Trischel Tips and Tricks - Communication, Public Speaking, Leadership Personal Development

The Problems of asking Questions

2012-01-23T11:34:00.001+10:00

I recently had the misfortune to attend a training session that got a trifle out of hand. The trainer completely lost control of the activity and mayhem reigned supreme. Luckily it has not happened to me - yet – but the spectre of it happening hangs over most trainers.

To begin with all was going smoothly, the information was interesting and relevant; there was controlled but exhilarating interactive activities; the group was attentive… so what went wrong?

Well we got to the “Question and Answer” segment where, sadly, it all fell apart. And it fell apart because the trainer had not mastered the art of actually asking the right kind of questions at the right time and to the right people.

So I thought I might take a minute to share what I know about questioning techniques in the hope it may assist you and help me to remember that there is an art to asking questions!

If we understand the types of questions that we can ask and what the outcome of them will be, it may help us to use them to maintain control of the session. For instance a closed question requires a short sharp answer, it is looking for a specific answer – a piece of information and is used to check that learning has occurred. “How many distinct types of gestures can be used by a speaker?” There is a right and a wrong answer of course, the right answer is “Four”* and the wrong answer is anything else!

But of course there is always an argumentative participant in any workshop or training session; the one who would question the authenticity of the answer or even the relevance of that question – so don’t pose this question to them! Or even to the shy person who is reluctant to participate, it does nothing to bring them out of their shell, merely causes them more stress.

Instead, use it to involve the garrulous one, the one who turns every opportunity into a five minute speech. By keeping their involvement short and sharp they should not get the opportunity to launch into “War and Peace” Volume 3.

Now the open question is just the type of question to avoid with these types. Being the opposite of the closed question it encourages people to develop their answer by including opinion, reasons and examples. – for instance “What would make a good topic for a Motivational Speech?” They can also lead to more detailed answers if you prompt for further information: “Why do people feel threatened by public speaking”? - What are some ways we can overcome that?”

The participant isn’t put on the spot because the answers can fall within a reasonable range. There is not a specific ‘right’ answer which is a reason why these are good questions to ask that nervous participant, and with gentle encouragement they can be coaxed into full participation.

Another way to target that quiet one is to ask a direct question. A Direct question is asked to a specific named participant, and is used if you want to get a person’s attention or to draw out that silent member of the group. And they have the benefit of being able to be asked in a number of ways. For example - ‘John, can you give us some examples of positive body language?’

This does have the effect of allowing everybody else to switch off as soon as the name is mentioned. So - ‘If we wanted to include physical exercises, Marie, what changes would we have to make to this room’s layout?” Is probably a better method.

But my very special favourite is the technique called Pose, Pause and Pounce – where the name is said at the very end of the question. Pose the question to the whole group; pause for a few seconds to allow them to think of the answer (or panic) then nominate someone to answer; as in “What would be the benefits of improved listening skills ... Fred?”

When people recognise this type of question is being used, they listen carefully to ALL the questions - just in case.

Now an overhead question is directed to the entire group, and is used to stimulate discussion by challenging the group as a whole; as in ‘Do you think Australia needs a good apprentice scheme?”

Starting with the overhead question can focus the group on the topic under discussion, and it easy to write it in large characters and place it in a dominant position ... as a reminder. It is often easy to draw out ideas, opinions and of course, opposition to the topic by using an overhead question.

Unfortunately the overhead question does have some disadvantages; if asked early in a session it can result in silence. So if no one offers an answer, pause for a few seconds to let the participants gather their thoughts and formulate an answer. Watch the audience; body language will often tell you when someone has an idea; then call on that person to reply. If the answer is correct, reinforce the participant’s answer by repeating it. If it is incorrect, rephrase the question, or call on someone else. If no one is prepared to answer, it might be best to leave it open and return to it later in the session.

Another disadvantage is that Overhead questions allow the quick thinker or more talkative members to dominate the answers, and allows quieter or lazier members to sit back and let others do the work. If you notice that the same people are answering the questions, ask direct questions using the pose, pause and pounce method.

The third disadvantage is the one that the unlucky trainer recently found out about. If it is not kept under control everybody wants to answer it – at the same time. And if this is allowed it can escalate into an all out shouting match; or even worse the session breaks into private little discussions groups, oblivious to the outside world. It will take a strong and determined trainer to impose law and order if this happens.

So, if I really want to involve the whole group I use relayed questions - they can be used when a question may not have been answered correctly of fully. For instance, we may have asked "When do we ask Direct Questions ... Jenny?" But Jenny isn't quite sure and doesn't answer the question in detail. Instead of pointing out what Jenny has missed, we can relay it - "Can you add to that ... Joe?"

It is also a good way to reinforce learning if I am the one being asked the question. Mary asks me "Why do we ask Direct Questions, surely it closes discussion down."

Why not relay it as "Interesting question Mary, so what would be the benefits of using Direct Questions ... Peter?" Or even get tricky and redirect it as an Overhead Question then relay and redirect!

"The question has been asked 'what can a trainer do to improve their listening skills?' What do you think, Rebecca?

At the session I attended when mayhem broke out, the situation was brought under control by some experienced members of the audience and the unlucky trainer was given a hard lesson in the necessity for him to maintain control of his training.

If it is of any consolation, it either has happened or has threatened to happen to most of us at some time or other. I learned the hard way to use my questioning technique to maintain the illusion that I am in complete control! Now that’s not a bad trick… is it? Answers at your leisure.

Michele @ Trischel

* The Four Distinct Types of Gestures are:

· Descriptive

· Emphatic

· Suggestive – or Emotive (don’t use the first term when training soldiers)

· Prompting

If you want to know what these are precisely, and how to use them to add life to your presentations, then join us on the Gold Coast on the 9^th February 2012

The Communication of Change

2012-01-16T09:08:00.000+10:00

I have often said that we never change until it becomes too uncomfortable to stay the same.

But the intention to change is only an illusion unless there is some specific action to accomplish it. This is the difference between making resolutions and setting goals.

Thinking about making a change in our lives, even talking about it, can fool us into believing that we are making progress, but until we put it into practical realities we are merely standing still day dreaming.

There is however, one advantage about making a change in our personal lives, and that is we don’t have any problem letting ourselves know what it is we want to change, how we think we might achieve that, and what the outcomes might be!

However, when we are concerned with commercial change – when that change is about the way a company approaches running their business – then we need to really consider the way in which we communicate that change to the people who will be affected by it.

Mostly we approach changes to our business when things are not going well for us. There is a reluctance to change our processes and systems unless it can be shown that they are not working and coming to that realisation can be traumatic! Then there is the difficulty in analysing what is going wrong and devising methods which may put things right.

In all of this huge upheaval the very people who need to know – our workforce - get overlooked. We can soothe our conscience by convincing ourselves there is nothing to tell until we have definite proposals or a clear direction. But what you fail to communicate will trickle down via rumour and the grape vine; and as mostly these rumours are concerned with change as negative, you wake up one morning and find yourself with a sullen and uncooperative workforce. Unconfirmed rumours cause confusion and concern; it is human nature to fear the worst, especially when the known becomes the unknown.

And even if a company does try to communicate, there is another problem; as George Bernard Shaw once said, “The problem with communication is the illusion that it has occurred.” Put this situation to most harassed executives and they will most probably be astounded! How can this happen, they have been clearly communicating the details of what is going on; not a day goes by without at least a dozen emails dropping into in-boxes all through the company!

But what is the reality of that kind of communication? For a start it is all one way! And even if our staff are dedicated readers of the morning influx, is it certain that it will answer the questions that are really causing concern? In fact, unless we engage in real communication, how do know what those issues are? Any organisational change is going to cause a degree of stress to the people within that organisation and it is the responsibility of the leaders to ensure that they communicate clearly, the details to those affected by them. To leave such important actions to the grape vine is a recipe for disaster.

Bringing in your workforce at the beginning of the change process is vital for its success. People do not go around trying to second guess what’s going on or how it will affect them if they know the situation and the possible realities from Personal communication – not emails!

Organising information briefings where problems can be discussed; impacts explained, reasons confirmed and outcomes predicted ... and most important of all ... questions answered is only one way in which change communication can be effected. But whatever means you decide - large meetings, small groups, trickle communication - you must make the time for it to be meaningful for it to be effective.

If you engage in that kind of communication then there is a much better chance that your workforce will be fully supportive of the changes you need to introduce. When we understand the reasons why something must be done, we may not like the change but we know the need.

So; communicate the need for change, the direction of change and the possible outcomes of that change – and do it personally. As the change proceeds keep your workforce informed as to progress and any changes in direction; and make sure that that communication is a two-way process which means listening as well.

And this goes for unions too – there often is a reluctance to engage them in such discussions, but if the rumours at the water cooler are dangerous – keeping the union reps in the dark can be catastrophic!

