Today’s post is relatively short, but that’s because most of the work was done a couple of weeks ago when I gave my first on-line interview. Yep. My first on-line interview! How cool is that?
A young woman named Erika Liodice writes a blog, “Beyond the Gray”, on inspiration and chasing your dreams. She came across my blog and was kind enough to invite me to do the interview, which you can read here. Given that public speaking ranks among people’s top fears, Erika was intrigued by my interest in, and passion for, the subject.
I don’t know if my comments will offer any ground-breaking insights into pursuing your dreams of public speaking (or anything for that matter) but perhaps you will find one or two useful thoughts. Again, you can read the interview here. I hope you enjoy it and thank Erika for posting it. And please be sure to have a look around Erika’s site. It is full of interesting and inspiring articles.
In the 1950s, 3D movies were all the craze. Since then, the technology has improved immensely and 3D has been used in a variety of interesting, educational and entertaining ways.
For presentations, however, sometimes two dimensions are better than three.
In his terrific book, Presentation Zen, Garr Reynolds applies a principle from the field of electronic communications – Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) – to presentations:
[T]he SNR is the ratio of relevant to irrelevant elements or information in a slide or other display. The goal is to have the highest signal-to-noise ratio possible in your slides. … There is simply a limit to a person’s ability to process new information efficiently and effectively. Aiming for a higher SNR is an attempt to make things easier for people. Understanding can be hard enough with out the excessive and the nonessential bombardment by our visuals that are supposed to be playing a supportive role.
One good way to reduce the “noise” in your presentations is to use two-dimensional charts and graphs and forget about fancy 3D effects. 3D does not make the information for the audience easier to understand; to the contrary, it can often make it harder. Let’s look at a simple hypothetical example.
Below is a chart for the three-year performance of ABC Co. The 3D effects make it difficult to understand all of the numbers. For example, the yellow Profit column for 2008 is partially obscured by the green Revenue column for 2009. Did profit for 2008 come in at $100,000 or greater? Not so clear.
Now let’s look at the same figures in 2D. Less fancy, to be sure; however, it is also much clearer. Profit for 2008 did exceed $100,000. The information is much more digestible for the audience.
As Reynolds says:
While it’s nice to have a choice perhaps, 2D charts and graphs will almost always be a better solution. Three-dimensional charts appear less accurate and can be difficult to comprehend. The viewing angle of the 3D charts often makes it hard to see where data points sit on an axis. If you do use the 3D charts, avoid extreme perspectives.
Remember that the next time you are using charts or graphs. Save the 3D effects for another time. Perhaps a good IMAX movie.
A new presentation tool caught my eye this week. It is calledPrezi. Now, I have to say up front that I have not used this technology, nor have I seen it used in an actual presentation. Still, my first impression is a favourable one.
The basic difference between Prezi and PowerPoint or Keynote is that whereas the latter are series of slides, Prezi is a single canvas on which you put all your material. You then move from place to place, zooming in and out and spinning around with a significant amount of freedom. I suggest you click this link to the Prezi website and watch the one-minute video on the main page. Then, click through some of the examples on the bottom of the page.
The effect is certainly arresting, in part, I am sure, because of its novelty. As with any presentation, the special effects of Prezi should be used to enhance the message and not outshine it; and I can see how it could be easy to get carried away with the “oooh and aaah” factor. You still need great content.
Nonetheless, Prezi looks intriguing. I particularly like the way in which an entire presentation (such as in the picture above) can look very much like amind map, which is an excellent way to craft the elements of your presentation holistically and creatively.
I predict that we will be hearing much more about Prezi in the future. In fact, it has already made the big stage. Prezi was used effectively by Parag Khanna during a recent TED talk. You can watch the presentation and read Khanna’s comments about Prezi here on Prezi’s blog.
What do you think? Have you used Prezi or seen it in action? Let us know.
This is Part 7 of a seven-part series on making speeches and presentations memorable. It is based on the book “Made to Stick” by Chip and Dan Heath.
