by Cam Barber
Think about what you want to be complimented on. It might feel nice to hear that people love the sound of your voice or think your slides are cool, however, the best compliment is when someone repeats your message as though it was their idea! The idea wins, so you win.
BAD MESSAGING…
The cake that cost a Federal election
There is an amazing example of the difference between a confusing message and vivid message in Australian politics. A question was asked of the Leader of the Liberal party in 1991 (John Hewson) about a new GST tax being proposed.
His answer cost him his job.
Five years later in 1996, the same question was asked of the new Liberal Party leader (John Howard). He won the next election and went on to be the second longest serving Prime Minister in Australian history.
Both leaders were attempting to sell a new tax (GST) to the Australian public. One failed and the other succeeded. Here’s exactly what was said.
Journalist: “If I buy a birthday cake with the GST, do I pay more or less for it?”
Leader of the Australian Liberal Party (1991):
“Well, it will depend whether cakes today in that shop are subject to sales tax or they’re not, firstly, and they may have a sales tax on them. Let’s assume that they don’t have a sales tax on them and that birthday cake is going to be sales tax free, then of course, you wouldn’t pay, it would be exempt, there would be no GST on it under our system. To give you an accurate answer, I need to know exactly what type of cake to give a detailed answer.”
Result: The Liberal Party lost the election and the leader lost his job. Five years later that same journalist asked the new leader the same question. It was seen as the litmus test for whether a GST tax would be accepted.
Journalist: “If I buy a birthday cake with GST, do I pay more or less for it?”
New leader of the Liberal Party (1996):
“It will go up by between 2 and 4 per cent - but you’ll have more money in your pocket to buy it due to (other) tax cuts.”
Result: The Liberal Party won the election and all Australians now benefit from this wonderful tax.
Not only does the second version answer the question, it includes a new, persuasive idea; the extra cost of the tax will be more than covered by newly implemented tax cuts.
The first message used 90 words and failed to provide a useful answer. The second message used 27 words and not only answered the question clearly, it defused the main concern about it.
When it comes to communication, people want quality, not quantity. Don’t deliver your information by the barrel, serve it by the glass.
IBM didn’t ‘Think’
IBM is famous for the word ‘think’. You might recall their laptops were called ‘ThinkPads’ and desktop computers called ‘ThinkStations’. IBM’s founders posted the ‘THINK’ message in large letters on the walls to remind everybody to do that thing which Henry Ford described as ‘the hardest work there is’ (thinking).
It was a ubiquitous message that permeated the IBM culture. But it ultimately failed the company in a spectacular way.
What exactly do you want me to think?
The problem is that the single word ‘THINK’ is a vague message. It will mean different things depending on the perspective of the listener. Can you imagine an IBM manager saying to a member of his team, “Are you thinking, Joe?”. What would your response be? “Oh yeah. Big time!”
Of course you are thinking, but there is no specific context.
What was lost over time was the fact that the focus of the IBM culture when it was wildly successful was a 2-word version of this message:
‘Think ahead’.
This is a much clearer message. It focuses your attention and can be measured. And this message makes sense in the computer industry where changes in technology can make you obsolete very quickly. According to Time magazine: ‘Fearful of falling behind in the fast-changing industry, CEO Tom Watson Jnr promoted ‘scratchy, harsh’ individuals and pressured them to think ahead …’
The worst business decision of all time?
The clear 2-word message, ‘think ahead’, and the culture it helped create, worked well for many years. IBM grew at an exponential rate in the 1950s and 60s.
However, by the 1970s, the ‘ahead’ part of the message was lost and IBM made perhaps the worst business decision of all time. A mistake that was the exact opposite of ‘thinking ahead’.
Apple’s 1977 launch of the first ‘personal computer’ caught IBM napping. They thought only hobbyists would buy it and ignored it for 3 years. Finally, watching the parabolic sales growth, they realised they needed to release an IBM Personal Computer (PC).
But the CEO didn’t want to wait the 2 years needed to develop an IBM PC from scratch, so to save time and get their new PC to market quickly, they farmed out a couple of components.
They asked Intel to create the microprocessor and a tiny company called Microsoft to come up with the ‘Operating System’. They accepted a deal from Bill Gates with 2 incredible provisions:
1. IBM wouldn’t buy the operating system (DOS), but license it and Microsoft would retain ownership.
2. Microsoft would have the right to sell DOS to other computer manufacturers.
What happened? Firstly, the IBM PC was initially a massive success. By the mid 1980s the IBM PC was the dominant personal computer, beating Apple by a wide margin.
However, just a few years later IBM was basically broke. Microsoft was licensing DOS and Windows to anybody.
Computer hardware became a commodity business. Why pay double for an IBM PC, when a Dell PC had the same operating system and ran the same programs? IBM couldn’t compete. They nearly went bust and ultimately sacked 200,000 people!