Change, when undertaken properly need not be so traumatic. Just make sure that your workforce is positively engaged in the process from the start by using clear and personal communication; at least that way you have a real chance to achieve the change you need.

Michele @ Trischel

What’s it all about … Alfie?

2012-01-10T13:26:00.002+10:00

Sometimes we are so close to a subject that we just can’t see it. Sometimes we are so convinced that it just comes naturally there is no need to learn more about it. Sometimes we just get it wrong.

What am I talking about? Well - the fact that if you want to be professional in whatever it is that you do; then you are going to need to communicate. No …. I don’t mean speaking - I mean communicating. And there’s a problem, there are not many of us who do it properly.

A simple reason is that we have been talking since we were babes in arms, and because we have been doing it for so long we seem to think that we don’t need to learn anything more. But truly – what did we learn about communication at the family dinner table? Probably not a lot. We may have had a real in-depth training in inter-personal skills; we could have picked up quite a bit about conflict avoidance and the occasional resolution. We maybe a dab hand at generating conversation - but real communication? I doubt it.

Robert Kent, former dean of Harvard Business School said, “In business, communication is everything.” In fact in a normal working day managers spend 75 to 80 percent of their time involved in communication; and if you are lucky enough to make it to the top management team, it could be as much as 90 percent of your time. However, in regards to training, communication has often been referred to as a “soft” skill, and many companies have not viewed it as important. But that was in the past, today it is considered the most critical skill leaders need..

So why do we manage reasonably well around the table; but get it so wrong in business? It is because we confuse conversing with communicating. There are whole rafts of cultural rules that govern the way we speak with and to each other. There are taboo topics, there are certain ways of addressing people that are considered down right rude, and often we use euphuisms to disguise our message and to lessen its distressing impact. “Our cat passed away last night, and we don’t want the grandchildren to know.” Instead of saying “The cat died”.

Sometimes we will tell a downright lie, especially if the truth will get us into trouble! “How do I look in this new dress” is an exercise in terror. If I tell the truth I am going to be in it up my neck, and if I lie I am going to feel guilty for the rest of the day. What to do??? (Answers in the comments please - I am dying to know how you get out of it)

Now we can’t do that in business. Here is one place where we should be able to tell it like it is; lay in on the line; let it all hang out … oh! Perhaps that’s a step too far.

However, communication in business needs to be clear, concise and most important of all it must be correct! We can’t dress it up in nice little boxes and pretend that it’s something else. And yet, that is what so many people actually do. They take the conversational skills that they have learned through family, school and friends and try to create a communication style that answers businesses’ needs. Unfortunately it doesn’t work. Used within the business environment conversational communication can create chaos – at best it leads to costly misunderstanding and mistakes.

If you are trying to maintain the credibility and professionalism of your organisation then you absolutely must apply some critical appraisal of your communication standards. If you are, or you recognise that your staff are trying to communicate important instructions, essential information and critical data in the incorrect way you will be one of those businesses whose communication is ineffective.

How to recognise if this is happening to us – or in our company? Ask yourself some simple questions … how many times do you have to restate your requests? How much time is being wasted by staff members incorrectly carrying out your instructions? How often do you have to re-explain something you thought you had already covered - twice? How many times do you have to ask for further clarification about an important task?

Give that some thought; and answer honestly. They say there are two different life styles that we lead – the one that we think we have and of course, the one that we actually live. So don’t answer the way you would like it to be, answer the way it is.

Time, they say, is money – and time wasted in ineffective communication is money wasted. Can you afford to waste money in business today?

So what’s it all about, Alfie? Well it’s all about communication; effective, concise, clear and positively correctly understood. So don’t waste time with conversational tactics when what is really needed is communication skills.

Michele @ Trischel

The experts in communication training!

Welcome to the Team!

2012-01-09T10:29:00.002+10:00

Trischel is delighted to welcome a new member to our training team -

Marilyn Freeman;

Marilyn started her career in the advertising industry and holds a Graduate Diploma in conference and events management. In 2007 she moved into the training arena, holds Cert IV in Workplace Assessment and Training and is an NLP General Practitioner.

She is experienced in leadership, management communication and the motivation and performance improvement industry. She is involved in designing training courses for Toastmasters in Queensland and is currently Chairman of the training team responsible for training more than 1200 club leaders throughout Queensland, Northern NSW, Northern Territory & PNG.

Marilyn has been a welcome keynote speaker at conferences, has undertaken speaking engagements for community and business organisations and is a member of the Mind Tools group.

Why not come and meet Marilyn, at the Creating Confident Communicators Workshop being held on Thursday 19th January.

Whatever your New Year's Resolution, the one skill that is absolutely necessary to attain it is ..... effective communication. The ability to get your ideas accepted; to have your ideas listened to; to sell that product and to inspire others to achieve - all these are based of good communication skills.

And you will be surprised - as others have been - at just how much you gain in Just One Day.

Book your place now - and come and meet Trish and Marilyn as they take you through a fun filled day of real achievement.

Creating Confident Communicators - In Just One Day

2012-01-06T13:31:00.000+10:00

Did you make some New Year Resolutions?

What's the betting they will have floated away by April?

If one of your resolutions was to improve your ability to get your message understood; to finally get a grasp on the ins and outs of this communication stuff or even to overcome that overwhelming fear of public speaking, then take a deep breath ... for we can help you.

In Just One Day we can give you the facts about effective communication!

In Just One Day we can remove that paralysing fear and replace it with real excitement!

In Just One Day you will understand exactly how to arrange your thoughts and ideas to make the most appeal to your listeners!

At the end of Just One Day, you will leave with real confidence, and a better understanding of how you can put into practice some of the exciting but simple tips from the Trainers at Trischel.

Sales presentations? - they'll be a breeze!

Getting your opinion listened to? - they'll be eager to hear them!

Need to get something done quickly? - clear instruction will solve the problem!

Our next workshop is on the 19 January at the Park Regis Hotel, North Quay Brisbane - and Early Bird Discounts still apply.

Book your place to become the Confident Communicator you always wanted to be, and make sure that your New Year Resolutions become this year's Achievements.

New Year’s Resolutions need Work!

2012-01-06T09:00:00.002+10:00

There is an old saying that a goal not written down is just a dream, and will fade away from our memory just like a dream. And a resolution made around midnight on the 31^st December will often depart much quicker.

New Year Resolutions are really wishful thinking just like that dream, and we often daydream; and they usually centre around that elusive ‘lottery win’! “If only I could win the lottery, I could do anything I wanted.” Such thoughts are common and not really a bad thing, it’s fun to visualise how we would spend all those millions; but really when we come back to reality we know it just aint gonna happen.

Resolutions made in the emotion of the moment, determined by the sound of fireworks and merrymaking, are often fuelled by champagne rather than determination. It may well be that these resolutions are a recognition that some kind of change in our lives is needed. But like that elusive lottery win, unless we do something practical about creating that change we will be back in the old routine by February.

So let’s stop thinking about making a resolution, which is merely statement of intention, and start thinking of setting real and achievable goals.

The goals I am talking about are those that live in our world, the world of reality which continues on after the hangover on the 1^st of January! Unless we really make some effort to precisely define and plan for them they are just as possible as all those dreams of a lottery win, and by June we will still be in the same place we were in December.

So, if your New Year Resolutions were the recognition of a real need for change, you will need to make a plan of action for achieving them, and recast them as goals.

Goals need to be given careful consideration and they need to be SMART! That is they need to be:

S Specific – that means clear and precise. Not just I want a better job, but I want a job that brings in at least $60,000 a year. If your main goal seems huge at this moment, you might need to plan the individual steps to achieve it; and each one of those steps becomes a specific goal along the way. The longest journey known to man began with just one step. But that step needs as much planning as the larger goal.

M Measurable - we need to be able to know when we have achieved it. And we need to be able to measure steps along the way. This is so important for continued motivation. We need the inspiration of ticking off the steps along the way to keep us focused on the main goal.

A Actionable – there are some specific actions that you can plan for that will lead to the goal in mind. Making your plan is similar to planning a route map. You need to know what has to be done to actually get there. Intend to improve your ability to give sales presentations? Then a good public speaking course is an action that will lead to your goal.

R Realistic – they have to be within the bounds of reality – if your specific goal is to obtain a job paying more than $60,000 it is unrealistic to aim for becoming a brain surgeon (unless you are a medical student). Pushing the boundaries is sometimes necessary to achieve your goal, but you need to have some realistic possibility of doing so, or its “lottery winning” time again.

T Time related – what is the time frame for you to achieve this goal. If no time limit is imposed on your goals then you can fool yourself that you are still working towards them when in reality you are just standing still.

So you could set yourself the Goal of “Achieving a position in a corporation as a Business Administrator/Manager with a salary of at least $60,000 a year within the next three years.”

