Blog

Look for similarities between yourself and your prospects.  Why?  People are more likely to comply with requests made by those who appear to be similar to them.

What are some possible similarities?  School affiliations, geographical connections, sports, pet peeves (such as traffic jams), dogs.  Just avoid politics, religion, and discussions about your intimate affairs.

For instance, a story to illustrate the power of similarity.  My daughter refused to swim as a child.  We got her lessons, tried to teach her ourselves—nothing.  Then we took her to a birthday party where all the kids were swimming.  Presto—in she jumped.

How do you find similarities?  You engage in conversation—the great social lubricator.  Diplomacy is based on it.  Through conversation, you discover each other’s common humanity. 

However, if you do this with the intention of taking advantage of the information you gather, you are doing the right thing for the wrong reason.

“The last temptation is the greatest treason: to do the right deed for the wrong reason.”   – T. S. Eliot

What makes a man a manipulator is not his persuasive skill, but his intention in using his skill.

Go figure!  You can do the right thing for the wrong reason.

Sims Wyeth is a speech coach in Montclair, NJ specializing in presentation skills and public speaking training in order to give accomplished people the knowledge and skill they need to become accomplished speakers. Learn more public speaking tips at www.SimsWyeth.com.

Empathy is our ability to understand the thoughts and feelings of others.  It enables us to build rapport, listen, and take an interest in how others see the issues.

Many leaders get into trouble by getting too far ahead of their constituencies without taking the time to connect with those they lead.

Two examples come to mind.  The first is Paul Wolfowitz, who moved from the Bush II Administration to be head of the World Bank.  It was widely reported that he failed in that position because he was unable to “win the building” before he tried to conquer the global challenges he was hired to address.

The other is Laurence Summers, the former President of Harvard University and now special advisor to President Obama.  In his dealings with the faculty, he lost their support and was forced to resign.

Just as leaders need to “win the building” in order to move the organization in a chosen direction, a presenter needs to connect with the audience before he takes them on a deep dive into his content.

A presentation is a micro-moment of leadership, a potentially defining one.  How can we connect before we drill down into the details of our message?

Display your civility
Civility is a formal expression of empathy.  It is good manners.  It predisposes your audience to like you.  Civility shows respect for the occasion and for the audience, and in return, encourages them to be civil to you.

Display self-effacing humor
All humor is inherently persuasive, but self-effacing humor is particularly winning.  It shows the audience that you don’t take yourself too seriously, that you have a degree of humility and self-awareness, and that you are likely to be good company as you lead them through your content.

It’s all about them
As I have mentioned in other blog postings, make your content “all about them.” So many sales presentations could be titled, “My product is cool,” or “My Company is the best.”  It’s more effective to demonstrate an understanding of their situation and then introduce your product/service/company/idea as a solution to their problems.

Display similarity with your audience
People are likely to listen to those they perceive to be similar to them.  At the start of a talk, it’s a good idea to try to link yourself to what they are familiar with.   However, if it’s too much a stretch, it’s pandering.

I once spoke to a group of anesthesiologists, and pointed out that we were in opposite professions.  They knew they were in trouble if their clients were awake, and I knew I was in trouble if my clients were asleep.

It seemed to work.  Being honest about differences must help with credibility.

Act as if you heard they love you
Many great plays dramatize the fact that if we think somebody likes us, we like them back, and are much more likely to display gestures and expressions that communicate a sense of closeness.  (I am thinking particularly of Malvolio in Shakespeare’s Twelfth Night.)  Radiate your delight at being in the presence of your “loving” audience, and they will reciprocate.

Display your curiosity
One of the easiest presentations to give is to report research about the audience to the audience.  All audiences are fascinated with themselves.  If you can tell them things you’ve learned about them, or about individual members of the audience, and express real interest in what they do and how they do it, you stand a better chance of building rapport.

Remember this:  if you’re a speaker and you lack empathy, you’re like a sled dog who has slipped out of his harness.  You’re not connected, and you’re moving nobody forward.

Sims Wyeth is a speech coach in Montclair, NJ specializing in presentation skills and public speaking training in order to give accomplished people the knowledge and skill they need to become accomplished speakers. Learn more public speaking tips at www.SimsWyeth.com.

