The Many Faces of You

Today, let's try something that requires a little more audience partiticipation. It's an exercise designed to illustrate the many roles each individual plays in society. You will need to make sure that each participant has paper and pencil handy. Ask your listeners to put headings above sections of the paper for each group they're in. For instance, over one area  they might write "Family" and over another area "Work." They need to leave enough room to write additional material. After they have listed all their groups, they are to look at one group heading at a time, then list all the titles/roles they hold in that group. For instance, under family I might write: Son, Father, Brother, Husband, etc. Participants can either form small groups to discuss their lists or work together to form a larger list for the whole room.

I'd like to thank Steve Sheridan for the idea that started this exercise.

Remember Your Father

Today we'll branch out a little from speaking to writing. It's likely you'll have to do both at some time in your life, even if you only write an email to request customer service help from a company, or a short letter to accompany your resume. Maybe you're one of the people who consider themselves skilled with words. Maybe you're completely at a loss for a starting place. Whatever your comfort level, the systematic approach is best.

The time-honored formula for successful writing includes planning the piece, getting something written to work with, shaping the writing to your goal, and cleaning up grammar, spelling and punctuation. It is usually advisable to handle these items in this order. The steps are known respectively as Prewriting, Drafting, Revising, and Editing. You can remember this by using a little acronym I chose, PaDRE.

Prewriting involves deciding on the ideas that you want to include in your writing. You may use such tools as mindmapping or brainstorming to decide these items. You may just scratch out a few bullet points on scrap paper, or make a full outline.

Once you know what you want to write about, you begin. Go start to finish, and get something written or typed out, creating your draft. Do not stop to rework sections, or correct your writing at this point.

When the draft is done it will trigger more ideas, and you may see that you want to add, subtract, and move things quite a bit. That's not a sign of deficiency, it is how things get done. You refine your ideas and their expression at this stage, the revision.

If you are certain that you have arranged your writing the way you want it is time to proofread. Check out spelling, grammar, and punctuation. Remember that using a word processing program is no substitute for a thorough understanding of English and a complete check of your work.

You may feel you are good at turning a phrase, or cranking out pages of expressive copy, but this systematic method will give you a much stronger handle on your final output. Try it, you'll even impress yourself!

Streaming Conscience

As you probably know, Netflix has stirred some controversy for itself lately. It began when Netflix announced that it would be dividing its two services, rental DVDs delivered by mail and on-demand video streaming. It also announced significant price hikes. Customers objected to the price hikes but could no longer choose a combined monthly rental-and-streaming plan. For many customers this amounted to doubling their monthly bill.

I usually analyze actions like this in very simple terms. I ask myself, “What do I like?” If I concentrate on simple answers like “cheaper” or “faster” I am usually able to gauge the response of my fellow consumers. In this case I decided that Netflix would have to act soon to stem the flood of criticism and cancelled plans. Well, today they acted. They emailed an explanation. Big deal.

Consumers have seen enough companies go down in flames (Gateway computer, for instance) to know that executive/marketing types don’t always know what they’re doing. If you send a long explanation it means you think things are more complicated than just giving shoppers what they want at a price they’ll pay. They don’t care. That explanation is just to make you feel there’s some reason you can’t do that.

The email gives me the impression that Netflix executives think I would be happy with the rate change if they had just explained it more fully. Nope. That’s how politicians and college freshman dismiss those who don’t agree with them. No student in my Business Communication course could get away with such an ‘apology’ letter.

Netflix' worst mistake was sending an explanation at all. When I read it, I was looking for the “We know you hated this so here’s how we’ll make it up to you” part. There is none. Netflix wants customers to accept their service and rates again without addressing concerns in a tangible way. How about if I started paying Netflix only half what my plan costs, but sent them boring explanation emails? The email raised the expectation that Netflix understood their customers, their reasons for leaving, and the way the company could compensate them in part. The message disappointed that expectation. In fact here’s a direct quote from the email:

For the past five years, my greatest fear at Netflix has been that we wouldn't make the leap from success in DVDs to success in streaming. Most companies that are great at something – like AOL dialup or Borders bookstores – do not become great at new things people want (streaming for us). So we moved quickly into streaming, but I should have personally given you a full explanation of why we are splitting the services and thereby increasing prices. It wouldn’t have changed the price increase, but it would have been the right thing to do.