Think back to your childhood. How great was it to lose yourself in a good story? The feeling is just as great today. Even in these tough economic times, the book business (online and in store) and movie industry (rentals, purchases and theatres) are still holding up. Everyone loves a good story. And everyone remembers a good story too.
Telling stories is the sixth and final way in which to make an idea “sticky” according to the Heaths in Made to Stick. It is one of the most important things that we, as public speakers, can do to make our presentations memorable.
The Heaths cite the work of psychologist Gary Klein. According to Klein, stories are effective teaching tools; they illustrate causal relationships that people might not have recognized before and highlight resourceful ways in which people have solved problems. Additionally, stories help to motivate our audiences to act.
How well do we remember stories compared to other kinds of information? Well, Chip Heath teaches a class at Stanford University. For one exercise he divides the students into groups of six to eight and gives them some statistics on crime patterns in the United States. Half the students in the group must make a one-minute presentation in support of the proposition that non-violent crime is a serious problem; the other half much each make a one-minute presentation arguing that non-violent crime is not a serious problem.
After everyone has presented, the students vote for the person in their group whom they thought was the best. Then, the exercise is over . . . or so they think. Chip moves on to something else and often shows a short video to distract the students. He then abruptly asks them to write down everything that they can remember about the speeches they heard. I’ll let the Heaths pick it up from here:
The students are flabbergasted at how little they remember. Keep in mind that only ten minutes have elapsed since the speeches were given. Nor was there a huge amount of information to begin with – at most they’ve heard eight one-minute speeches. And yet the students are lucky to recall one or two ideas from each speaker’s presentation. Many draw a complete blank on some speeches – unable to remember a single concept.
But here’s where it gets really interesting in terms of the power of stories:
In the average one-minute speech, the typical student use 2.5 statistics. Only one student in ten tells a story. Those are the speaking statistics. The “remembering” statistics, on the other hand, are almost a mirror Image: When students are asked to recall the speeches, 63% remember the stories. Only 5% remember any individual statistic.
For me, this excerpt is a gem. It demonstrates just how powerful stories can be. And yet, many speakers shy away from stories, preferring instead to inundate their audiences with statistics and other bland details. This is unfortunate because by not telling stories, these speakers are foregoing the use of one of the most effective tools in a speaker’s arsenal.
A few months ago, I wrote an article on the importance of telling stories. If you have not yet read it, I recommend it to you. It contains a terrific speech by Steve Jobs to the 2005 graduating class of Stanford University in which he conveys powerful messages through the use of simple stories. The next time you have a presentation to give, try incorporating a story or two so that your message sticks.
Mother Theresa once said, “If I look at the mass, I will never act. If I look at the one, I will.”
Think of promotional campaigns for children’s charities that you have seen on TV. Do they start by giving you lots of statistics? No. Instead, they introduce you to one or two children. You learn something of their lives and the hardships that they face. You become emotionally involved. Then you are told the statistics; that there are thousands of children in the same position as the one you just met; and that you can make a difference.
Does presenting the information this way make it more likely that people will give? According to studies cited by the Heaths in Made to Stick, yes. But why?
The researchers theorized that thinking about statistics shifts people into a more analytical frame of mind. When people think analytically, they’re less likely to think emotionally. And the researchers believed it was people’s emotional response to [the child's] plight that led them to act.
Now I can hear some of you saying that an appeal for donations to help children is one thing, but how do I get my audience to care about my message when I am talking about accounting rules or latex paint or any one of a number of other things that are, at first blush, not conducive to an emotional response? Well, as the Heaths say,
The most basic way to make people care is to form an association between something they don’t yet care about and something they do care about.
And although different things matter to different people, there is one obvious thing that matters to all of us: Us! People matter to themselves. “It will come as no surprise,” the Heaths say, “that one reliable way of making people care is by invoking self-interest.”