Empathy is our ability to understand the thoughts and feelings of others.  It makes us more successful in our personal lives and in our careers because it makes us able to connect with those around us.

Leaders and managers need empathy to build a bond with their direct reports one-on-one.  But perhaps even more important to their rapport with others is the ability to display their empathy as public speakers.

It is at such high-stakes moments that listeners develop in their hearts and minds a snapshot of the speaker’s character—an image that they carry with them.  If a speaker lacks empathy—that is, if she demonstrates a lack of understanding of their view of the issues under discussion and their feelings—her audience will disengage from her.

One way to demonstrate empathy with an audience is to talk about them.  Make your content listener-centric.

For instance, if you are presenting a new product to a sales force, it would be best to begin by demonstrating that you understand the challenges the reps are currently facing in the marketplace.

If presenting the same product to a new customer, begin by demonstrating that you are familiar with the difficulties of their business.

Only after you have shown an understanding of their situation should you introduce your product as a solution to their needs.

As you elaborate on your product (or service) you will be continuously linking its features and functions to the needs of your audience.

The actual content of your presentation will be all about how cool your product or service is, but you will have framed it around their experience

This may seem manipulative, but it’s not.  Remember, empathy is not the same as sympathy. Sympathy implies that you feel the same as the other person.  Empathy only means that you understand how they think and feel.

By using your powers of empathy, you are more able to get and hold their attention by making your ideas more relevant to their frame of experience.

If you are truly trying to help them, your skill is not manipulative.  It is caring and constructive.

Sims Wyeth is a speech coach in Montclair, NJ specializing in presentation skills and public speaking training in order to give accomplished people the knowledge and skill they need to become accomplished speakers. Learn more public speaking tips at www.SimsWyeth.com.

This article is based on a book preview in Fortune Magazine, Oct 27, 2008.  The book is: Talent is Overrated by Geoff Colvin.

We admire great performers and often attribute their success to a unique talent they have for their particular field.

The problem is that there is no evidence that talent has much to do with extraordinary performance.  In fact, a few researchers contend that the very existence of talent is not, as they carefully put it, supported by evidence.  If this is true, our naïve belief in this “thing we call talent” misdirects our efforts and undermines our potential to develop ourselves and others.

Thanks to recent findings, we now have a more accurate view of how top performers in any field achieve their remarkable results.

So what do top performers do—to win the prize, earn the money, bask in the glory, get the girl, get the Standing O, and blow away the competition?

They do what scientists call Deliberate Practice (DP).

Deliberate Practice has the following characteristics:

1. DP is designed to improve performance.  It is highly targeted, even engineered to address particular weaknesses that the performer has.  It is almost always designed and implemented by a teacher, coach, or expert of some kind.
2. DP is stultifyingly repetitious.  Most people practice what they’re good at because it feels good, and they do it until they get tired.  Top performers practice what they’re bad at, even though it’s frustrating and humiliating, and they do it to the point of mental and physical exhaustion. They go until they break down old habits, and have to develop new ones.
3. DP provides continuous feedback.  Every swing of the club, every passage in the concerto, every stump speech given, every marketing tactic undertaken, every meeting run– is assessed, measured, compared, and diagnosed for improvement.
4. DP is mentally demanding.  The quality of our attention is more indicative of success than our willingness to endure mindless repetition.  The more we concentrate on the task, the less time needed to improve.  
5. DP is so hard that few people have the stomach.  Most of us lack the desire and the belief in self required to endure the long mental, emotional, and physical struggle needed to achieve world class performance.  This is good news for some.  It means that if you’re willing to put in the work, you won’t have much competition.

The bad news is that most business cultures are not using the principles of DP.  It’s cheaper and less risky to stick you in a job doing things you already know how to do and keep you there.  And the feedback you get may not be continuous, or useful.

Of course, this means that the opportunities for achieving advantage by adopting the principles of great performance are huge.  A few companies realize that.  They embed mentoring and coaching in the culture, use developmental assignments, and put people through high-fidelity simulations.