Now write it down. Keep a copy in a newly created file and put a small copy in your wallet to be re-affirmed daily. Put it as your screen saver; make a poster and put it up on your wall – create ways of ensuring that you will see your written goal a number of times each day. The term ‘out of sight is out of mind’ is even more relevant when discussing goal setting.

But – just writing it down will not accomplish anything other than to remind you that you have not yet actually set out on your journey, remember you have to make a plan. Yes … more work! But without a plan nothing will ever happen. You will take out your written goals and wistfully think what a fool you were to believe in goal-setting.

So now you need to consider realistically what steps you will need to take to get you where you want to be. You will need to consider what resources you will need; what extra knowledge or qualifications; in fact what do you have to really do to achieve that goal - you know, the one that seemed so easy in New Year’s Eve. It is time to take stock and detail all the assets you already have and what contacts can help you on your way.

Planning for goal achievement needs enthusiasm and commitment. It needs the cooperation of all your support staff – family and friends need to be aware and enthusiastic about the final outcome. They also need a firm belief that you can do it, so that when your energy and enthusiasm fails (and sadly we must expect them to do so from time to time) – they will be your cheer squad and support team to encourage and support your through to the goal.

For attitude is the third thing that you will need to make sure that you get where you are aiming to be. Without a firm belief in your ultimate destination, you have little chance of gaining it. Strong faith and stern belief are the hall marks of any goal scorer. So if you are not sure how this works – here’s a hint.

It’s all in the positivity of your thinking and in the air of certain success that you create around you. Strengthen your sense of inevitability with strong affirmations; create that success through changing focus from negative to positive.

And there is one more hint that I can give you – whatever your chosen goal is; wherever it is you want to be at this time next year, there is one achievable action that will assist you to get there.

In all aspects of management, leadership or even self-development the ability to communicate clearly; listen carefully and comprehend correctly is a skill that will help to impel you along your road to success.

From Lion Tamer to Traffic Warden; from Storeman to CEO, from Corporal to Captain – it doesn't matter what you are or where you intend to be, clear communication is the key to getting you there. It should be the very first actionable step on your journey to achieving your New Year’s Resolution – and it is one of the easiest to achieve right now.

We at Trischel would be proud to be a part of your support team, and we can show you just how easy it is to turn your New Year Resolutions from 'Intention' to an 'Achievable Outcome'.

Michele @ Trischel

You might also like:

New Year's Day at the Crossroads

Making a Choice for Change

The Politics of Communication

2011-12-19T09:52:00.000+10:00

A number of our world leaders seem to be in the grip of communication problems. Here in Australia our Prime Minister has delivered Christmas cheer (or gloom) to members of her government by a rearrangement of the cabinet. Her expressed intention was, ‘to promote ministers more able to communicate the government’s message.’

A worthy aim; and that it rewarded her supporters and removed her detractors probably had nothing to do with it!

In the US, there have been a number of debates to select a Republican candidate for the Presidential Elections, and those that performed better were I believe unexpected.

And over in Europe the British Prime Minister seeking to shield the City of London’s Financial markets from legislation of a fiscal union that Britain does not belong to; finds his country on the end of a remarkable French diatribe from officials that should really know better.

Communication? Well of a sort I suppose – but if communication is to be used to explain policy, justify selection or to promote further discussion, I think all of them need to do very much better.

There seems to be a lot of myths running around about the use of communication in politics. Julia Gillard seems to think that if only her ministers could explain just why the Carbon Tax (for instance) is needed and how it will enhance the lives of middle Australia, then all the opposition will immediately fall on their swords exclaiming “how stupid we were! I see it clearly now” – that is a dream for children.

And in the US, successful debating conclusions while important, does not indicate the true ability of the debater to govern the country for the benefit of all; there needs to be far more important indicators present.

And the French should understand that vicious rhetoric never brought any country back to the negotiating table – it merely hardens the opposition and highlights cultural and historical differences which many thought should have been buried long ago.

Each one of these examples show where a wrong impression about the use of communication led to actions which failed completely to achieve the aim.

Perhaps we should refresh our memory of the truth about persuasive communication – whatever the reason, whatever the aim, the communication from the sender is always personal and it will be received equally personally. Nothing we say and nothing we hear is unfiltered – it is always filtered through who we are, what we know, how we were raised, our cultural background, our education, our experiences and our expectations. And those are incredible things to just ignore.

To change the minds of those diametrically opposed to your point of view needs far more than adequate communicators; it needs clear logical rationality; it needs accurate supporting facts, it needs a recognition of the interests of the receivers and it needs to recognise their concerns and it needs to address them; address them without bluff, bluster, insults or ridicule.

Think about the examples that I have used; in every case not one of them addressed the concerns of their opposition as being ‘rational or understandable’. In each case areas of concern were insultingly dismissed and those that aired them were abused as being at best ‘foolish and ignorant!’ and at worst ‘childish’. Such attacks will do absolutely nothing to bring these people to an understanding of your argument, or even to consider that you have an argument at all.

And with many governments seemingly taking a position diametrically opposed to the general public, I am beginning to sense a frustration with the democratic process itself. Indeed in Europe under the guise of reforming the economic situation legally elected heads of state have been forced to resign while unelected bureaucrats are appointed by faceless people behind closed doors.

So, perhaps another truth about communication needs to be understood; if you cannot convince the people of the rightness and purity of your actions perhaps it is because your actions are wrong and/or your integrity has been compromised.

Certainly Julia Gillard who promised ‘no carbon tax from my government,’ surely cannot wonder why the people now distrust her? And those politicians in Britain with their vehemently pro-EU stance cannot expect the population to trust them when they find out they are in receipt of pensions paid by that very same EU – it goes way beyond a ‘conflict of interest’ ... some have evencalled it treachery!

The American presidential run-up always confuses me, so I shall nothing about it, except that the same considerations surely must apply.

If you are not perceived to be a credible source of information, that information will be compromised no matter how accurate, reasonable or logical.

However, even if you do communicate your ideas well, it does not mean that everyone accepts your point of view. Filtered as it is through their concerns, they could just as easily reject your carefully researched arguments. If you want to convince them of the righteousness of your intent, you need to understand it from their point of view, and not dismiss their concerns out of hand. If you ignore those concerns, abuse those that voice them – you will not be communicating persuasively, you will be bullying.

Communicating correctly and persuasively will not bring about immediate agreement – that is a fallacy. What it does is to air concerns and hopefully bring about understanding of both sides of the argument. There is no shame in disagreeing with others when you are in the majority!

But politicians should note that when your future is in the hands of the masses, it does not auger well for your continuity of employment to simply ignore them because you think you know better.

Whatever your political philosophy if you are elected to represent a section of society you are expected to do so; so you should be communicating to those in the ivory towers or in the glass bubbles of Canberra, Washington or London just what the population at large is concerned about, worrying over and what it is that they want done. It is not your job to lecture, abuse or dictate to them... or alas you may be looking for another job come election time.

And I am sorry; being an ex-politician is not really credible work experience in my book!!

Michele @ Trischel

PS – the opinions expressed in this article are those of the author

Leadership Confusion

2011-11-28T09:04:00.001+10:00

There is an old Irish blessing, which goes “May you live in interesting times” – and these days most of us can say we have been blessed!

These are very interesting times for many organisations and indeed nations. Some are re-defining their operations, some are struggling to recast their methods, and others are just plain going broke. The realisation that something has gone seriously wrong is beginning to dawn on even the most optimistic.

More and more voices are being heard – in the media; in politics and now in society – voices which are asking “What are our leaders doing to get us out of this mess?”

While Trischel primarily train communicators, we are increasingly being asked about the qualities of leadership. There seems a real interest in corporate Australia to define the role of a Leader. During breaks in training, I often find myself in deep and meaningful discussions about what leadership is, as well as what leadership isn’t, and how is can be defined in the twenty first century.

Let’s face it, there are hundreds of books which talk about Leadership; and there are some iconic writers who have laid out definitive ideas of what Leadership should look like, such as John Kotter, in What Leaders Really Do (1999); the guru of Leadership and Change.

In addition, we’ve had Locke with The Essence of Leadership (1991); the Kuczmarski’s, Susan and Tom, discussing the Values-Based Leadership (1995): David Rock introduced us to Quiet Leadership (2006): and Eva Cox evaluated the problems faced by Leading Women (1996).

But my point is that Leadership, despite the tomes that have been written about it, is still a difficult attribute to pin down. Often our assessment about demonstrated leadership depends on the position or the career path. For instance – we have leadership forums chaired by Fred Smith or Joe Bloggs, because they are the Chairman of this company; or CEO of that one. Or during our training session someone grabs me in the break and pinning me against the wall, gushes “You’ve spent a long time in the military – tell me about (breathless pause) Leadership!”