So whatever it is that you are speaking about, be sure that your audience understands why it should care. In Made to Stick, the Heaths quote John Caples, a successful copywriter:
Caples says companies often emphasize features when they should be emphasizing benefits. “The most frequent reason for unsuccessful advertising is advertisers who are so full fo their own accomplishments (the world’s best seed!) that they forget to tell us why we should buy (the world’s best lawn!).’ An old advertising maxim says you’ve got to spell out the benefit of the benefit. In other words, people don’t buy quarter-inch drill bits. They buy quarter-inch holes so they can hang their children’s pictures.
There is much more on this subject in the book and again, I encourage you to read it. However, before moving to our speech for this post, I will leave you with some concluding words from the Heaths on how to bring emotion into your speeches and presentations.
How can we make people care about our ideas? We get them to take off their Analytical Hats. We create empathy for specific individuals. We show how our ideas are associated with things that people already care about. We appeal to their self-interest, but we also appeal to their identities – not only to the people they are right now but also to the people they would like to be.
And now for our speech. It was given byBenjamin Zanderat aTEDconference. Zander is a the conductor of the Boston Philharmonic Orchestra, a successful writer, a gifted public speaker and a wonderful human being. I encourage you to click the link on his name to learn more.
As for his talk, let’s just say that it drips with emotion from start to finish. Of all the excellent talks that I have seen on TED, this one from Benjamin Zander is still my favourite. And that’s saying something.
This is Part 5 of a seven-part series on making speeches and presentations memorable. It is based on the book “Made to Stick” by Chip and Dan Heath.
OK, this blog has become officially cool because I have figured out a way to get George Clooney to drop by. Yes, George Clooney. Suave, debonair, funny, articulate George Clooney. Women love him, men love him – what more could you want?
OK, now before you start thinking that this is just a cheap gambit to drive more traffic to my blog – note to self: find a way to work Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie into next post – there is a serious reason why George is here.
The picture was taken in July this year when he was speaking at the opening ceremony of the “Nobel for Peace” cinema. He spoke at a campsite for people displaced after the April 2009 earthquake that devastated houses and lives in and around L’Aquila, Italy. When it comes to movies and humanitarian causes, few people pack as big a punch as George Clooney. His work as an actor and director is known around the world. His humanitarian work, especially his tireless campaigning on behalf of the people of Darfur, Sudan, is almost as well known.
When it comes to talking about theatre or humanitarian relief, people will listen to George because he has credibility. And credibility is the fourth characteristic of a sticky message.
Credibility makes our messages believable, and a believable message is more likely to be remembered than one that is not. But gaining credibility is not so easy. As the Heaths note in Made to Stick, “If we’re trying to persuade a skeptical audience to believe a new message, the reality is that we’re fighting an uphill battle against a lifetime of personal learning and social relationships.” So how can we add credibility to our words? There are ways.
First, we can cite expert authorities. An expert, say the Heaths, is “the kind of person whose wall is covered with framed credentials: Oliver Sacks for neuroscience, Alan Greenspan for economics [well, maybe not such a great example any longer] or Stephen Hawking for physics”. If an expert supports our position, it usually adds credibility. If we are giving a presentation on a medical issue and can find support for our position in prestigious medical review such as The New England Journal of MedicineorThe Lancet, it probably would not be a bad idea cite those authorities.
Second, we can refer to celebrities and other inspirational figures. Take the example of Oprah Winfrey recommending a book. Her recommendations influence the book-buying habits of thousands of people. Why? Because “[i]f Oprah likes a book, it makes us more interested in that book. We trust the recommendations of people whom we want to be like,” note the Heaths. But what if there are no ”experts” or “celebrities” to be found? Well, hold on a minute. Not so fast. They might be closer than you think. Do you have positive feedback from satisfied customers? Is there someone on your team (including you) with certain educational background or work experience that is relevant? If so, they might be able to provide the expertise that you seek, even if they are not widely known.
Third, we can rely on what the Heaths refer to as “antiauthorities”. They cite the example of Pam Laffin, a mother of two who died at the age of 31 from emphysema-related lung failure caused by years of smoking. She appeared in several anti-tobacco commercials sponsored by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health. The commercials were difficult to watch but highly effective; Pam Laffin told a compelling story in a way that more famous people could not.