But if you want to try it yourself, there are things you should do before, during, and after the work.

Before the work:  Set goals, not only for outcomes, but for how you will achieve the outcomes.  Top performers focus on the process, and even on one aspect of the process.

During the work:   Self-regulate.  Be mindful of what’s happening in the moment.  Top distance runners scan their heart rate and breathing patterns to maintain a target ratio between steps and breaths.  Average runners tend to think about anything other than what they’re doing because what they’re doing is painful.  Even in purely mental work, elite performers monitor what they’re thinking—it’s called metacognition—knowledge about knowledge, thinking about your own thinking. 

After the work:  Assess yourself against a chosen standard.  Average people are content to say they did well, okay or poorly.  Top performers are more specific.  They measure themselves against a standard that is relevant to what they are trying to achieve.  Such a standard could be their last effort, or the results achieved by a competitor, or the world record.  Too high a standard is of course discouraging.  Too low a standard produces no advancement. 

What you do with the evaluation of your performance will determine your success.  Chances are your performance wasn’t perfect, and parts of it were unpleasant.  Elite performers respond by changing their approach, trying new behaviors, and getting back into the task.  Average performers are more likely to avoid the unpleasant parts, and go back to what felt easy.

What you want—deeply want—is fundamental to success.  Deliberate Practice is hard.  It demands sacrifice now for results later.  You have to want the results badly to put up with the sacrifice. 

And you must believe in the work—believe that it will bring you the results you’re looking for.   Without that belief, you will not have the ability to endure the difficulties. You will begin to think that you just don’t have the talent.  And when you think that, you will stop working.   And that will be the end of your development.

The price of top-level achievement is high.  Few are willing to pay it.  But most of us can learn how to use the elements of Deliberate Practice and put them to work for our own purposes.

Those who do will stand out. 

Sims Wyeth is a speech coach in Montclair, NJ specializing in presentation skills and public speaking training in order to give accomplished people the knowledge and skill they need to become accomplished speakers. Learn more public speaking tips at www.SimsWyeth.com.

I just met a client, a young woman new to the work force and recently hired by a consulting firm, who had studied oratory and debating in high school. I don’t think I’ve ever had a client with similar experience in my 20 years working with speakers.

She had a remarkable ability to be still when standing in front of the crowd. Not just still on her feet, although she was good at that, but still in her composure. She had the ability to remain at rest even while projecting her ideas effectively.

When I suggested an alternative to the beginning of her talk, she responded with ease, using the approach in her own way and increasing the power and impact of her remarks.

She was the youngest person in the room, yet she had the most authority and stature.

If she’s as good at mastering the mountains of data required for success in her field as she is at the basic mechanics of communicating, she will go far.

I have high hopes she will give me some of the credit, while of course I will humbly deny any responsibility.

Blaise Pascal was a 17th century French mathematical genius who spelled out the laws of probability more clearly than anyone before him.  This was a watershed moment, because for the first time humanity had a systematic way of thinking about the future.

Pascal was both a gambler and a religious zealot.  He wanted to know if God really exists, which is knowledge not easily acquired.  So the next question was, “Should I act as if God exists, or should I act as if He does not exist?”

Suppose, said Pascal, that we lead a life of virtue and self-restraint, and when the day of reckoning comes, we discover there is no God.  Well, life was not too bad being good.  Maybe  life could have been a little more fun, but … this is a consequence that most people could accept.

Suppose however,  we bet that God does not exist, and lead a life of lust, violence, and depravity, only to discover that God really does exist.  Suddenly we’re looking at some serious time in the furnace of the underworld.  Pascal was not willing to take this chance.

Pascal’s wager is helpful for speakers.  When recommending a course of action to an audience that seeks GOG (greed, opportunity, and glory) a speaker should spend time exploring the possible downsides.  Risk is always present, no matter how close the goal appears.

For instance, hedge fund managers often make a huge bet, and then borrow even more money to put down on the bet to increase their potential earnings.  They do this because their data tells them that it’s practically a sure thing.  The problem arises when their data, which is about the past, does not apply to the future.  And if they have borrowed more money than they can easily pay back, their creditors close them down, and their clients lose their money.

