to IM or check email - but they did it anyway. Because they were bored!
•    The solution to Blackberry Abuse was to be INTERESTING as a speaker. Engage and excite your audience and they will be compelled to listen, and watch!
•    That’s still the solution to the almost 90% of speaking situations where Twittering would not be appropriate (see below). But we're beginning to see an expectation that people SHOULD Twitter, it’s OK, it will be constructive, and it’s not really because they’re bored. But the majority of Twitterers WILL be twittering because they are bored, because the majority of speakers are unfortunately boring. And so now we have a valid excuse to put our heads down, get our minds on the tweet and not the message, and be rude to the unsuspecting speaker.
•    Confusion will reign.

Now for the bad:

•    In probably 80-90% of most business and conference settings speakers have a message to give – at keynote speeches and large company events - the large audience venues. It is not a groupthink or collaboration (see below for “the good.”)
•    You can't read and listen effectively at the same time. This has been well documented by Edward Tufte and others, and I'll personally confirm that with my past 30 years experience in the communication and speaking business. It is cognitive dissonance in action.
•    Think of the problem with PowerPoint presentations filled with text, (also well documented in this blog and Presentation Zen and others.) We’ve all had the sad but common experience of reading ahead, as the speaker says, “Now stay with me.” And of course we don’t, and since we can’t read and listen at the same time we have cognitive dissonance.
•    And it’s even worse with Tweeting. If you think you can’t read and listen at the same time, it’s even worse to try to text and listen (and read) at the same time. If you have a group listening to a speaker (supposedly) and tweeting about the speaker’s 140 character sound bites (supposedly) and looking at the text and PowerPoints, and reading other Tweeter’s tweets, and looking up urls – chaos reigns in the mind. The speaker has lost control, and there is not only NOT better communication - it is far worse and more fragmented.
•    In this large conference/event/speech setting where the speaker has a point-of-view and a message to deliver, the speaker is responsible for the experience. You can’t command “No Blackberrys. No Twitter!” - because people will do what they want to do. But there are other ways - the speaker cannot abdicate his or her responsibility. He or she should be should be interesting, engaging and powerful, using arresting stories, visuals and Black Slides!

 A new perspective – the good that will come out of this:

•    The growing dialogue and power of Twitter is opening up new ways to communicate, and we are just on the forefront. This is what this recent buzz is leading to, and take the time to read all of the ideas and comments in those blog links below – you’ll get some idea of where it is going.
•    Workshops, social media sessions, Jelly!, BarCamps, et al are far different than the traditional more formal speeches mentioned above. Although they won’t replace them anytime soon, they are offering new collaborative possibilities, and it is these where Twitter and the ‘back channel’ will flourish. Likely ALL the sessions at SXSW 2009 Austin in two weeks will be Twitter enhanced, providing a high level laboratory - much should come out of that.
•    On webinars and teleconferences there is much more potential for using Twitter, and this back channel becomes very useful where you don't have the speaker present, and need more visual engagement.
•    The thousands of smaller meetings and business conferences going on everyday should be living laboratories for experimenting and trying out some of these new ideas of Twitter that have already shown promise.

See Olivia, Pistachio and Edgehopper for dozens of examples of the benefits of Twitter in today's growingly diverse communications experiences. But don’t lose sight of the fact that in most speeches today, Twittering during a speech won’t be of use - but abuse.

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...

Six Do's to Open Your Presentations

Take advantage of your opening.

You have the highest interest at the beginning and end of your presentation. George Morrisey in his book Loud And Clear first put forth the Retention Curve principle, and it’s a good one you can use to your advantage.

So open strong by using these six sure-fire methods:

1.      Start with a bang.  You want to grab people’s attention – and you are only limited by your creativity. Be unusual. Use silence, then a quote. Bring out a prop. Use a talent. Dr. Dean Ornish is a noted heart/health author and speaker whom I coached before he was going to give a major speech before 7,000 people at the Million Dollar Round Table. They expected him to talk  heart and health from his recent best seller, which he did - later. What they didn’t expect was how he grabbed their hearts in his opening by strolling out center stage with his guitar and starting in song – a funny and relevant one.

2.      Tell a story. The easiest, best and most useful speaking tool is story telling, and we don’t use it enough. It is the S of our SHARP principles to keep people involved and interested as you speak, and it is the MOST USEFUL at the opening. Tell a story of yourself, or an appropriate anecdotal story that your audience can identify with. Stories are easy to tell, will help ease the pressure you feel from the opening, and will connect to your audience. Remember that as kids we always heard stories read or told to us – they are easy to hear. And they make a point.

3.      Pause – Look – Move.  Come out to center stage, or your laptop table with your notes on it. Pause for a few seconds (2 or 3). Look at one person, then move with your eye communication towards another – and THAT’S when you begin speaking. Dramatic – a little. It will feel a lot more dramatic to you than it will to the audience. (There is a phenomenon called disparity that makes us feel much more uncomfortable than we look with new habits.) To the audience, it will just be effective. You’ll have their attention, since you began with a certainty and a confidence that is often not shown at the start. Too often we start with LBOW’s (see #5.)

