Presenters: Do The Diagnostic

"In our scan and skip world, in a world where technology makes it obvious that we can treat different people differently, how can we possibly justify teaching via a speech?  Speech is both linear and unpaceable. You can’t skip around and you can’t speed it up. When the speaker covers something you know, you are bored. When he quickly covers something you don’t understand, you are lost."--Seth Godin

I get what he's saying, and I think that one of the real issues is the fact that speakers need to do their homework. When we automatically  believe that what we have to say is actually what our audience needs to hear, we get into trouble.

Most of the success of a presentation happens before the speaker ever stands up.

 

Do the diagnostic

• Is a presentation really the best way to communicate?

• If so, what does my "audience" want and need to hear? (call some of them on the phone and ask them. They'll give you your content).

• How can I connect the dots instead of provide facts alone?

• Do I still need a presentation?

• If I do, is it better to sit around a table and connect rather than stand up and create a classroom/teacher atmosphere?

• If it's a stand-up, what media can I use to keep people engaged? (Bullet points probably aren't the right answer).

• If it's a stand-up, why use media at all? If my message is crafted with word images and created to incite action, then I should be able to do that in 20 minutes or less. That's about the attention span before people start squirming in their seats.

Remember this: You are the presentation. It's your passion, knowledge, credibility, and language that will engage the group. And how 'real' you are will determine the depth of your connection.

Comments

[Mary Jo Asmus]

Great post and questions for thought, Steve. It seems to me that it takes a whole lot of courage to do more than just "present". I just had the experience of being asked to "present" (with powerpoint and bullets) to a global group of leaders. It was an interesting discussion with the conference planners because they insisted that the outcomes of the "speech" needed to be for the group to come up their own solutions to the topic at hand. Yet he wanted me to stand up and blah blah blah. I said that I wouldn't do that (I was happy to provide basic information and lead a conversation amongst the participants, though), and left without a contract, which was okay by me. Please explain how an audience can come up with their own solutions when I do all the talking (this is a rhetorical question, by the way).

[Miki Saxon]

Excellent, Steve! As usual, you are a voice of simple sanity in a world of increasingly complex insanity.

[Steve Roesler]

Mary Jo

Uh, yeah, don't you just hate when that happens?

The instance you cited is not, as you know, the least bit uncommon. The outside person is brought in to give the appearance of participation. I have recently taken a different stance with a total lack of shame. After informing the prospective client of the fact that such a presentation does not lead to the alleged desired discussion, I ask if (s)he still wants to continue. If the answer is "Yes" then I put the disclaimer in the contract and take the money.

It's just money, you know. And the mortgage company really appreciates it.

[Steve Roesler]

Miki

I am informing my dear wife that you have accused me of sanity. She will be baffled.