Unfortunately, the key issue comes all wrapped up in a large knotty ball. One of the strands of that ball is misinformation. Marisa Hall had confused the national debt and the recession, and Carole Simpson, the moderator, tried to clarify by defining the terms.
I think she means more the recession…the economic problems today the country faces rather than the deficit.
Despite Ms. Simpson's well-meaning effort, she took the discussion off on a tangent, away from the central issue.
One of the other strands wrapping and masking Miss Hall's question was her emotion.
Well, I've had friends that have been laid off from jobs. I know people who cannot afford to pay the mortgage on their homes, their car payment.
Other strands that can obscure the key issues in any question include:
Nonlinear right brain thinking
Unprepared extemporaneity
Anxiety about standing up exposed in front of an audience
As a result of all these factors, most questions come tumbling out helter-skelter, wrapping a dense thicket of strands around the key issue, producing a stream of jumbled words that is completely unclear to the presenter.
The challenge for you, as it was for President Bush, is to unwrap the ball. Peel away all the strands until you can see the Roman Column.
The Roman Column
In the glory days of the Roman Empire, around 100 BCE, the great Roman orators, such as Cicero, spoke in the imposing Forum for hours on end without a note in their hands. They couldn't because the invention of paper in China was still a couple of hundred years away. Instead, these orators used the stately marble columns of the Roman Forum as memory triggers. As the orators strode around majestically delivering their rhetoric, they stopped at various columns and discoursed eloquently on particular themes. Each column represented the focal point for a cluster of related ideas. Before you open the floor to questions about your mission-critical presentation, you must find your own Roman Columns, find your key issues. (For a fuller discussion of Roman Columns and the techniques to define them, please see my previous Prentice Hall book, Presenting to Win: The Art of Telling Your Story.)
What was the Roman Column in Marisa Hall's question?
Please note that the balance of this page is blank. This is for you to stop and think, or to look back at the transcript of the question in the previous chapter and decide what her key issue was.
The operative word in Marisa Hall's question was "how," the very word that had stopped George H. Bush in his tracks during the debate. She wanted to know how each of the candidates could solve the nation's economic problems considering they had no personal experience with them. She also had another how…how those economic problems affected them. But this second how, although posed first, was subordinate to her primary concern: whether these three candidates…two of whom were multimillionaires and one a career politician with two terms as a governor…could provide solutions to the country's economic problems when they clearly had none of their own. This constitutes a double Roman Column: the first being the effect of the economic problems on each man and the second, their ability to deliver solutions.
Marisa Hall asked her question twice, stating "affect" each time, and referring to solutions first as "a cure" and then as "help." Her first time was while President George H. Bush was looking at his watch.
How has the national debt personally affected each of your lives? And if it hasn't, how can you honestly find a cure for the economic problems of the common people if you have no experience in what's ailing them?
The second time was when, after four failed attempts, the president asked her to help him by clarifying her question, and she responded,
But how has it affected you and if you have no experience in it, how can you help us, if you don't know what we're feeling?
Did you get the Roman Columns? Don't worry if you didn't. I show the videotape of that exchange to my private clients and stop the tape to ask them the same question I asked you. Many people have seen that tape, but only about a quarter of them get it right. The rest get sidetracked by the discussion of the national debt and recession. They think that the Roman column is only about how the national debt or recession has affected the candidates personally. This is close, but no cigar. The cigar is: How can you, given your comfortable situation, help us?
George H. Bush actually touched on Marisa Hall's main concern twice during his exchange with her. First, as he struggled to understand her question:
Are you suggesting that if somebody has means that the national debt doesn't affect them?
But he couched his question about her question so defensively and negatively that he backed himself into a corner and could not extricate himself. Instead, he simply gave up and asked the young woman to restate her question. After she did, he circled around the ability issue again during his rambling answer:
I don't think it's fair to say, you haven't had cancer. Therefore, you don't know what it's like. I don't think it's fair to say, you know, whatever it is, that if you haven't been hit by it personally.
Once again, the negative cast of his words…three "don'ts" and two "haven'ts"…put him into reverse gear, unable to turn his answer positive.
As a matter of fact, none of the three candidates dealt specifically with the question of his ability. They all went directly to their solutions; an acceptable shift given that Marisa Hall was seeking "a cure for the economic problems of the common people."
Bill Clinton heard both of Marisa's concerns loud and clear. He addressed each Roman Column, beginning his answer with the first: the effect.
Well, I've been governor of a small state for 12 years. I'll tell you how it's affected me…
And concluded his answer with the second: his solutions, articulated by the action verb "do"…in four ways.
I think what we have to do is invest in American jobs, American education, control American health care costs and bring the American people together again.
Ross Perot also heard Marisa clearly. He began his answer with her first issue: the effect.
It caused me to disrupt my private life and my business to get involved in this activity. That's how much I care about it.