4.      Be short and sweet.   Most presenters spend too much time in their openings, and run short at the close. This is another common phenomenon of thinking we might not be able to fill our time so we start slow. Then we run out at the end, when we should be rising to our climatic crescendo! Our studies have shown that rehearsal time is about 75% of the actual presentation time. Don’t waste time at the opening – or you’ll take away from your close.

5.      Be focused – be net.  Too often we open with LBOW’s that are too long, boring and don’t take us anywhere but do use up time. (LBOW is an acronym we use at Decker Communications for Lovely Bunch Of Words – sounds like they should mean something but they are really bland nothings, going nowhere.) Be brief in your openings. Get right into it. Remember your retention curve is highest at the beginning, so you want to use it well. Move your listeners right into a main point – or a surprising benefit.

6.      Think intrigue and interest.   Then use it. There are hundreds, actually thousands, of creative ways to open your talks, speeches and presentations. Usually I will start my presentation by doing the absolutely wrong thing – reading a speech. I walk out on stage with what looks like a written text, plop it on the lectern, grab on to the sides, look down and begin reading in a monotone. And here is a supposed speech expert who is immediately boring with monotone voice and no eye contact – bad! For only about 30 seconds though, as the energy plummets so quickly I then raise my voice, step out behind the lectern, look at people with good eye contact and rip up the speech. Usually I get a round of applause, as people are so relieved to get a speaker, not a reader. Now I’ve used this opening many times as I know it makes several points that are relevant to my speech, and it works. But I’ll never forget the first time I tried it when I was scared to death – at a speech years ago for Equitec in the Berkeley Marina Hotel. But if I hadn’t thought intrigue and interest – it wouldn’t have happened. As Emerson said, “Do the thing you fear and the death of fear is certain

1.      Start with a bang.  You want to grab people’s attention – and you are only limited by your creativity. Be unusual. Use silence, then a quote. Bring out a prop. Use a talent. Dr. Dean Ornish is a noted heart/health author and speaker whom I coached before he was going to give a major speech before 7,000 people at the Million Dollar Round Table. They expected him to talk  heart and health from his recent best seller, which he did - later. What they didn’t expect was how he grabbed their hearts in his opening by strolling out center stage with his guitar and starting in song – a funny and relevant one.

2.      Tell a story. The easiest, best and most useful speaking tool is story telling, and we don’t use it enough. It is the S of our SHARP principles to keep people involved and interested as you speak, and it is the MOST USEFUL at the opening. Tell a story of yourself, or an appropriate anecdotal story that your audience can identify with. Stories are easy to tell, will help ease the pressure you feel from the opening, and will connect to your audience. Remember that as kids we always heard stories read or told to us – they are easy to hear. And they make a point.

3.      Pause – Look – Move.  Come out to center stage, or your laptop table with your notes on it. Pause for a few seconds (2 or 3). Look at one person, then move with your eye communication towards another – and THAT’S when you begin speaking. Dramatic – a little. It will feel a lot more dramatic to you than it will to the audience. (There is a phenomenon called disparity that makes us feel much more uncomfortable than we look with new habits.) To the audience, it will just be effective. You’ll have their attention, since you began with a certainty and a confidence that is often not shown at the start. Too often we start with LBOW’s (see #5.)

4.      Be short and sweet.   Most presenters spend too much time in their openings, and run short at the close. This is another common phenomenon of thinking we might not be able to fill our time so we start slow. Then we run out at the end, when we should be rising to our climatic crescendo! Our studies have shown that rehearsal time is about 75% of the actual presentation time. Don’t waste time at the opening – or you’ll take away from your close.

5.      Be focused – be net.  Too often we open with LBOW’s that are too long, boring and don’t take us anywhere but do use up time. (LBOW is an acronym we use at Decker Communications for Lovely Bunch Of Words – sounds like they should mean something but they are really bland nothings, going nowhere.) Be brief in your openings. Get right into it. Remember your retention curve is highest at the beginning, so you want to use it well. Move your listeners right into a main point – or a surprising benefit.

6.      Think intrigue and interest.   Then use it. There are hundreds, actually thousands, of creative ways to open your talks, speeches and presentations. Usually I will start my presentation by doing the absolutely wrong thing – reading a speech. I walk out on stage with what looks like a written text, plop it on the lectern, grab on to the sides, look down and begin reading in a monotone. And here is a supposed speech expert who is immediately boring with monotone voice and no eye contact – bad! For only about 30 seconds though, as the energy plummets so quickly I then raise my voice, step out behind the lectern, look at people with good eye contact and rip up the speech. Usually I get a round of applause, as people are so relieved to get a speaker, not a reader. Now I’ve used this opening many times as I know it makes several points that are relevant to my speech, and it works. But I’ll never forget the first time I tried it when I was scared to death – at a speech years ago for Equitec in the Berkeley Marina Hotel. But if I hadn’t thought intrigue and interest – it wouldn’t have happened. As Emerson said, “Do the thing you fear and the death of fear is certain

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!"