A persuasive speaker, when advocating for a course of action, will ask the question, “How will we deal with surprises?  What are the consequences if we are wrong in our assumptions? “  Risk is the eternal possibility of being wrong–not always in an adverse direction.  Sometimes you’re wrong and things turn out better than expected.

When recommending a decision to an audience, it is wise to explore the consequences of your being wrong.   Sometimes the consequences are trivial (lead a good life but get no prize in Heaven), and sometimes they are not (lead a bad life and cook slowly forever.)

Rather than let the audience try to poke holes in your argument, you should do it yourself.  Give your presentation a pressure test, and see if it holds up.

Effective persuasion starts with the recognition that any forecast can be wrong, then weighs the consequences of being wrong.   Even if success will lead to fame, wealth and glory, you will be more credible if you surface the negative possibilities, and can honestly dismiss them as trivial.

On June 20th in the Wall Street Journal, in response to the media coverage of Tim Russert’s untimely death, Peggy Noonan wrote in her Declarations column, “When somebody dies we tell his story and try to define and isolate what was special about it–what it was he brought to the party, how he enhanced life by showing up. In this way we educate ourselves about what really matters.”

“In a way, the world is a great liar. It shows you it worships and admires money, but at the end of the day it doesn’t. It says it adores fame and celebrity, but it doesn’t, not really. The world admires, and wants to hold on to, and not lose, goodness. It admires virtue. [...] That’s what we talk about in eulogies, because that’s what’s important.”

Reading this, it struck me that we could say the same thing about public speaking. We make a show of admiring speakers who are clever, rich with data slides, equipped with approved platform behaviors and polished texts. But in the end, what we really like in speakers is character.

Character traits that appeal to audiences are varied, but certainly confidence is one, tempered, we hope, with humility. Genuine interest in the audience is another, or at least an empathetic understanding of their needs and concerns.

Finally, I myself like speakers who appear to be authentic, true to themselves, not working too hard to please me, but are nevertheless skilled at holding my attention.

Think about this. When a speech or presentation is over, which do you remember the longest: what the speaker said, or the impression the speaker created?

Decision makers rarely undertake an important project without first hearing the project leader explain it to them. They are listening for two things–grasp of the material, and the requisite character needed to overcome the inevitable obstacles any large project will encounter.

When a presentation is over, and listeners gather to discuss it and pass judgment, the speaker’s expertise is the dimension they consider overtly. But deep down, their decisions are informed by their perceptions of the speaker’s character.

Dividing the Dais

Sharing a podium is a frequent method for by-passing yet another dry presentation and (we hope) generating heat and light between two or more people seated on stage engaging in friendly verbal exchanges.

In my experience, each speaker prepares and delivers a short talk (less than 10 minutes) on the topic being considered, takes a few questions from the moderator, his fellow panelists and the audience.

After all the panelists have had their turn to address the audience for 10 minutes, the moderator encourages the audience to ask more questions, which they do, and each panelist, in turn, ventures a response.

It can be a good model.  It limits the damage that any one presenter can inflict on a meeting.  It allows for a variety of perspectives.  It is more audience-centric than a traditional presentation.  And if the moderator is good, she can create drama by teasing out the differences between panelists and creating healthy debate.

But speakers and panelists should remember a few rules of etiquette.

1. Prepare your opening remarks as you would a public speech.  It should be engaging, formally presented, and end on time.
2. If you are first to speak, acknowledge at the start the moderator, the sponsoring organization, and your fellow panelists.
3. If you can, and if it’s allowed, stand to deliver your opening remarks.  If there’s a lectern, move to stand at it.  Please click here to learn the difference between a lectern and a podium.
4. If you are not first, it is always a good idea to find something positive to say about those who spoke before you.
5. If you want to disagree with someone, do so in the most diplomatic manner.
6. In fact, before disagreeing, ask the speaker you disagree with if your understanding of her remark is correct.  If she says yes, then you may proceed.
7. It is never a good idea to say, “You’re wrong,” to someone, especially on stage.  Rather, you could say, “I see it differently,” or “I have a different perspective.”
8. Resist the temptation to be the center of attention.  Your goal should be to contribute to the public discourse by throwing whatever light you can on the subject.
9. Refer to your fellow speakers by name.
10. Remember to sit up straight and project your voice, even though you may be seated (I sound like my mother.)  Make sure you make effective use of any microphones supplied.  And finally, visibly enjoy yourself.  Refrain from looking and sounding like a leg of lamb moldering on the table.