And concluded his answer with the second: his solution.
I want these young people up here to be able to start with nothing but an idea like I did and build a business. But they've got to have a strong basic economy.
Actually, President Bush also offered his solutions at the end of his answer.
But I think in terms of the recession, of course you feel it when you're president of the US. And that's why I'm trying to do something about it by stimulating the export, vesting more, better education systems.
But his "do" words came at the tail end of his one minute and ten second answer, after his false start, after four bungled attempts, two interruptions, a tangential discussion, and a digressive ramble, by which time it was far too late. Clinton and Perot did not get to their solutions until the ends of their answers either, but each of them started his answer in the first person, thereby empathizing with Marisa's concern. George H. Bush began his answer by going universal.
Well, I think the national debt affects everybody.
By generalizing, the president, in effect, distanced himself from the economic problems. Worse, in doing so, he ignored one of Marisa Hall's Roman Columns, which evoked her fateful follow-on question and, in turn, sent the message that he wasn't listening. Imagine if George H. Bush had begun his answer with his last words.
I'm trying to do something about it by stimulating the export, vesting more, better education systems.
When Bill Clinton came bounding off his stool toward Marisa Hall to ask her, "Tell me how it's affected you again?" he evoked her "Well, yeah, uh-huh," response. And when, three sentences later, he began his answer with, "I'll tell you how it's affected me…" he sent the message that he had listened.
Emulate Bill Clinton in your Q&A sessions: Listen carefully to your a
udience and evoke your own equivalent of "Well, yeah, uh-huh."
Listen carefully to your audience and evoke your own equivalent of "Well, yeah, uh-huh."
Sub-vocalization
A very simple method to enable your Active Listening is sub-vocalization. Speak to yourself under your breath. Silently say the words that represent the Roman Column. "He's asking about competition," or "She's concerned about the cost," or "He wants to know about the timing."
As a matter of fact, President Bush used a hybrid form of sub-vocalization in his third attempt to answer Marisa Hall's question. Speaking aloud, he asked rhetorically,
Are you suggesting that if somebody has means that the national debt doesn't affect them?
That was only the subordinate half of what she was suggesting, so he got no "Well, yeah, uh-huh," as Bill Clinton did. Instead of continuing on to clarify the key issue, President Bush gave up.
I'm not sure I get…help me with the question and I'll try to answer it.
The lesson for you is to listen carefully for the Roman Column and sub-vocalize to help formulate it. Think of the key words, the one or two nouns or verbs central to the questioner's issue, hear them in your mind, but do not answer.
Visual Listening
Another vital part of Active Listening is the physical expression of your attentiveness. Remember the exercise in Chapter 2 where you saw the negative effect of merely relaxing into a slouch while listening silently? Avoid this trap by keeping all the elements of your outward appearance as focused on the person asking the question as your inner workings are focused on processing his or her words.
Balanced stance. Distribute your weight evenly on both your feet.
Eye Connect. Lock your eyes on the questioner as if you are a laser beam.
Head nods. Show that you are in receive mode.
Voice assent. Utter a few "Uh-huhs" or "Mm-hmms."
Steady fingers. Don't let your fingers twiddle or fidget. If they do, a simple remedy is to squeeze the tips of your fingers in a short burst of pressure. This will drain the tension out of your hands.
Now let's go back to the moment where you've yielded the floor to the man in the middle of the back of the room. And let's say that you've listened carefully, you've sub-vocalized intently, you've "Mm-hmmed" several times, and you've nodded your head repeatedly, but you still don't understand.
…You Still Don't Understand
It was at this very moment that President George H. Bush made the fatal mistake of moving past the point of not understanding and, in so doing, became guilty of the Zen master's accusation, "You are full of your own opinions and speculations." The President speculated:
Are you suggesting that if somebody has means that the national debt doesn't affect them?
Since he was off the mark, Marisa Hall started to correct him:
Well, what I'm saying is…[4.3]
Her voice rose on the word "saying," indicating her frustration and therefore echoing…as well as validating…James Carville's "It's the economy, stupid" slogan. A close cousin of Ms. Hall's vocal exasperation is the more common, "Well, what I'm really asking…" in which the voice rises on the word "really." That irritable emphasis in the questioner's voice radiates out through the audience like wildfire. In the case of President Bush, the audience was the millions of people watching the debate and, ultimately, the majority of the electorate.
When some presenters don't understand the question, they make the mistake of trying to interpret. They say, "Let me see if I have this right…" which gives the questioner the opportunity to say, "No, you don't have it right!" The message is, "You weren't listening!"
Some presenters make the other mistake, known as the deafness ruse. They hear the question. Everyone else in the room hears the question, but the presenter, in an innocent tone of voice, says, "Could you repeat the question?" The pretense is transparent.