The truth is that position or career does not automatically create a Leader. It allows people to fill a position of power, or imbues them with an air of authority – but neither of these produces that special something that we instinctively recognise as being ‘leadership’.

Is it something that a few of us are born with, or is it something that can be nurtured? Is Leadership a skill which can be taught or must it be the province of those chosen few who seem intuitively to understand it?

These are questions that have been asked for centuries, Plato and Aristotle posed similar questions, and I dare say they will still be debated in the future. I think it is because the quality of Leadership is so ephemeral that it is really difficult to pin down. We may not be able to articulate what it is exactly, but we recognise it when we see it.

The difficulty comes when we consider what Leaders are supposed to look like. Kotter’s book laid down some basic ideas that leadership consists of action. And of course, it does. The leader who occupies the position but does nothing is merely a figure head. So leadership must be about what you do.

But then so is Management – so is Leadership a different kind of management then?

In the Essence of Leadership Locke talks about the four keys of successful leaders – Knowledge, Skills, Ability and Vision. These are, with core motive and traits, still being taught as being at the basics of all leadership – and rightly so, because a real leader must demonstrate these key factors or fail.

But if I have the knowledge and the Skills, if my ability is recognised and am able to articulate my vision – will I be recognised as having that indefinable quality that those I lead will recognise and trust? Should there be something more?

Susan and Thomas Kuczmarski thought so. In Values-Based Leadership they told us that “…employees need values they can believe in. Without a reason to believe in the values and mission of an organization [sic] profits and productivity will decline”

That a leader should demonstrate that they have principles and are ethical is so obvious, that I wonder why we had to have it spelled out for us. So, in addition to my actions, and the four key points, as a leader I am also required to communicate my personal values to those I lead so that they are motivated and inspired.

I cannot fault any of the attributes discussed above – I agree with everything they say; they are all necessary, and in my time as a Senior NCO in the army I learned and implemented each and everyone of them. Just as every other person who went through the various leadership courses did. As everyone of our industry leaders must have done, on their path to the senior positions.

But not everyone who went through the military leadership courses and who received the promotion demonstrated that special quality of leadership that is recognised by the soldier. Soldiers follow because they must. The system dictates it. But there is a great difference between following a leader because he holds the position, and following a leader because you believe and trust in them.

So the question of leadership, for me, is still open for discussion. Especially as my answer to the question of “What are our leaders doing to get us out this mess” is usually to ask “What were the leaders doing to get us into it in the first place?”

So are we still confused about Leadership? What are your thoughts?

Michele @ Trischel

You Might Also Like:

Principles, Ethics and Effectiveness

A Question of Values – or isit Principles – no: wait! It’s Ethics – isn’t it?

Just a minute!

2011-11-14T11:18:00.000+10:00

I’ve learned at lot about leadership and management in my time, but the one thing that I really learnt through practical experience, is that leadership (or management) is a minute by minute experience.

I can set goals in the morning for my intended outcomes; I can be meticulous about my time management to ensure that I reach my daily goals, (which of course are stepping stones to my weekly goals – which are stepping stones towards my monthly ones and so on and so forth!), and I can begin the day with a sense of optimism, which usually proves to be unfounded.

Because even before I start the world conspires to create unexpected obstacles and minute by minute my carefully crafted daily routine is in tatters.

So one day I set some general ideas of where I would like to be at the end of the day and set off to achieve them minute by minute. I was surprised at the difference that attitude made.

Previously, when I was committed to a set routine and a time-table, any deviation from that caused me stress. If I had to sort out an unexpected problem, I worried that I was taking time away from my important tasks – the ones I had set myself to achieve that day. The most important thing in my day was that time-table carefully worked out to make sure I achieve the set programme.

I am sure that you can see the fallacy of that approach! Eventually, so did I.

Setting goals is really important; creating a time frame to achieve them in is equally important – but making them the most important thing in the day is foolish. It impairs your ability to be flexible and open to the needs of the day. Set timetables for set outcomes that do not take heed of the need to change focus causes rigidity – and that can lead to some disastrous mistakes.

I began to view my staff as impediments; they impacted on my ability to keep to my schedule. Sorting out their problems threw me behind time; responding to different outcomes than I had envisaged hampered my ability to address those issues I had planned for. I became unwilling to deviate from the schedule and unresponsive to the realities of the workplace.

Luckily I had a good mentor, one who took me aside and explained the inevitable outcome of continuing this rigid practice – and the impact my attitude was having on the rest of the team.

So, as I said earlier I changed my attitude, and I became much more responsive of the immediate issues of the working day. I realised that I cannot dictate the outcomes of the daily routines just by setting goals. Inevitably something would come up that changed the situation, created more urgent tasks than my set one or created a complete different set of conditions. I needed to be flexible enough to change direction when circumstances changed.

More like the Willow tree that bends before the wind; rather than the oak tree that I admired for its strength and rigidity. But come the storm winds, being unable to give, it breaks.

So now I don’t set rigid deadlines for myself; I try to set achievable goals with the flexibility needed to change direction and even to suspend them if something more important turns up. My original schedules had my day planned almost to the minute, and every minute was accounted for and if I deviated from that timetable I worried for the rest of the day that I would never make up that ‘lost’ time.

Now I only look that proverbial minute ahead. Yes; I still have desired outcomes and I still have a time frame in which to achieve them, but now the timeframe is much more sustainable because I build flexibility into it.

I am no longer driven to distraction if a team member is unavailable or resources are late, or any other of the one hundred and one things that can go wrong. Being committed to flexibility I can work around the problem, often redirecting efforts to other more achievable outcomes, building time available when the original task become viable.

The affect on my stress levels has been quite dramatic ... oh, and my team are much happier too!

Learning to commit only to this minute has certainly improved my output.

Michele @ Trischel

Why Won’t You Listen?

2011-10-31T09:10:00.000+10:00

Leadership is 75% communication. In fact so important is effective communication for our leaders that it just about tops every list of preferred leadership traits.

“But,’ disagreed one leader “I can’t communicate every little decision that the board makes, and I certainly don’t have time to listen to every crack pot scheme that gets suggested. In fact, I get paid to make the decisions and I expect the staff to understand that and get on with their jobs – which they are being paid to do!’

I have a feeling that this man did not fully comprehend the nature of his business. Today more companies have abandoned the rigid hierarchal structures that supported such a point of view and adopted the more flexible team working unit.

It is a very successful system that engages the workers in making decisions about their input leading to a sense of ownership – and it depends on effective communication based on good listening skills.

The problem with isolating the leadership from the work force is not least that it causes lack of important information which may be essential for the task ahead, but that it will also cause misunderstanding – both of the task and of the leadership.

We only have to think of how we feel when someone is obviously not listening to us; there is an immediate sense of alienation, as if we have been cut off. We can be offended at the implied insult, and if it happens too often we will lose respect for that person and even avoid their company.

Companies that depend on customer feedback are in a much better position if they actually listen to it. Listening to problems and reacting to them positively is excellent customer relations. Such responses quickly get known, and customers will be happy to recommend them “Need a new washing machine? Go to XYZ – their service is excellent”

Alas, those washing machine providers who ignore complaints will also be highlighted – but for all the wrong reasons.

If you have customers, then you must listen to them when they bring problems to your attention or you will soon be out of the business. Likewise leaders must listen to their workforce when they bring problems to their attention – the results are very similar, alienation, resentment then direct opposition.

Personal relationships can also founder on the lack of listening skills; how often has a frustrated partner hurled the ‘You never listen to me’ accusation across the angry space?

Listening does not mean agreement; it means that you try to understand the situation from the other person’s point of view. Similar people will probably have similar points of view, and often friendships begin with that recognition. But we can also get on better with those we do not agree with if we understand their ideas and their reasoning. There is no shame in agreeing to disagree.

But listening should not be confined just to our personal relationships or even our working environment – governments also have a poor record of listening to the electorate. In those countries that have adopted the Westminster system of government there is an expectation that the Member of Parliament for a constituency is there to reflect the views of the largest majority.

In the United Kingdom, the government recently suffered the humiliation of 81 members voting against their own party in defiance of a three line whip. (You might like to google that if you are not familiar with the term)

These members were listening to what their electorate was saying and chose to act on what they heard. The government, it appears, was refusing to listen to the people and were determined on an action that the majority of the nation refuses to support.

The cost of not listening can be very high. Our personal response to not being listened to is to reject that person, and to avoid them in the future; a senior management that does not listen to their workforce risk alienating them and losing their willing contribution which is so necessary for success. Companies that ignore customer feedback will lose them, and their reputation will suffer as a result.

And governments will face an angry population; frustrated by being ignored they will often turn towards political parties that they feel better represent their opinions. The obvious cost may not be immediate, but too many governments face immense voter backlash simply because they appear to not listen to their electorate.