So, what should that email have said, since Netflix just had to send one? First paragraph: apology for shocking the customers with such drastic changes all at once. Second paragraph: pledge to do what is necessary to keep or win back our business. Third paragraph: announcement of partial rollback of rate structure, or a significant discount code (hint: 10% means nothing). Without this kind of basic business technique Netflix will not reach many consumers. Maybe they're the ones who don't understand.

Listen First

Yes, this really happened.  It's a good example of saying a lot without listening.

A few years ago I called a restaurant to make reservations and this is the conversation that ensued.

Restaurant:  Thanks for calling La Ristorante Authentico (not its real name).

Me:  I'd like to make a reservation for six-fifteen, please.

Restaurant:  I'm sorry, we don't take reservations here, we do call-ahead seating.

Me:  What's that?

Restaurant:  If you can be here in 10 to 20 minutes you call ahead and we seat you when you get here.

Me:  Okay, I'd like to be seated at six-fifteen.

Restaurant:  I'm sorry, it's only a quarter to six now.  You'll have to call back at six o'clock.

Me:  Well, can I have you write me in now for six?

Restaurant:  Sure, that was for six people?

Me:  No, six o'clock.  Ten people.

Restaurant:  Ten people?  Oh, we can't possibly be ready for ten people in fifteen minutes.

Me:  Okay, can you set us up for six-fifteen?

Restaurant:  Sure.

When we arrived we weren't seated until 6:30.  Several of our party ordered lasagna.  The waitress returned after placing our order to tell us they were out of lasagna.  After selecting alternates and waiting a while for them to arrive, we were told that there was lasagna after all and we could change our orders.  It's a good thing we didn't, our food took an hour to arrive.  Probably because they didn't start the order until after they offered us the newly-found lasagna.  I always wondered where they found it.

Minimum Usable Force

I want to spend the next few entries helping those that may find some conversations don't go as well as hoped and wonder why.  There are a some principles that can guide a speaker through the rocky shoals.  Once they become a matter of habit your can expect your blood pressure to drop.  The first principle appears in a lot of guises in other areas of life.  It is simply the idea that you use the least possible pressure to get the job done.  This is a concept already known to radio operators and law enforcement officers.  I've borrowed a term for it:  Minimum Usable Force.

What does Minimum Usable Force mean during, say, a performance review?  It means you will phrase your negative statements as lightly as you can without sacrificing your point.  Imagine you must meet with an employee and point out a repeated failure to meet deadlines.  You can choose to state your case in a way that makes a blanket statement focusing on the individual such as "You don't get your work done," or you can limit your observation to something more specific, for instance "Your work usually isn't in by the expected date."  In the first sentence there are greater implications about the character of the employee, and while it may be warranted, it will be harder for the employee to answer without becoming defensive.  Both sentences discuss the same problem, but if your listener is the type to take offense the second will give you both some room to maneuver.   The second statement focuses on the work itself, in a way that can be checked and verified.  Here's a script to suggest how this might help:

You:  Now there is an item we need to spend a minute on here.  It seems that your work is often submitted after the due date.

Employee:  Are you saying I'm lazy?

You:  No.  I want to see what can be done to improve the timeliness of the work, that's all.

Employee:  But when you say that you're saying I'm procrastinating or something, like I don't do my job.

You:  Not at all.  There could be any number of reasons why this happens.  Of course I would like your perspective on this.

Employee:  Oh.  Well, I can tell you why it usually happens...

You get the idea.  Naturally, if you're a supervisor dealing with this employee on numerous tasks you will be tempted at times to blaze away in anger with a statement like "You're as slow as molasses in January," or something more insulting.  Developing a light touch will keep you from having to apologize, backpedal, or raise your voice quite as often.

I is for Impression

Here's another way to phrase statements that will help you get past the automatic defenses we all raise when we hear something we don't like.  The technique is to leave room for you listeners to disagree with you and still be right.  Leave them the opportunity to contradict you without feeling they are creating a confrontation.  There is a straightforward way to do this:  Make a statement that presents your point of view and your reasons, rather than a flat pronouncement.  You can utilize a form of the "I" statement for this.

There are times when I observe a student in my classroom who makes very little eye contact, frequently looks at the door, and fidgets quite a lot.  One way to sum up the situation in speaking with the student could be to say "You're not paying attention."  You can imagine the replies I would get - anything from "Yes I am" to "I already know this stuff."