Fourth, we can rely on statistics, which is something that many of us do anyway. But here, the Heaths issue a warning: we are so used to resorting to statistics that we tend to bombard our audiences with too many mind-numbing numbers. As the Heaths state:
Statistics are rarely meaningful in and of themselves. Statistics will, and should, almost always be used to illustrate a relationship. It’s more important for people to remember the relationship than the number.
We need to put statistics into context for our audiences. In the book, the Heaths give several good examples of others who have done this. For example, they introduce us to Geoff Ainscow, one of the leaders of the Beyond War movement in the 1980s.
Ainscow gave talks trying to raise awareness of the dangers of nuclear weapons. He wanted to show that the US and the USSR possessed weapons capable of destroying the earth several times over. But simply quoting figures of nuclear weapons stockpiles was not a way to make the message stick. So, after setting the scene, Ainscow would take a BB pellet and drop it into a steel bucket where it would make a loud noise. The pellet represented the bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima. Ainscow would then describe the devastation at Hiroshima. Next, he would take 10 pellets and drop them in the bucket where they made 10 times as much noise. They represented the nuclear firepower on a single nuclear submarine. Finally, he poured 5,000 pellets into the bucket, one for each nuclear warhead in the world. When the noise finally subsided, his audience sat in dead silence. That is how you put statistics into context.
Below is a TED talk by Barry Schwartz, a Professor of Social Theory and Social Action at Swarthmore College and the author of numerous books in the field of psychology and economics. Schwartz is credible in his own right. However, I have chosen his talk to show an example of how using “antiauthorities” to make a point can be very effective.
In his talk, Schwartz makes a call for “practical wisdom” in a society gone mad with bureaucracy. (Wouldn’t that be nice?) I encourage you to watch the whole talk, but pay particular attention to the first 7:30. During this time, Schwartz talks about virtue and wisdom in today’s world. In so doing, he uses some unlikely people – “antiauthorities” – as examples of wise individuals. Then, at 5:50, Schwartz tells a story about those whom we usually think of as being wise but who, in one case at least, were not. These examples make his message much more memorable.
So the next time you are looking for ways to add credibility to your message, don’t despair if George Clooney is not available to assist you with your presentation. If you think carefully, you can probably come up with other support that gives your message the credibility that it needs. (Even if it might not be as cool as George.)
This is Part 4 of a seven-part series on making speeches and presentations memorable. It is based on the book “Made to Stick” by Chip and Dan Heath.
Today I want to talk to you about planned initiatives to streamline functionalities in inter-departmental communications, thereby capitalizing on synergies and maximizing shareholder value.
Wait a minute. Stop. Rewind. Play. … What?!?!?
Have you ever listened to people who talked this way? Did you understand their message? If so, more power to you, because it is incomprehensible babble to me. The words are so amorphous, so vague, that listening to them is akin to trying to grab a cloud.
And yet, this kind of talk peppers the language and PowerPoint slides of thousands of presentations every day. Is it any wonder that our eyes glaze over and the message (assuming there is one) fails to stick? The words are just too mushy. And that is the opposite of how they should be: concrete.
Concreteness is the third characteristic of sticky speeches.
In “Made to Stick”, the Heaths give a witty example of what John Kennedy might have said, had he spoken like so many business executives today, about his dream of sending a man to the moon:
Our mission is to become the international leader in the space industry through maximum team-centred innovation and strategically targeted aerospace initiatives.
Now read what Kennedy actually said:
Our mission is to “put a man on the moon and return him safely by the end of the decade.”
Kennedy’s message was concrete; people knew what he was talking about. So, how can we make our messages concrete?