The audience will be alert to any signs of tension between panelists.  Treat your fellow speakers with respect, and your character will speak even more persuasively than your thoughtful remarks.

Cicero, the great Roman statesman and orator, said that he preferred tongue-tied intelligence to ignorant loquacity. That’s a convenient polarity, and one we’re familiar with.

We see the former occasionally when college professors make an appearance on national TV. They can look like owls with ruffled feathers blinking in the glare of daylight. We see the latter in religious and political demagogues, strutting across the stage belching clouds of rehearsed phrases in predictable cadence. We all prefer thoughtful speakers who have something to say.

But it’s not really a fair distinction. For instance, we can have tongue-tied ignorance and intelligent loquacity. An example of the former would be the poor unfortunate Miss South Carolina, who got nervous when asked why Americans couldn’t find their own country on a map of the globe.

And then we have Hans Rosling, a doctor, researcher, and inventor of the Trendalyzer, who is intelligent and loquacious. Substance, style, humor and surprise combine to make this guy one of the best presenters you will see.  If you have a few minutes, click on this gripping video.

Cicero was being a snob and had his tongue in his cheek. His witty remark only draws attention to his own erudition when he says that he prefers substance to style. And he was known as a great orator who had both, only he didn’t want you to notice his style. He wanted you to pay attention to what he was saying.

Style that is unrelated to substance we see as antique, grandiose, and phony. We worry that if we wave our arms around too much when we speak, people will think we’re imitating William Jennings Bryan.

So we choose a different style–one that is conversational and carefully moderated for the intimacy of our zoom lenses and lavaliere mics. We might like to think of it as “natural,” but in reality it is as much a style as any other. It is a behavior that we choose to achieve an effect.

19th Century orators waved their arms around and shouted over the rooftops because they wanted to be seen and heard. There were no video-magnification screens around the battlefield when Edward Everett spoke for two hours at Gettysburg before Lincoln got his chance. No microphones allowed him to give an intimate grave-side chat to the grieving throng. Horses were neighing. Dogs barked. The wind pushed his voice back into his mouth . To focus the eyes and ears of the audience, Everett needed to pump it up.

Let’s not be snobs and argue that we prefer substance to style. Such a stance often masks an inability or unwillingness to capture and hold the attention of others.

Instead, let’s say that style brings life, texture and nuance to substance.

Let’s say we prefer our speakers to be confident, to know what they think, and to feel the truthfulness of their thoughts as they speak them. The substance of style is the feeling of truth in the words being spoken.

I prefer intelligent loquacity to tongue-tied ignorance. I prefer style that brings substance to life.

You will have noticed, if you’ve read through these postings, that I am a fan of Henry Ward Beecher, one of the greatest speakers in American history.  Even Lincoln looked up to him.

Here is a description of Beecher written by Milton MacKaye and published in The New Yorker.

Henry Ward Beecher had a genius for bringing the most somnolent audience to life.  One July morning he rode into a West Virginia town which was widely known in lecture circles as “Death Valley”–for the reason that any speaker unfortunate enough to have an engagement to lecture there wilted and curled up when he faced the town’s stupid and indifferent audience.

Beecher was duly warned.  That afternoon, when he was being introduced, half the audience was already dozing.  Beecher rose from his chair and, wiping his brow with a large handkerchief, strode to the front of the platform.

“It’s a God-damned hot day,” the clergyman began.

A thousand pairs of eyes goggled and an electrical shock straightened the crowd erect.  Beecher paused and then, raising a finger of solemn reproof, went on, “That’s what I heard a man say here this afternoon!”

He proceeded into a stirring condemnation of blasphemy–and took his audience with him.

This is a good reminder: the first job of a speaker is to get attention.  The second is to keep it.