The epilogue to this story is that once dominant IBM sold their loss-making PC division to a Chinese company called Lenovo in 2005. There is no such thing as an IBM PC any more.
Too many messages are vague and open to multiple interpretations. In the IBM example, adding just 1 word made a significant difference.
Confusing Bushfire Warning - ‘stay or go’
We’ve seen that 1 word can make a big difference in the ‘Think’ and ‘Think Ahead’ message. Here’s another example. One that relates to the tragic bush-fires in Victoria in 2009, known as Black Saturday, when over 170 people died.
After the tragedy, many commentators, and a Royal Commission, discussed whether the headline message issued by the state fire authority (‘stay or go’) could have been clearer. ‘Stay or go’ doesn’t guide your thinking clearly. It simply states that there are 2 options. It gives no guidance as to which option an individual should choose, or why.
Unfortunately the headline message was too short. The actual policy for community safety in bush-fires was entitled, ‘Prepare, Stay and Defend or Leave Early’, but it was deemed too long as a headline message and became known as ‘Stay or go’. Our messages need to find the right balance between detail and brevity. For example, here are 3 options for the headline message:
‘Stay or go’
‘Stay, or go early’
‘Stay and defend, or go early’
Which would you choose?
Let’s face it, fire safety authorities have a significant challenge communicating to people who live in fire-prone areas. They need to jolt people into action, which requires a simple ‘cut through’ message. But, as the Royal Commission pointed out, they also need to remind people that their decisions when facing a fire depend on a lot of factors, and aren’t as simple as a choice between staying or going.
“The Commission understands the attraction of an uncomplicated policy framework that presents two clear options – stay or go – but such an approach is simplistic. Realistic advice is unavoidably more complex and requires subtlety.”
This is a serious subject but it highlights the choices we have to make when crafting a vivid message. Shorter is easier to remember, but provides less clarity. A longer version provi
des more clarity but may reduce recall. And adding or changing 1 word can make a significant difference.
Ultimately you need to use your own judgement to find the right balance.
Format Wars: Blu-Ray versus HD-DVD - can you put it in a sentence?!
Successful messaging flows easily in normal conversation.
Did you know that Blu-Ray was the winner of an Optical Disc Format War? The current Blu-Ray standard, promoted by Sony, beat out a rival format from Toshiba. The war raged for 3 years between 2006-2008, and was ultimately won by the Blu-Ray Disc.
There are a few theories about why the ‘Blu-Ray’ format beat out Toshiba’s ‘HD-DVD’ format. Many people say that Blu-Ray won because it was included in Xbox and Playstation, which meant there were more Blu-Ray players in the hands of consumers, and as a result the movie studios and technology companies chose Blu-Ray.
I believe there is another far more fundamental factor at play: you can’t use the term ‘HD-DVD’ in normal conversations without getting confused.
The reason is that both parts of the name already mean something else. ‘HD’ was already in widespread use as a term to represent High Definition in TVs, computer screens, cameras, digital video format, etc.
HD is also used as an abbreviation for the Hard Drives within computers, cameras, etc. The term ‘HD’ is overused and therefore open to misunderstanding and confusion.
And so is ‘DVD’!
Try this now. Imagine you’re at a store and you’re having a conversation to learn more about the new format. Say this sentence out loud:
‘Hi. I want to know if HD-DVD will work with my HD TV and DVD?’
Say what?! Now try this sentence out loud:
‘Hi. I want to know if Blu-Ray will work with my HD TV and DVD?’
Much clearer. Technology can still be confusing, however Blu-Ray is a distinctly different word, so there is less chance for conversational stupefaction. Here’s another conversation,
‘Will HD-DVD be backward compatible with DVDs?’
Or,
‘Will Blu-Ray be backward compatible with DVDs?’
These simple conversations only scratch the surface of the kinds of technical discussions that were also going on during the battle for format supremacy.
The conversations using the term Blu-Ray seemed more concrete. The individuals talking about this format sounded clearer and more certain when they used the Blu-Ray term compared to those who used the HD-DVD language. I can imagine HD-DVD people having to correct themselves more often because of the extra concentration required to make sense.
You can decide for yourself how important the name choice was. The point here is that when you test your messages, you want to make sure they flow in normal conversation.
What’s next?
So hopefully you’re now thinking; ‘That’s great, Cam. I see the value of being a message master. But is there a step-by-step method that will answer all my other questions and fill all the gaps required to be a great speaker?’
Yes! There is. It’s called The Vivid Method for Public Speaking.
Let’s look at that now.
THE VIVID
METHOD FOR
PUBLIC
SPEAKING
Welcome to the practical part of this book! Glad you’re still here. The following pages contain a method to prepare and deliver compelling speeches and presentations.