First, talk like a normal person. As a lawyer, I often heard things in court such as “I observed the suspect exit the vehicle and proceed on foot to the premises.” Why not, “I saw the suspect get out of the car and run to the house.”? Most of us (thankfully) have little to do with the legal profession on a daily basis and so we are not that bad. But we are far from perfect. Why do we “make an application” when we can just “apply”? Why do we seek to “come to an agreement” when we can “agree”?
Simplify your language. This is not to say that you cannot or should not spice it up now and then – by all means, do so – but it would be best to recall the words of Ernest Hemingway in response to comments from William Faulkner that Hemingway’s language was too pedestrian:
“Poor Faulkner. Does he really think big emotions come from big words? He thinks I don’t know the ten-dollar words. I know them all right. But there are older and simpler and better words, and those are the ones I use.”
Second, use real examples, not abstract ones. If you are trying to convince a company to adopt a certain policy, provide examples of other companies that have done the same and the results that they achieved. Use metaphors and adjectives to describe situations and things in an effort to make your words more vivid. For an effective example of how to be concrete using descriptive language, this story that the Heaths tell about the American beer Schlitz is good (even if everyone knows that Canadian beer is superior).
Third, use real things to drive home your points: props; pictures; videos; etc. Anything to make your words more tangible, more concrete.
The Heaths correctly note that our memory works in different ways depending on what it is we are trying to remember – a song, a face, a childhood experience, a technical concept. To make our ideas concrete, we have to make them like Velco; we need to put enough hooks into our audience’s mental hoops so that our messages stick.
Let’s see concreteness in action. In a moment, you will meetDaniel Kraft, a physician working in the field of stem cell research. He gave a talk at a TEDConference about a device that he invented that allows him to harvest bone marrow much more efficiently and painlessly than has been done in the past.
In the time allotted to him, Kraft had to (1) explain what bone marrow is; (2) explain how it is used; (3) explain how it is extracted; (4) explain how his device can do the job better; and (5) explain how this is relevant to us. And to cover this complex subject, he had less than four minutes!
Watch the video and then read on for the analysis.
Pretty impressive. Both the subject matter and the way in which Kraft was able to convey so much information, so memorably, in such a condensed period of time. Let’s break the speech down a bit and look at the different ways in which Kraft was concrete.
At 0:35 he holds up a bag of bone marrow so that we can see what we are talking about.
At 0:41 he shows a slide of a transfusion.
From 0:50 to 1:05 he sets the scene in an operating room where he and his team performed an operation.
At 1:07 he shows a “small” needle that he used to get the marrow.
At 1:15 he demonstrates the action of punching the needle into the bone, noting, at 1:30, that he had to do this about 200 times.
At 1:37 he holds up the skeleton part for effect.
At 1:50 he shows his new device.
From 1:55 to 3:01 he shows an animated video of how the device works, a slide that demonstrates that the device yields more stem cells than the traditional method, and a video of the device being used on a real patient.
At 3:02 he asks the key question for any speaker: Why should the audience care? He then explains why.
At 3:35 he once again shows his new device.
At 3:52 he ends with a picture of 150+ people who are alive thanks to bone marrow transplants – a very concrete way to stress the importance of his work.
And throughout the talk, Kraft uses simple words wherever possible to make his message more accessible to his audience. All in four minutes. Well and truly a great example of concreteness under pressure.
This is Part 3 of a seven-part series on making speeches and presentations memorable. It is based on the book “Made to Stick” by Chip and Dan Heath.
One of the reasons most of us love surprises - I mean good ones – is that we do not expect them. Whether it is a surprise gift or a chance meeting or good movie, it is the unexpected that intrigues us.
In fact, when you think of a movie that people do not like, one of the main complaints is that it was so predictable. There was no mystery at all. On the other hand, if someone says “I never saw that coming!”, chances are that person enjoyed the show.
The same holds true for public speaking. Being unexpected is the second indicia of stickiness in Chip and Dan Heath’s book,“Made to Stick”.
The Heaths say, “If you want your ideas to be stickier, you’ve got to break someone’s guessing machine and then fix it.” In other words, you have to break their pattern of thinking. You have to create surprise and interest, but you must do so in a relevant and thoughtful way. Being unexpected in a constructive way involves much more than just doing something crazy.