And politicians, who promise the earth before the election only to deliver nothing after, will suffer huge damage to their reputations, damage that may never be overcome.

But what happens if you simply cannot respond positively to what you are hearing? What if the circumstance at the moment does not lend itself to supporting the idea or implementing the changes that the customer/workforce/partner/electorate is demanding?

Remember, the most sought after leadership trait is communication. Then why not be open about it and explain the reasons why... “Thank you for advising us of the difficulty cause by our washing machine model no .... Unfortunately at the moment we do not have the means to incorporate your suggested improvements, but will note them for the future.” Such a response may keep the customer, but “Your suggestions are stupid and we intend to ignore them!” certainly will not.

By not listening we are often sending the second message.

But, listening to the concerns of our partner we can understand the problem from their point of view, and if necessary we can explain our reasons and our actions. Listening does not automatically mean agreement; but it should automatically give understanding.

And the MP’s who voted against their own party in the UK are demonstrating the depth of concern in the community. Not listening to those concerns is alienating the government from the people. If the government would only explain their violent opposition to the voices of the people, hopefully creating at least understanding of the situation from the government point of view, they just might have a chance to avoid the impending debacle at the ballot box. Refusing to do so is setting in concrete the concerns of the people and destroying the party leaders' reputation.

This problem is not just one for the UK government; here in Australia both the federal and my state government face a similar voter backlash because they too are acting in defiance of the majority of voter’s wishes.

It’s almost enough to make you stand up and shout “Oh! Why won’t you listen?”

Michele @ Trischel

Strategy or Tactics – Which comes first?

2011-10-27T08:51:00.001+10:00

“What’s the difference between strategy and tactics, then?” I was asked recently; but of course if you don’t already know it’s a bit like the chicken and the egg.

So let’s get this clear,– strategy always comes before tactics, because strategy is concerned with outcomes and tactics is about means.

Strategy is the destination and tactics is the journey.

It’s a bit like the ‘leader or manager’ debate – strategy is ‘doing the right thing’ while tactics is ‘doing the thing right!’

Without a strong clear strategic aim, tactics are meaningless, or at worse will be designed to achieve the wrong aim.

As that doyen of military practice Sun Tzu said, "Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat."

So, unless you have clear knowledge of what needs to be achieved, the destination of the action if you like; even if you have some idea of what actions to take to achieve it, your progress will at best be slow and at worst, completely off target.

It also follows that even carefully planned actions which have little reference to the desired outcome will ultimately fail to achieve it.

Place that into today’s context and I am sure we can find some examples of Sun Tzu’s dictum – where tactics have been spectacularly undertaken, but have failed to address what is claimed to be the strategical aims – in both politics and business.

Sun Tzu also said “All men can see these tactics whereby I conquer, but what none can see is the strategy out of which victory is evolved” which seems to imply that the leader should keep his strategy to himself.

However, as any military leader knows (and business leaders should know – and political leaders – well who knows?) the intention is not to withhold the strategy from your own troops but to disguise it from the enemy.

Clear communication to the people who will be designing the tactics is absolutely necessary, without that whatever tactics are adopted will eventually be futile. How do I know what train to catch if I have no idea of the required destination? Strategy is the destination, tactics is the journey.

Which means of course, that once a strategy has been decided upon, it must be able to be clearly communicated, and that is not a simple as it seems. In fact more disasters have come from misunderstanding the strategy than from executing the tactics.

And then there is the temptation by those that design the strategy to interfere with the tactical achievement of them. Politicians are good at this, after all war is an outcome of politics as Karl Von Clausewitz well knew: “The political object is the goal, war is the means of reaching it”

No-one suffered from detailed political interference more than the Duke of Wellington. The British Government’s strategy was to defeat Napoleon through war in the Peninsula, forcing him to withdraw his troops from Spain & Portugal thereby loosing the southern sea access. It was rather more detailed than that, but it gives the general idea.

But the political masters back in Westminster were determined that Wellington should not be allowed free reign, and bombarded him every day with memos, orders and demands. Luckily, Wellington was made of sterner stuff and wrote back:

My Lord, If I attempted to answer the mass of futile correspondence which surrounds me, I should be debarred from the serious business of campaigning... To the Secretary of State for War during the Peninsular Campaign

It sort of signifies the type of leader that Wellesley was, certainly his ‘Publish and be damned’ response to blackmail was in character.

So what has all this to do with business you may ask?

The person who asked me the original question had recently returned from a business leadership seminar where much time was given to discussing “Strategy”. He felt they had not differentiated between the two, and that this confusion was at the heart of some of the problems facing us today.

Without a strategy you cannot articulate your vision – the desired end result. It is the leader’s role to create this strategic vision – it’s what they are being paid for. It’s the Where we will be and the What we will be doing.

It is also the leader’s role to clearly articulate that strategic vision in concrete terms, not abstract constructs; those that are expected to plan the tactics, the How to get the company there, need to know exactly what it looks like when they have arrived.

And finally, when strategy has been decided and communication is over, the leader needs to step back and not to interfere with the detailed implementation of the tactics. It is the commander on the ground that can see what is before him, it is probably they that have far more up-to-date information which allows them to make the adjustments that lead to victory.

Opportunities multiply as they are seized – Sun Tzu

There is a difference between Strategy and Tactics, and sometimes even the military can get that wrong; but when we have the differences clear in our minds we can create magnificent victories.

Thus it is that in war the victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won, whereas he who is destined to defeat first fights and afterwards looks for victory - Sun Tzu

Michele @ Trischel

Why Should I Believe You?

2011-10-17T10:49:00.000+10:00

After a hard day of doing very little yesterday, I settled down to watch the news last night. It appears that the world is in a sorry state- an impending financial meltdown in Europe; an occupying sit-in on Wall Street, a Carbon Tax imposed against the wishes of the population in Australia – and we lost the Rugby World Cup Semi Final!

It was a little depressing, but I also noted something else which I feel might even be more depressing – it was the way in which that news was imparted. We have a large number of channels to choose from here, but I felt the same problem was being shown on every channel. It seems that we are no longer being informed of the news, we are being subjected to their particular interpretation of the news.

More often than not the news programmes of even the State broadcaster are becoming opinion pieces than straight forward presentations of the facts; often telling us what we should believe rather than what it is about.

With so many problems facing us, and so many different interpretation of the facts how are we, the population, going to decide what the truth is, and who we can believe?

Let’s begin to apply the Ethical Test to the communication we are receiving and see which – if any – pass the test.

The Five Step Ethical Test is used by many public speakers to evaluate the ethical standard of their purpose and their presentations. We know that to have our message accepted we must be credible speakers, and that means that we must be judged by our listeners as believable sources of information.

The first Step looks at the speaker’s intention; the purpose of his speech and its consequences - both intended and unintended. Speaking out against a country selling arms appears to be a great idea; surely it would lead to less armed conflict and that outcome would certainly meet the ethical test.

But what would happen if the purchaser was a small nation facing overwhelming aggression from a larger neighbour; could that lead to more instability and even the risk of having one nation unable to defend itself? Weapons are not only used for aggression, they are also used for defence. The jury might be out on that one; so why should I believe you?

Secondly, we examine the truthfulness of the information – and here is where we can often be deliberately misinformed. An ethical speaker would recognise the objections to their opinion and answer them with rational rebuttals; unethical purveyors of information often merely ignore them.

With easy access to the internet, it is inevitable that opposing points of view are going to reach the population eventually, so if, as a proponent of a specific course of action you simple refuse to address my objections, or brush them aside; and if negative views are deliberately withheld, or even more worrying when they are deliberately kept from the population by undeclared censorship – then why should I believe you?

The Third Test is the emotional test; what standards and values is the speaker appealing to; and with that goes the question how is that appeal being made?

The same set of facts can be presented in a positive as well as a negative way, and there is no reason why any person seeking to create an emotional appeal to a rational argument should not present that appeal in the most positive way.

But - the deliberate use of negative language to create an emotional reaction which is not warranted by the facts brands you an unethical speaker.

‘The Prime Minister visited a farming community in Queensland to explain the need for a Carbon Tax’ these are the facts.

At Radio Station A, we hear: -

‘The Prime Minister received a warm welcome from an enthusiastic Queensland farming community when she took time out from her busy schedule to personally explain the necessity of the carbon tax.’

So here we have the picture of a warm and caring person, taking the time to personally explain to a group of grateful and welcoming farmers the reason for a very necessary government policy. Everything is absolutely lovely then ...

.... except at Radio Station B we hear this :

A deeply unpopular Prime Minister was given a rowdy welcome when she set out to justify this iniquitous carbon tax to some long suffering farmers.

Perhaps it’s not quite so lovely then - and really, why should I believe either of you?