It’s estimated that around 50,000 presentations are made around the world every minute. That’s around 2 billion each month. Important decisions are made as a result. Projects are approved or cancelled. Tenders are granted. Hiring decisions and promotions are made.
Unfortunately, many of these presentations fail to engage their audience. Speakers struggle to translate their ideas in a way their audience can understand. As a result, bad decisions are made and the progress of careers is jeopardised. It all adds up to an enormous waste of time, money and talent.
The Vivid Method will guide you through both the planning and the delivery of great speeches and presentations. But first, we need to clear away some of the myths that might be complicating your public speaking…
PUBLIC SPEAKING MYTHS…
Body language: everything you know is wrong
Body language can be telling. However, most of us have been exposed to a dumb idea about the link between body language and public speaking impact. This dumb idea says that our non-verbal communication is more important than the words we say, no matter what the situation.
‘More than 90% of impact is non-verbal’ – not!
In the 2005 movie Hitch, Will Smith’s character is a ‘date doctor’ who helps men find the love of their life. At one point he refers to a ‘well-known statistic’ to help his client seem more confident and intelligent - that 90% of one’s impact comes from body language and vocal tone. Only 10% comes from the words we say.
This misunderstood statistic has become the damaging dogma within thousands of books and courses on communication. The specific figures that appear to backup this claim state that when speaking in public:
• 55% of the impact is conveyed via visual signs, e.g. facial expressions, body language and physical appearance.
• 38% of the impact is via your tone of voice.
• 7% of the impact is the words you say.
These numbers, particularly the last one – that our words have only a minor impact – have been quoted by public speaking ‘experts’ all over the world for 40 years. They have played a significant role in the overemphasis on ‘performance’ over natural style – ultimately making public speaking seem more complicated than it needs to.
But it’s a myth.
WRONG.
A complete distraction.
The numbers themselves come from the work of Dr Albert Mehrabian, who published them in his 1971 book Silent Messages. Mehrabian was a respected professor who did credible research. However, the meaning attributed to the figures was taken out of context. It’s just plain wrong when applied to public speaking in general.
I was taught these figures in that public speaking course I attended all those years ago, which caused me so much grief. But when I finally recognised that it made no sense, I contacted Dr Mehrabian directly. The first thing I discovered was that he was frustrated that his work has been so widely misunderstood. Very few people who use his figures have actually read his book or understand their context! Dr Mehrabian told me:
“These figures are only relevant when there is a contradiction - when your words are contradicted by your non-verbals.”
Then he asked: “Do you have a credit card?”
Pause… “Um, yes, Visa”, I responded.
“Would you like to buy a copy of the book?”
“Absolutely!”
So, he personally sent me a copy with a hand-written Post-It note at the start of Chapter 5.
The note read, ‘Please read these 5 pages’. The chapter that dealt with the famous statistic was called ‘The Double Edged Message’. As soon as I read the chapter title, it all fell into place.
The chapter is about the contradictory messages we sometimes send out. For instance, imagine you are in the middle of an emotional conversation with your spouse. He or she has an eyebrow raised, hands planted firmly on hips, and through gritted teeth, says:
“No! I am NOT angry!”
Would you believe these words in this context?? Normally I’d demonstrate this story to an audience by putting my hand on my hip and actually screaming through gritted teeth. That way it’s instantly obvious the words wouldn’t be believed because they are said with anger. But you can see from the explanation that there is a contradiction between the words and the tone used.
Put simply, if your visual signals and/or vocal tone contradict the words you are saying, the visual signals will be given more weight by your listener. Fine.
By the way, none of Mehrabian’s research was based on speeches, presentations or any kind of public speaking! In fact, Mehrabian himself
is so frustrated by the misunderstanding of his work, his personal website clearly states:
“Please note that this and other equations regarding relative importance of verbal and nonverbal messages were derived from experiments dealing with communications of feelings and attitudes (i.e., like–dislike). Unless a communicator is talking about their feelings or attitudes, these equations are not applicable.”
The real message is ‘Be yourself’
In my opinion, the real message from Dr Mehrabian’s research seems to be: ‘be yourself’. Trying to be something you’re not might lead to giving off these contradictory messages.
This is insanely ironic, don’t you think? A man does painstaking research, which shows us that contradictory messages will weaken your impact and confuse your audience. Thousands of experts misread that data and teach people that they need to change their style, change who they are, sometimes in a dramatic fashion, to be effective in front of an audience. This puts people into such turmoil that they give off contradictory messages!!
How important is body language in public speaking?
Your body language matters because it either supports what you’re saying or contradicts it.
You may be thinking, what about TV shows like ‘The Mentalist’ or ‘Lie to Me’ where the hero is able to divine what people are thinking through body language signals? Isn’t there some magic influence around body language components that I need to learn?
Well, it depends. (Probably not.) Consider the following examples.
Mr Body Language – Alan Pease