The Heaths continue: “The easiest way to avoid gimmicky surprise and ensure that your unexpected ideas produce insight is to make sure you target an aspect of your audience’s guessing machines that relates to your core message.” To put it another way, they say that you need to open a hole and then fill it.
Want to see unexpectedness in action? Below is a great example: the talk thatDaniel Pinkgave at aTEDconference in London in July 2009. Pink, who is interested in the changing nature of work, is the author of the best-selling“A Whole New Mind”and other popular books.
In the presentation that you are about to watch, Pink looks at the science of motivation (i.e., offering greater incentives, usually financial ones) and how it affects our performance, particularly with regard to activities that require creative thinking. The surprising (dare I say, unexpected) conclusion is that offering people more money usually results in worse performance for these kinds of activities!
Now, I do not want to steal Pink’s thunder, and so will leave it to him to explain further. It is a very interesting subject. However, I want to analyze the talk in terms of its unexpectedness, in terms of how Pink deftly opens a hole in our thinking and then fills it. As you watch the speech, note the following milestones (in terms of the time of the talk):
From 0 to around 1:15, Pink is unexpected in a humorously clever way. This has nothing to do with the heart of the talk, but it is a great way to get your audience’s attention at the outset.
At 4:00, Pink starts to dig his hole. Note the comment, “Now this makes no sense, right?”
From 4:30 to 4:45 he digs some more. Our footing is starting to become unstable.
At 5:15, he throws up a slide where the word “mismatch” is highlighted.
From 8:00 to 12:00 he gathers momentum until he reaches a crescendo. Drawing on examples from studies around the world, Pink is no longer merely digging; he is into major excavation!
Then, just when we are sure that we are going to fall, Pink throws us a rope at 12:15 with “a new approach” and some “good news”. And as we hang on, he fills the hole that he has created by giving us ideas on what does work in terms of encouraging people to think creatively. He puts us back on terra firma.
This talk is one of the best examples that I have seen about how to use unexpectedness to create audience interest and make the message memorable.
I encourage you to look for ways to throw your own audiences off guard in the future. Just be sure that the unexpectedness relates to your core message. Oh yes, and also be sure that you catch them before they fall!
This is Part 2 of a seven-part series on making speeches and presentations memorable. It is based on the book “Made to Stick” by Chip and Dan Heath.
Being simple in our presentations is not so … well … simple. And yet, finding the core of our message and communicating it in a straightforward manner is at the heart of sticky ideas.
When I was in law school, I came across a quote by the late Oliver Wendell Holmes, a former Justice on the United States Supreme Court. He said: “I would not give a fig for the simplicity on this side of complexity; I would give my right arm for the simplicity on the far side of complexity.” His words are etched in my mind. They burst with wisdom on many levels, but for our purposes they contain a golden nugget of advice for lawyers and public speakers alike.
The ideas about which we speak to others are frequently complex. We cannot stop at a superficial summary. That would be simplistic, which is not the same as being simple. We must get into the details. However, that is where many of us go astray. We lose perspective and become mired in those details. We think that more is better and so we fill our PowerPoint presentations with slides and slides of information. Inevitably, our key points become lost among the trivial ones.
We have to get into the details of the matter, but we have to work our way through them and come out on the other side. We have to find the “simplicity on the far side of complexity”. When I made closing arguments in court, I would rigorously ask myself beforehand: What are my key points? What do I want the judges to remember? I would then focus on two or three and exclude the rest which in any event were summarized in my written submissions. I would then try and summarize those key points as simply as possible.
As speakers, we must be “masters of exclusion” as the Heaths say. We must determine our key message and then ruthlessly prioritize. If everything is important, then nothing is important and our message will be lost.
Simple ideas, say the Heaths, are core and compact. They cite proverbs and fables as classical examples. Think of sayings such as “A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush” or “sour grapes” or “A stitch in time saves nine” or any one of hundreds more. Each one crams a complex idea into a tiny space so that it is memorable.