And finally; how does the speaker respect the opposition? People who are attempting to make sense of what may appear to be senseless news can often have a number of questions, fears and apprehensions and they deserve to have these addressed.

Merely calling your opponents unacceptable names, attacking them personally; ignoring their right to have their objections heard and addressed does not lend an air of credibility to any speaker – in short it is not an ethical way to inform the audience, whether it be just a couple of hundred or the nation’s population – so why should I believe you?

If any one of these five steps is used deliberately by a supposed unbiased source of news, it labels them unethical.

So what’s the burning question where you are?

Is it the Financial crisis; lack of democracy; fiscal irresponsibility; biased media or just why did Australia loose to New Zealand? Why not apply the Five Steps Ethical Test to those who are bringing you the stories – and you might find yourself asking “Why on earth should I believe you!”

Michele @ Trischel

Think before you Email ... please!

2011-10-10T08:57:00.000+10:00

It’s Monday morning and I’ve just spend an hour deciphering, decoding and deleting a pile of emails; very few of which were of importance in either my professional or my personal life.

It is really incredible how this insidious means of communication has stolen in and taken over my life. Once upon a time, oh way back in the mists of the 1970’s, if I wanted to contact someone I had two options either pick up the phone and ring them or write them a letter.

I can still remember the tingle of excitement when the postman popped that envelope into the letterbox – who was it from? What was it about? Anticipation was keen.

But now I open the Inbox and sigh – what an awful lot of rubbish collects in there, all masquerading as something important. It doesn’t really matter what the subject heading says, I have to read at least the opening sentence to ensure I don’t miss important information before I decide what to do with it – the temptation alas is often to delete without reading; especially when I get close to the end of the marathon.

And some of my correspondents use a completely different language – I feel like I have been betamaxed, in fact I appear to be 404’d, and while I don’t quite think I’m a stress puppy I do admit to going postal!! See what I mean ... ROFL!!

I also have a number of delightful correspondents who wish to enrich me with substantial sums of money, if only I would be kind enough to supply the details of my bank account into which they would joyfully deposit said sums. Next there’s the one that seems never to notice that their capital lock is on, and I feel quite exhausted when I reach the end of the message.

Then I reach the important ones, the ones that deal with my business life, and the others I love to receive from my friends and family. Only, sometimes it is never quite clear which is which. Some of my business correspondence is lovely and chatty, and the tone is friendly and relaxed. Indeed, I have been sadly taken to task when I failed to realise the urgency of the situation – it got missed in the general air of relaxed friendship.

My family, (mainly because I have nagged them repeatedly) have now caught onto the fact that email is not always just a light hearted electronic conversation; and when used to convey important information it does need to be constructed in a way that allows the recipient to clearly understand the urgency.

If we understand that email is just another way of constructing communication, we should be able to create a style that allows us to convey our precise message in easy to understand terms – and avoid wasting time when they pop into the inbox. So here are my suggestions:

First – do not confuse me with multi subject headers. Ones like “Confirmation of meeting time and holiday photos” confound my simple mind. If I want to talk to you about business I may not actually want to view the holiday memories. And if I am desperate to see what you got up to in Rome, it may not be a good time to discuss Communication Training.

Second – Uppercase does not impress me, it merely confirms my suspicion that you don’t know your Capital Lock from your Scroll Lock. I will accept the occasional capitalisation to show true emphasis BUT I suggest you use it with caution, not everyone is so forgiving.

Third – Please, may I suggest that when you respond to some contentious issue, you write the email and put it into the draft box. Revisit it the next day and if you still think it is a good idea then send it. Immediate responses in the heat of the moment have led to the death of some promising friendships. Flame wars breakout on facebook and twitter for the same reason they do in the Inbox – precise emotional intention is unable to be accurately assessed. With the best will in the world a grinning smiley will not decrease my anger if I feel you have insulted me.

Fourth – take some thought to the way that the email is constructed. With time being so constrained in business today it really helps if, as well as an accurate and concise heading, you put the reason for the message, its relevance and if possible the time frame up front - in the first paragraph in fact.

This allows me to assess the urgency and relevance of the correspondence, helping me to decide the most appropriate way of dealing with it.

There are some who naturally translate the more formal structure of business writing into the email format, and I bless them everytime I open their message. Clear, concise and to the point it makes understanding and responding a breeze; and I thank you from the bottom of my heart.

And finally – reread your message before pressing the fatal ‘enter’ key! It is surprising the number of words missed out, the keying mistakes that get through and the confused thought processes that may need clarifying – so check before sending is the mantra.

Time is precious, it is also money – and time wasted in ploughing through a host of emails is not time spent profitably. Carelessness in crafting your electronic correspondence can really leave a bad impression.

So my last piece of advice to you is that if you have something to discuss which may be open to misunderstanding, don’t use email; pick up the phone and ring them. Why? Because you will have instantaneous feedback to warn you if something is being misunderstood in time for you to rescue the relationship.

Email is a great servant, but we need to know how to use it wisely. We also need to understand the problems it can create as well as the benefits it brings. Crafting clear email messages needs some thought and it is much better to sit down and plan before you switch on; rather than sit down at the keyboard and compose on the run.

Now if you will excuse me, I have just been notified that “I have mail” – so I suppose that I had better take a deep breath, calm and centre myself and then open the Inbox.

michele@trischel.com.au

Sequences for Synergism

2011-10-03T10:01:00.000+10:00

Or ... Making Group Discussions Really Work.

Simon was looking particularly glum when I bumped into him recently, and it didn’t take long to find out the problem. He had been detailed to lead the monthly get together at work; to receive reports on progress, analyse activities and seek solutions.

“That doesn’t seem too bad” I remarked, puzzled at his obvious reluctance, “it isn’t as if it’s a formal meeting with points of order and all that stuff!”

But it turned out that there were some problems; one member seemed reluctant to participate; another wanted to dominate discussion and others saw it as a chore rather than a chance to add value to their work.

Of course management by teams, or coordinated action (synergism) is nothing new. It has been an option of choice for many companies and its appeal is worldwide; and it is true that we can be more effective as a group than we can be alone.

However, like all things, it needs some thought and knowledge to allow all members of the group to participate effectively; and I am sure that we all know about meetings where one person hogs the discussion or where there seems to be no direction and no real reason for the meeting - and where we are all only too happy to cut it short and get onto more important things.

And yet – the value of group discussion and group decision has not changed. The collective mind can be far more innovative, can see more clearly and can – if guided properly – arrive at far more successful actions. But it must be guided, and often it is not.

So let’s recap the value of engaging in group discussions – why it was that back in the 80’s it caught our attention and was adopted with such avidity.

Information – knowledge is power, and by keeping people informed we are empowering them. Regular updates about the company or the project leads to a better understanding of the importance and relevance of the task.

Objectives can be clarified – we need an understanding of what it is exactly that we are aiming for. If we do not understand the real target or the objective we do not recognise that we have achieved – or more importantly – when we have failed to achieve.

Commitment to the objective is fostered by unity of purpose, and group identity with the task.

Innovation comes from enthusiasm which itself is created from commitment. Bouncing ideas around is an energy building exercise which can produce a much larger number of ideas than doodling on a pad by oneself

Team identification – from school yard to work place there are always groups, either self-created or work-related. We do not need to be one of the ‘In Crowd’ – but there is a sense of status from being part of a recognised group. The importance of group identity is the reason that they often differentiate themselves by how they dress, and how they behave. The Scout and the Biker are no different in their identification with their chosen group from the distinctive ‘uniform’ to their accepted code of behaviour.

To be recognised as a member of a successful team gives a sense of personal pride. Such emotional attachment is what companies tap into to improve their business.

So there are a number of effective outcomes to creating work teams, and the benefits have been demonstrated.

But equally, teams are composed of individual people with their own little agendas, their own characteristics and whenever two or three are gathered together we need to watch the dynamics.

It is the role of the Group Leader to take all these dynamics and create (hopefully) a harmonious whole. This demands meticulous preparation because you cannot just walk into a group meeting and hope things go well, they will not.

People need to know what the purpose is, what the options are and what they need to contribute. In short, they need an agenda, an action statement or a plan – call it what you will. Without it any discussion will descend into chaos, wasting time. Busy people resent having their time wasted and will come to avoid these meetings whenever they can.

So first – a plan! Then: - when to hold it? The best option is in the morning when people are often more alert and their attention span is not being eroded by the problems of the day.

After the time – what about the place? Yes, it’s probably in the same old place that is always used, but could it be moved? A change of location can take the group out of their comfort zone and often the energy is doubled. And how is the seating arranged? Even if we are only left with a rectangular table, try to avoid the seat of power arrangement, a group should be led not dictated to; so if you are the leader with this kind of table why not take a seat half way down one side?