This is usually my approach:  "I get the impression you have other things on your mind."  If the student asks for a reason I can mention the behaviors I observed.  In the case of at least one student I was dealing with a case of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, but I found this out because the student was willing to open up to me.  I doubt I would have reached that point by verbally slapping him at our first meeting.

The pattern to follow is to allow part of your statement to be subjective.  Rather than state that such-and-such is a fact, you state why you think is true.  The listener can then bring other facts to light, or correct your reasoning without thinking they are flatly contradicting  you.  You have practically invited them to respond.  The lines of communication remain open.

Give them Space

You're about to make a very important point.  You're sure you're right.  You're expecting some opposition.  Use my third principle to get a fair hearing.  It's the principle of the Tentative Statement.

Before I explain, I want to make clear that I am not asking you to ignore facts or compromise principles.  I am suggesting that you avoid statements that will allow for no retreat. Use phrases like "because of x I think y."  Your listeners can then bring other facts to your attention, or offer another interpretation of your facts.  This will avoid some of the raised voices and flat contradictions you might otherwise encounter.

You've worded things in such a way that you are not making pronouncements from on high.  You've created a dialog.  If someone doesn't like something you say they are bound to talk about it.  They may as well say their piece directly to you.

Easier to Say is Easier to Remember

I'd like to help you step away from a tendency that is common among beginning speakers.  This is the tendency to go too far.  When you say too much you make it hard for listeners to rememmber.

I have a lot of chances to visit the classrooms of new college instructors.  They've got large textbooks and short quarters.  They often feel pressured to talk about everything in the textbook during a lecture to make sure they've "covered" everything.  This would be an admirable goal if it weren't based on a fallacy.
  

The underlying assumption of a long lecture is that if the teacher has said a thing the students know it.  I doubt that more than one percent of us could repeat a 20-minute lecture word-for-word 10 minutes after we have heard it.  So we clearly don't fully know what was said, let alone how to understand or apply it.

The solution makes life easier for you as the presenter and for the listener.  You take big ideas you want to communicate and explore them, leaving out some details or related ideas that are lower priority.  Spend more of your presentation time building meaning for your listeners.  You do this by helping them to apply the concept they have just learned through questions and examples.

Let's use Maslow's hierarchy as an example.  You could show a Powerpoint slide with all the levels of Maslow's hierarchy and their definitions, reading each to your listeners, then explaining further, helping them catch up on some much-needed sleep.  Or, you could ask, "How many of you ever gave up trying to make dinner because you were so tired, and didn't eat anything until breakfast the next day?  Some needs outweigh others and must be satisfied first.  Abraham Maslow described types of needs and which order they must be satisfied in."   You could then ask them to contribute to a list of needs and rank them.  Once they've got the general idea they will easily understand Maslow's work and can assimilate the details.

To apply my own principle here:  Just remember to give the big ideas in a simple way.  This makes them easy to remember.  Details come in time.

New World Errors

I'm really surprised by the amount of people who make these common errors:

Using apostrophes to form plurals.  That would make this last sentence read "Use apostrophe's for their plural's."  I am amazed that seeing a few other people make this mistake sways them from everything they were taught for years in school.  This seems to arise from the fact that we have seen a lot of advertising material in the last few years that use the abbreviations CD's and MP3's among others, but the apostrophe only applies to plurals of abbreviations like these initials, and it is OPTIONAL.  So it is really not even need there.

Trying to extend a word by multiplying the last letter of the word, instead of the last letter of a word that is pronounced.  If you have decided to marry someone you might write "She is the ONNNNNNNE!" but not "She is the ONEEEEEEE!"  Better yet, stop trying to write like you are speaking.  Writing has its own virtues.  Exploit them.  And yes, in this context its should have no apostrophe.

The world's only forensic lexicologist draws unfavorable conclusions about linguistic abilities when he sees these errors.

You Don't Say So

I've noticed a new trend in extemporaneous speech.  It's the habit of start a statement or conversation with the word so.  I've noticed myself doing it, and I am making a conscious effort to stop, just as if I were saying "uh" frequently.  My technique for now is simply to pause half a beat before speaking, to give myself time to filter the word out if I was about to use it.
  
The problem is that so is a conjunction, and should usually be used to join.  When you start out with it there is nothing to join, unless you are building your sentence on something someone else just said.

Yes, if you pick up this habit you will sound trendy, but you will also sound shallow.  Do not let the crowd or a habit control your speech.  While I was writing this little entry I found myself ready to type "so" at least four times, but quick reflection helped me make other choices.  It didn't take long to edit my phrasing, but it helped me stop going to my default.  Now I've got a reflective practice I can use for other areas of my writing and speaking.  I hope you will try it too.