One way to make your ideas simple is to anchor them to ideas with which your audience is already familiar. Use metaphors and similes. (Remember all those figures of speech that you studied in school and wondered what possible importance they could have? Now you know!)
The Heaths give a great example by teaching readers what a pomelo is. They start by giving a technical definition, stating that it is the largest citrus fruit and then describing its properties. Based on that definition alone, I might be able to find one in a store. But then they give a much shorter explanation, saying that a pomelo is like a supersized grapefruit with a thick and soft rind. That gives me a much clearer idea because I already know what a grapefruit is.
There is more to be said about making your ideas simple but I will leave it at that. Again, I encourage you to buy the book or at least check out theMade to Stick website. Meanwhile, I will leave you with the first video in this series.
John Woodenis a retired basketball coach who won 10 NCAA Championships with UCLA. He set many records that remain unbeaten to this day. Affectionately known as “Coach” to many, Wooden also speaks publicly about the values that he tried to instil in his players and how, perhaps, they can help us to be more successful in our own lives.
The following speech was delivered at a TED conference andI have written in the past about how fantastic TED is. As quoted from theTED website, “With profound simplicity, Coach John Wooden redefines success and urges us all to pursue the best in ourselves. In this inspiring talk he shares the advice he gave his players at UCLA, quotes poetry and remembers his father’s wisdom.”
Watch the video and listen to the “profound simplicity” in the message that John Wooden conveys. It is wonderful example of what we should strive for in our own messages.
This is Part 1 of a seven-part series on making speeches and presentations memorable. It is based on the book “Made to Stick” by Chip and Dan Heath.
Good speakers are memorable. Come to think of it, bad speakers are also memorable, albeit for different reasons.
Being memorable, making our message resonate with our audiences and stay with them – that is the Holy Grail of public speaking. Whether we are trying to inspire nations or a high school basketball team; whether we are trying to raise millions in venture capital or sell a few products at a local trade show; whether we are trying to persuade management to increase our department’s funding or trying to persuade our teenagers to clean their rooms (if you have figured this last one out, please contact me!) – the one common objective is that we want our messages to be remembered.
Easy to say, not so easy to do. Every day, our attention is pulled in thousands (yes, thousands) of directions by TV, radio, email, phone calls, meetings, advertisements, families, friends, colleagues, etc., etc., etc.
A German psychologist namedHermann Ebbinghausstudied memory and developed, among other things, what is known as theForgetting Curve. Essentially, the Forgetting Curve shows the declining rate at which we retain information after hearing it. Ebbinghaus found that after only 20 minutes, we have forgotten almost 42% of what we have heard! After one hour, we have forgotten almost 56%. After one day we have forgotten 66% and after one week almost 75%.
Pretty grim statistics. And keep in mind that Ebbinghaus passed away in 1909, long before the advent of personal computers, the Internet, the Blackberry and Reality TV. How do we compete when it is our turn to speak? We are like salmon swimming upstream, fighting against rapids, rocks and predators.
Fortunately, there are ways to make our messages memorable, and that is what this seven-part series is all about. The basis of this series is a terrific book that I highly recommend:Made to Stickby Chip and Dan Heath. The Heaths begin by asking two questions: Why do some ideas thrive while others die? And how do we improve the chances of worthy ideas? They then proceed to answer them.
Drawing on research and examples from all walks of life, the Heaths have found that “sticky” messages possess six qualities. They are Simple, Unexpected, Concrete, Credible, Emotional and come with Stories: “SUCCESs”.
A book you won't forget
“Made to Stick” is interesting, entertaining and full of ideas on how we can make our messages memorable. A comprehensive analysis of everything in the book is beyond the scope of this blog. However, over the next six posts, I will examine each of the Heaths’ indicia of “stickiness”. My hope is that this series will stimulate your thinking about ways in which to make your next speech or presentation compelling, memorable and, well, stickier.