With everyone seated it is time to remind the group of the purpose of the meeting, and if necessary lay down some guidelines – how long each may speak for instance. It is surprising how succinct we can be if we know we only have two minutes to add our point of view.

The group leader needs to encourage the reluctant, to control the over effusive and to add their five cents worth last.

And finally it’s the leader’s role to summarise the discussion, remind those who have tasks to complete and warn the group out for the next meeting – only then can they then heave a big sigh of relief and go get a hot cup of coffee!

The role of a manager has changed in the last three decades and discussion has taken the place of demands. While this gives the employee a much greater input into their work it does take time and responsibility to organise the mechanism of such a management style.

When we get it wrong it is a waste of time and energy and generates resentment and reluctance to participate.

But when done well it becomes a channel for energetic enthusiasm which can have amazing effects.

Michele @ Trischel

Meet the Yezbut!!

2011-09-26T16:27:00.000+10:00

We ran away this weekend ... disappeared for a few days. Became incommunicado in fact (which is why the blog is a little late).

We just wanted to relax and get away, and so we ended up in a nearby little coastal town just north of Brisbane. And it was a delightful spot; with white sandy beaches, the glittering sea lying gently under a warming sun, and palm trees and old beach huts spread out, hugging the ocean edge. It didn’t take long to relax.

The second day we strolled along the coastal road to the small shopping centre and found a café open for breakfast. It was a small place, and we were ushered to a table already occupied by a gentleman reading the morning paper. We exchanged polite greetings and sat down to ignore each other.

But I was on holiday, and I was feeling full of peace and love for the whole world and the people in it, so I set out to coax our inadvertent companion into conversation.

“The weather is lovely” was my opening remark.

“Yes it is” he responded looking up from his paper “but it looks like rain later.”

I looked up to the cloudless sky and wondered how he knew that, gave a quick look round for the seaweed which usually is depended on at these times – couldn’t see any and gave up the conundrum.

“You have a lovely little town” I persevered.

“Yes; but wait until the traffic builds up” he answered morosely.

I was getting the picture – I’d met up with another ‘Yezbut’

“What a peaceful place”

“Yezbut wait until the kids come home from school”

“I love the smell of coffee in the morning”

“Yezbut it’s always cold”

The trouble with ‘Yezbuts’ is that they always see the problems and never the possibilities – so the coffee is cold? Call for the icecream and make iced coffee. If it does rain later, then enjoy the sunshine now, and rejoice that you don’t have to water the garden later.

Negative people live in a negative world full of ‘don’ts’ and ‘can’ts’ - and the real problem is that they can be infectious. Sitting in the sunlight, gazing out to the horizon at the sparkling sea I refused to be brought down to my ‘Yezbut’s’ level. But oh how easy it would have been to fall into the trap of seeing life from their point of view.

So I tried a different response:

When he complained that it would rain later, I responded brightly “Well that will be nice for the garden!” He looked startled as if that had never occurred to him.

Then when he complained about the traffic, I pointed out that it was good for business; and when I finally got to the bit about turning cold coffee into creamy iced coffee, he grabbed his paper, stood up and said “I hate Pollyannas” in a disgusted voice and strode off.

I refused to be daunted. I was not going to let a miserable ‘Yezbut’ spoil my short holiday; and it confirmed something about life that I have always known; it is not about what you know, or do – it is about your attitude.

So are you a Yezbut – or are you Yezand? Yezand’s, take the statement and run with it, building onto the experience, rather than trying to diminish pleasure and enjoyment.

A Yezand might have responded to my original comment with “Yes! And we may be lucky to get some rain later.” They could have highlighted that “Yes, the town was lovely and there were some great bathing beaches as well.” – Quiet? “Yes it is, and when the children get out of school it really starts to buzz!”

I like being around Yezands; they are positive people and I'm beginning to think they are becoming an endangered species.

So which one are you - a Yezbut or a Yezand?

Michele @ Trischel

What a difference that word makes

2011-09-19T09:59:00.002+10:00

Short words are best and the old words when short are best of all. ~Winston Churchill

Well I suppose Winnie should know, he wrote enough of them – words that is; and I’ve been writing a few over the weekend and have been struggling with some dialogue which isn’t going well.

“Oh hello,” he said as he opened the door “do come in”. “Thank you” she said as she entered. “And ... how have you been?” he said, “Fine!” she said.

Well, I think you can see that it’s not what I would call inspired, and when you are describing dialogue you face a constant problem – how many ways can you indicate that someone has spoken? Winston claims that short words are best, and the shortest is the verb ‘to say’ – ‘I say’ ‘You say’; ‘he or she said.’

But you can see from the above example of my common place dialogue that it can get ... er ... monotonous – she said!

So in desperation I gave up on the writing and decided to explore the Thesaurus instead. There must be more words to indicate speech than just that one – and do you know there are over 200 that I have gathered; which could add considerable interest to my rather run of the mill dialogue.

While many of these words do have the same or similar meaning, it is important that we choose one that works in context. For instance I can ‘inform’ you of the facts, or I can ‘explain’ the facts – the difference is subtle but very important; for while I want to bring life and colour to my writing I do not want to change the meaning in anyway.

This, I believe, is the beauty of the English language. Because it has been promiscuous and borrowed from just about every other language it has a variety of words that can be used to infer the exact nuance of meaning that creates expressive language: - and expressive language is easier to visualise and understand.

“The sea was lovely and the sun was warm.” Well, we know what was meant, and we understand the intention, but there is very little life in the description to give us a visual representation of the verbal.

What about: “The sea was sparkling in the warmth of the sun.” – does that give you a better picture of the light reflecting off the water?

Winston is right – most of the time; there is a need to keep our words simple enough to be understood. The word ‘agreed’ is much simpler and clearer than ‘acquiesced’- and if we want to indicate that we all felt the same way about a topic it gives us that exact meaning. But if we want to indicate that someone agreed, but did so reluctantly and probably had to give up some cherished idea or opinion to come to that agreement – then the word ‘acquiesced’ is much more descriptive and accurate.

A comprehensive vocabulary (or a good Thesaurus) is necessary for a writer and for anyone engaged in public speaking. When we want to convey precise information then we need to use precise words to convey exact meaning.

Luckily we can do that, we have a brilliant language (that is brilliant used in its academic sense of being outstanding) – and we can choose from the plain and practical Anglo-Saxon; the romantically descriptive Italian, French or Spanish; or we can plunge into the plethora of exotica from places as far apart as Mexico, India and China and just about everywhere else in between.

So how can I use this language to put some life and character back into my boring dialogue? Well, what was the mood of the person who opened the door; was he surprised to see his visitor?

Then I could have said: “Oh hello,” he exclaimed, as he opened the door”.

What kind of mood could I have created using the word ‘enquired’ or ‘muttered’? And his invitation – was it genuine, or begrudged?

And the second person; what about her? “Thank you” she jeered’ sets a completely different scene.

So here goes, let’s see what a difference a word or two can make:

“Oh hello,” he murmured as he opened the door “do come in”. “Thank you” she retorted as she entered. “And ... how have you been?” he enquired, “Fine!” she snapped.

Hopefully you now have a different picture of the characters and an idea of the relationship between them, just from this dialogue.

So while I agree with Winston, that it can be counterproductive to say ‘apprehensive’ when you really mean ‘fearful’ – the truth is that if you really do want to generate that idea of a vague mental perception of possible trouble ahead – then ‘apprehensive’ is the only word that will do it. ‘Fearful’ is used if we want to describe someone full of fear. I am fearful of jumping out of a plane, there is nothing apprehensive about it, it’s more like terror!!

It’s all in the nuances – and that’s the difference the word makes.

Michele @ Trischel

How May I Persuade You?

2011-09-15T09:55:00.001+10:00

Interesting Point – how do we persuade others to our point of view?

When we need to persuade someone it indicates that they may be unwilling to believe us. There is a great deal of difference between ‘informing’ your audience on the history of climate change; and ‘persuading’ them that the change is caused by human interaction.

When we set out to ‘persuade’ we often make the mistake of believing that our passion for the topic will shine through and we can persuade merely by our energy and enthusiasm. But this approach does not consider the speech from the audience’s point of view, and if ever a speech needs to address the audience’s point of view it is the persuasive speech.

We know that whenever we stand up to address our audience they will all hold vastly different points of view. Normally if we seeking to inform this will not matter – the facts are the facts, and we are only conveying the information; the audience can accept or reject as they choose. But if we are hoping to change their minds about something they hold dear; or if we are seeking to spark some action then we certainly need to understand the challenge facing a ‘persuasive speaker’.

Creating a persuasive speech is far more complex and can be far more demanding than merely speaking to inform your audience. Often we seek to persuade people on topics that touch on their most basic values, attitudes or beliefs. These are their core values, and will be like a sore toe; we do not like them trodden on!