On Plagiarism

Due to the nature of my work and personal life I often come across plagiarism, usually because I am the one responsible for documenting and responding to it.  Yesterday it came to my attention in two ways.  I found the substance of a pastor’s Sunday sermon point-for-point in a commentary, and Melania Trump is accused of copying parts of her speech from Michelle Obama.  One article about the Trump situation lists all the accusations of plagiarism against the current crop of politicians, and I found a news article about a college professor who committed massive amounts of plagiarism.  He had a very lucrative contract teaching police officers how to do their jobs.

Academics will tell you that the main reason students plagiarize is to save time, so they encourage students to start their work well in advance of due dates.  I estimate that about half of the students in my classes who plagiarize are not rushed, they are intellectually lazy and, of course, dishonest.

Just to get a definition out of the way, I’m not referring to a botched citation format.  I am using the term plagiarism to mean deliberately representing the ideas or work of another as your own, or at the very least knowing they are not your own and failing to give credit where it is due.

The first thing that comes to my mind when realizing our politicians are comfortable stealing the work of others is what that tells us about the taxes we can expect.  The next is that these people do not have a lot to offer us.  They are either not smart enough, not ambitious enough, or not visionary enough to craft their own messages.  They are not secure enough to let others get some of the credit for their speech.   And they certainly are not highly scrupulous or careful of details.

Now we come to the case of the pastor.  Following the practice of forensic lexicology, I determined that his sermon material was not original.  A quick search on the Internet took me to his source, where I found that with the exception of adding one example from a movie and one from his personal life (or was that really someone else’s story, too?) he was paraphrasing every point, examples included, from a commentary on Paul’s letter to the church at Philippi.  There are three problems with this.

First, the work in question is copyright protected.  Yes, I checked.  It would have been bad enough if this was a book of sermons for sale but it was not.

Second, this is a symptom of a spiritual problem.  I have suspected for some time that most of his sermons were not original.  Since the preaching duties rotate at our church, he only has to preach about twenty sermons per year.  As lead pastor, I expect him to be a man close to God.  He should be learning and growing every day, and have things that he wants to convey to his congregation.  If he cannot do this a handful of times per year I wonder about his faith.

Third, there is deception involved.  Because the actual authors referred to the original language texts, cultural situations, and related quotes from church history, this message created the appearance of great scholarship where there was none.  To get ready for the sermon series, the pastor also had some members of the congregation produce a study guide to the book of Philippians.  This is a great aid, to be sure, but it implies that there has been some massive study underway, when in reality this man only needed to recite a few pages from someone else’s book.

So much for “Provide things honest in the sight of all men”. (Romans 12:17)

That's What Mr. Lincoln Said

 Since this post is being published on President's Day I wanted to reflect on one particular speech. I had to memorize it in elementary school and deliver in front of a crowd. It was considered a required part of curriculum, at least back then.

I am referring the Lincoln's Gettysburg address. It was delivered at the dedication of the cemetary at the site of the battle at Gettysburg. He was preceded by another speaker, former President of Harvard and United States Senator Edward Everett. Everett spoke for around two hours, which was not as unusual as it might sound today. Think of the friend you know who tunes in to their favorite talk show for three hours a day. 

But Lincoln only spoke for about two minutes. He summed up the point of the conflict, but he also pointed out that the Declaration of Independence was written with the premise that "all men are created equal", at at time when the Constitution but not the Declaration was referred to in arguments over slavery. 

What Lincoln thought would be a set of forgettable remarks became an immortal message.

For more on the Gettysburg Address see the article on History.com .

A Speech in Three Words?

In this post and the next I will provide you with one method for starting a speech from scratch.  This method is designed to do two things for you.  First, it will require a fraction of the effort required to start writing out a speech word for word and stop when you’ve got everything recorded.  Second, it will take you a long way toward memorizing your speech without the grueling hours of rote memorization.  So what do you have to give up in exchange for these advantages?  You must let go of the idea that your delivery must be word-perfect.  You are not planning to write out and repeat every idea to your audience verbatim.  What you will do to get started is answer two questions.  

The first is “What is my point?”  You should be able to state in a single sentence the thesis of your speech.  It will probably read something like “I want to persuade my listeners to vote for me” or “I need to explain the company’s new vacation policy”.