Other presenters go all the way to the end of their answer to a question that they didn't understand in the first place, and they see the narrowed eyes of the questioner glowering back at them. If the presenter, as far too many presenters do, then says, "Does that answer your question?" or its close cousin, "Is what you're asking…?" the questioner has the opportunity to say, "No." The message is, "You weren't listening!"
Remove these statements from your vocabulary.
"Let me see if I have this right…"
"Could you repeat the question?"
"Does that answer your question?"
"Is what you're asking…?"
If you do not completely understand the question…and completely means 100%, not 99.999%…picture a bold red line between you and your audience. Do not cross the line. Do not retake the floor. Do not answer. Do not interpret. Psychiatrists have difficulty interpreting veiled meanings. And as the Zen master counsels, do not speculate.
Instead, return to sender. Do not retake the floor, leave the questioner with the floor by saying, "I'm sorry, I didn't follow, would you mind restating the question?" In doing so, you take the responsibility for not understanding, rather than pointing out that the questioner asked an unintelligible question.
What will the questioner do?
He or she will rethink the question and then restate it in simpler terms. And you are off the hook. The key here again is the foundation of Active Listening: Do not answer until you fully comprehend the Roman Column.
Do not answer until you fully comprehend the Roman Column.
Yards After Catch
In North American football, an important measure of success is a statistic called "Yards After Catch." It refers to receivers who catch a pass for a gain of yards and then run for additional yards. Superior receivers are able to add many yards after they catch a pass. The not-so-superior receivers, in their desire to become superior, often take their eyes off the ball and start to run before they catch the ball. They then fail to make the catch or the yards. The play fails.
The analogy applies here. Do not take a step into your answer until your hands are on the ball, until you fully grasp the Roman Column.
You can get the Roman Column on your own with Active Listening, or you can get it by asking the questioner to clarify. Either way, with the key issue firmly in your mind, you are now…and only now…finally ready to move forward from the state of suspended animation that we left at the end of Chapter 2 and move forward in the cycle to Retake the floor.
Chapter 5
Retake the Floor
(Martial Art: Self-Defense)
Become one with the opponent, like an image reflected in the mirror.
—Ittosai Sensei Kenpo-Sho (Teacher Ittosai Sword Manual) By Kotoda Yahei Toshida [5.1] (1716)
When your Q&A session moves from Yield the Floor to Retake the Floor, the shift in dynamics presents another opportunity for you to exercise control. It shifts the energy exchange away from the questioner and back to you.
Let's return our focus to that moment after you have opened the floor to the gentleman in the middle of the back of the room. He has asked his long, rambling question and you, either on your own, or through his own restatement, now fully grasp the Roman Column in his question. Being a results-driven person, you are eager to provide him with an answer, but suppose the gentleman's question was challenging: "Wait a minute! You tell me that your product is going to save us money, and then you give me a sticker shock price that's twice as much as your competition asks! That's outrageous! Where do you get off charging so much?"
Then suppose the answer you give to this very irate person is, "When you consider the total cost of ownership of our solution, you'll see that it will cost you less money in the long run."
You would then be telling your potential buyer that he is wrong. After all, the clear inference in his question was that you are charging too much, and the clear inference in your answer was that you are not charging too much.
That irate gentleman would then perceive you as contentious …similar to the public's perception of Ross Perot whe
n he responded to Al Gore in the NAFTA debate by snarling, "You're lying! You're lying now!" For you, that perception is highly unlikely to induce your potential customer to give you a purchase order.
Another approach, widely considered conventional wisdom, is to repeat the question. However, if immediately after the question, "Where do you get off charging so much?" you were to say, "Where do we get off charging so much?" your echo would validate the inference that you are overcharging. Your potential buyer would then perceive you as having admitted guilt.
What's worse, when you answered, you would most likely start out defensively: "When you consider the total cost of ownership…" In essence, you would be carrying forward a negative balance.
Therefore, when you get a challenging question, do not answer and do not repeat; paraphrase instead.
Paraphrase
The dictionary defines the prefix "para" as beside; near; alongside, as in "parallel." This prefix occurs in words such as "paralegal," "paramedical," "parapsychology," and "paramilitary." All of these terms refer to alternate but correlative forms of the root words: legal, medical, psychology, and military. In that same vein, the dictionary defines "paraphrase" as a restatement of a text or passage in another form or other words, often to clarify meaning. [5.2]
The intention here is to use the paraphrase during your Q&A session to state the challenging question in another form…to deflect the challenge and to control the meaning. This is distinctly different from restating or rephrasing because the prefix "re" means "again." "Again" implies repetition, and repetition implies carrying forward the negative inference latent in the challenging question. A negative statement creates a negative perception. To create a paraphrase of the original question, begin with an interrogative word, such as:
"What…?"
In the Line of Fire: How to Handle Tough Questions... When It Counts Page 5