The second question is “What information do my listeners need?”  Create several short sentences that will answer a question like “How do you do that?” or “How can you prove that?” and arrange them in the order you will present them.  Read all the notes over several times, and pick out one or two keywords from each point.  You might find that you can actually sum up the points of your speech with one sentence for your main point and a pair of words for each of your subpoints.  

When you have broken your work down into these bare-bones elements you will see how easy it is to memorize the form of your speech compared to memorizing a five-minute speech word for word.  Even if you weren’t able to shorten your subpoints to keywords you won’t have much trouble remembering the thrust of four or five sentences.  Once you are able to rattle these off in order without a lot of fumbling you are ready for the next steps, which will be described in my next post.

For now, get started on this stage, and you will lose a lot of your fear of speaking.

Dr. King as an Example

 Since this entry is being released on the day we honor Dr. Martin Luther King, I thought it would be appropriate to recommend some time listening to speeches he delivered. You can find a great playlist here.

Wrap It Up

In my last post I walked you through a process that starts a speech with just key ideas, and helps you memorize those ideas rather than trying to write out and remember a full text.  Now let's round it out with more material and a clear beginning and ending.

You have obviously only memorized about a minute worth of material so far, and you probably need more.  Most of it will come from expanding your points with explanation.  The rest will come in the form of an introduction and conclusion.

We will start with the body of your speech.  You are able to recall each of your points.  Speak each one out loud as you might way it to an audience, and then follow it with some explanation.  For instance, let's imagine that your main point is that the smokers in your audience should give up cigarettes, and the first keyword you memorized was money.  You might say out loud "I want to persuade you to quit smoking, and the first reason I think you should is money.  It costs a lot to keep that habit going.  Think about what you could be buying if you didn't spend money on cigarettes."  Most of this explanation was already on your mind when you wrote out your points in our last step, so it shouldn't be too hard to speak this much without a script.  Go through all your points in order this way several times and you will find you have almost created an entire speech ready in your memory.

Now for the introduction.  Find a way to catch the attention of your audience.  Ask them a question or give them startling information.  You might start by asking "Do you know how much you spend in a year if you smoke a pack of cigarettes every day?"  Once they are listening, tell them who you are and why they should believe you.  Maybe you quit smoking yourself, or you've done research on the topic.  Mention whatever helps your credibility with your audience.  Tell them what they will get for their attention.  "This speech will help you save money and may even save your life!"  When you have covered these bases you are ready to get to your main point.  From there you work your way through your points as you have already practiced.

Finish off by leaving them with one thought that will stick.  Summarize your speech in one sentence, or repeat your best argument, for example.  In this case it might be "What will you do with all that extra spending money?" that makes the impression.

Using this simplified method may take a bit of practice, but once you have the method down you will be able to produce and present speeches in a fraction of the time it would take to create and recall full texts.  Now you can relax and enjoy your audience!

Ethical Leadership Matters

               “Well,” my friend told me, “I told them, you’re adults, work it out for yourselves.”  I was sitting with a former retail manager.  She had started her story by telling me how her sales staff would get in fights on the sales floor to get the commission on a pair of socks.

                I pointed out to her that fighting on the sales floor was their way of working it out.  The problem here was that neither one had the authority or the leverage to settle the situation.  Let’s imagine that one of the sales staff had earned a sale, call her Joan.  While she is distracted by a question her customer walks up to the cash register and pays another associate, Tim, who rings the sale under his own number, intentionally stealing the sale. 

                Tim definitely will not give up his sale, and Joan has no way of getting it back on her own, she can only confront Tim, and perhaps threaten to do the same to him.  The situation is already getting out of hand, but if one of the two does not back down it will also probably get loud and vulgar, forcing my friend the manager to step in.

                Think about how different the situation would be if the manager has stepped in early and made a determination.  It would have been settled and both parties would have to move on.  Yes, someone may come away upset with the decision, but the upset would not be any greater than what occurred on the sales floor anyway.  The intervention would also send a clear message to employees that the boss is willing to fix things.  This assures them that they do not have to resort to fights on the sales floor.

                This type of leadership isn’t easy.  It requires the courage to stand up for principles, the ability to take criticism for your decisions, the judgment to make the right call, and a good ethical foundation to frame these actions.  Consistently ethical leadership may not be popular with all followers, but it will build a foundation of trust with coworkers and subordinates.  It is also the best way to attract and retain employees who are ethical themselves, which is a big payoff in itself.