Many of us have come to our opinions after some degree of soul searching, and having to justify them to ourselves in the light of a persuasive speaker can set up strong resistance.

So if you are creating a persuasive speech about capital punishment for instance, (whether you wish to reinstate it or see it outlawed worldwide); you will certainly have to contend with your audience’s existing knowledge about capital punishment –what exactly do they know about it?

But there are also peripheral topics that you must address before you can persuade them to your point of view: what is their attitude towards crime and punishment? How many might believe that capital punishment is a deterrent and what are their views on the sanctity of human life? The way they feel about these issues will affect their attitude towards your topic.

In addition you will have to accept that there is a limit to what you can realistically accomplish. You are never going to persuade lovers of a big barbecued steak to adopt a vegetarian lifestyle. You may, if you are really persuasive, give them pause to think about the value of a Meat Free Monday though.

When you are tackling a really controversial topic there will be a multitude of attitudes within any one audience. There will be those that agree with you, and will not need persuading; there will be those vehemently opposed to your point of view and these may never admit to the validity of your arguments; and then there will be those with little understanding or interest in the subject; or those who are ambivalent about it.

So who do you think might be your target audience? Surely, it would be best to focus on the largest percentage that might be willing to be persuaded if they only had a little more information or some valid reasons to change.

If we are to focus on these then we really need to put ourselves in their shoes. If they want more information then we must give it them. If they need reasons to believe then we must supply them; and if they have doubts, criticisms and objections then we must answer them.

By addressing these issues we will reinforce those that already are onside; we can address the issues that interest the ambivalent – and we just might give our opponents something to think about.

If you are a speaker for a specific cause giving several speeches, you will need to assess the make-up of your audience at each event.

How many are going to be vehement against the issue here? Then you may have to spend more time addressing the opposing point of view and answering it; again be realistic about what you can achieve. And never fall into the trap of abusing those that believe differently to you, that is intolerance, and intolerance never persuades anyone to anything worthwhile.

If you are addressing a crowd of the uninterested, your persuasive task is to show them why they should be interested; how the issues are affecting them and how your solution may benefit them. What’s in it for me is still a powerful persuader.

And if your audience are already convinced, your task may simply be to reinforce their understanding of the issues and to enthuse them to continue in the cause.

So persuasive speaking needs a slightly different approach to merely speaking to inform or instruct. Here we need to be totally convincing; and we can only convince if we understand not only the topic from our point of view, but from others too. Only then can we directly address those things that impact on our listeners.

Realistically you cannot change people’s minds with just one speech. You need to identify your target audience and address their issues; answer their probable questions and queries and then you will have a good chance of persuading at least a few of them to your point of view. And we cannot ask for much more than that.

I do trust I have persuaded you of that fact.

Michele @ Trischel.

Persuasive Speaking needs to be built on a strong foundation.

Learn the art of Public Speaking and

Creating Confidence with the trainers from Trischel

Next workshop - 29th Sept in Brisbane
Book online at www.trischel.com.au

Overblown Rhetoric ... ?

2011-09-08T10:32:00.000+10:00

In my previous blog I had outlined the strength of both Churchill and Lincoln’s speeches. They did not depend on ‘overblown rhetoric’ were my actual words, and I have been severely taken to task for them too!

I have been accused of being ignorant of the basics of the theory of rhetoric – and severely chastised for my words in respect of ‘two of the greatest rhetoricians of the twentieth century’

I shall not give in to the temptation to point out that Lincoln was not of the ‘twentieth century’, deeming that a mere sophist’s deflection from the point to hand – which is that I am supposedly ignorant of the wealth of information pertaining to the origins of discussion on the art of communication

I am outraged – Me! who has bored half the population of the Brisbane dinner party set with my passionate defence of the Aristotelian pragmatic position as opposed to Plato’s vehement rejection of the sophists!!

See what I mean? - I bet you are already politely yawning over your morning coffee - or worse: -

Well, I will try not to bore you, but I must address this issue, (I can hear Trish all the way from Los Angeles sighing “Now we’re in for it)” – and you can blame this on ‘Anonymous’ from Wisconsin!

The question “What makes a speech effective” is one that has troubled speakers from ancient Greece onwards – both Plato and Aristotle discussed the nature of man’s speaking, and came to different conclusions. The Romans also took up the challenge and we are very familiar with the words of Quintilian - in fact Dr Ralph Smedley himself, the founder of Toastmasters International was fond of quoting Quintilian.

Even the early Christian fathers addressed the issue of the quality of public speeches designed to alter men’s thinking, and both St Augustine (early) and Bacon (later) have written many words on what makes a speech effective. And if you really want to know some books to read I have listed some that I own below. (They can be very good for insomnia.)

Even today, the purveyors of communication training have dissected the subject, and modern books written about this eternal question fill libraries, never mind bookshelves. In fact, we have written a couple ourselves.

But if we rid the basics of the many theories, the variety of ideas, the additions, the multiplications of interpretations which all set out to explain but often only confuse, we are left with five simple challenges that every speaker who rises to their feet will face.

These are:

Invention – discovering what it is we are to speak about and the arguments we will use.

Disposition – as the Greeks would term it, but we would recognise that today as our basic structure – how we are going to organise our material.

Style – finding the right language, the form of our speech

Delivery – just how we are personally going to present this material, and

Memoria – often misinterpreted as our memory, but in reality it is how we conduct the whole speech so as to make a mark on the memory of our audience.

These five challenges have been debated over centuries, but reading them through today, we can see how remarkably relevant they still are. These are issues that crop up at every workshop we run – they may be couched in different terms, but the intent is still the same

We still are faced with the challenge of what to say, how to say it and how to make it relevant to our audience. So let’s take the first of the five challenges of rhetorical speaking today - the Invention, and look at the three issues that face all of us, when someone asks ‘can you give a ten minute presentation of the art of public speaking?’ or something like that.

The 3 main principles contained in the concept of Invention are Logos; Pathos and Ethos. And despite the ancient terms they are still modern problems.

Logos - the word Logos covers what we know as the ‘content’ - but of course it is very much more than that. It is the arguments we will depend on to prove our case; it is the logic we use and the reasoned assumptions we make.

And it is the way we address our material to make it relevant to the people we are speaking to. How they (the audience) are likely to receive our message is still of concern to us today. Proponents of the Carbon Tax here in Australia are facing an increasingly sceptical public; so to convince this wider audience these speakers will have to devise arguments which are far different from the ones they would use when speaking to listeners sympathetic to their cause.

Pathos is the Emotional Factor. The ancient Greeks were well aware that emotional speaking creates power. Homer and Thucydides recognised that Pericles’s control of Athens came from his ability to create within his listeners an emotional response which led onto action.

In fact so obvious to them was this emotional connection with changing the listener’s attitude, opinions and actions, that the old republican Plato decided in his ideal state only the philosopher-kings should hold power, and only they would be entitled to influence ‘the masses’ or decide who else could wield that power. Censorship is a very old problem.

And Finally – Ethos – the foundation of our word ‘Ethical’, which puts it into modern terms. Ethos means our credibility as a source; how believable are we as a trusted purveyor of information. Without creating that bond of trust, no matter how carefully prepared are our arguments, no matter how delicately directed to our audience’s needs – we will not create the outcome we want.

And the ancients were well aware that it is not only in the accuracy of your statements or the logic of your arguments, but how you are perceived by your audience that also matters. In fact it was Cicero who said of orators that ethos concerned “What a speaker ought to be as well as what he seemed to be.”

So with Logos, Pathos and Ethos – we have the foundation for any public speaker who stands up to convince their audience to their way of thinking, to change opinions and to create actions.

Not much has changed then in the past few thousand years.

And just for Anonymous of Wisconsin – here’s a quote you might like to think on:

“’Rhetoric’ is not mere ornament or manipulation or trickery. It is rhetoric in the ancient sense of persuasive discourse.” J.S. Nelson, A. Megill, D.N. McCloskey in ‘Rhetoric of Inquiry' and who are also of Wisconsin...

... and I point out to you, that while it is not merely ‘ornament or manipulation or trickery’ those are part of the dictionary definition of the word. And it was this meaning I used in reference to both Churchill and Lincoln’s ability to move their audience.

So that is dinner over; now, will someone pass the port please!

Michele @ Trischel

The innovative communication training company who knows a thing or two about rhetoric!

And here are some books by authors who also knew a thing or two about rhetoric, sitting on my bookshelves, and which read in bed with a cup of hot cocoa, are a fabulous way to beat insomnia:

Aristotle, The Rhetoric of Aristotle, translated and edited by Lane Cooper, Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall, 1960

Plato, Gorgias, translated by W. R. Lamb, Cambridge, Mass. Harvard University Press, 1925

Cicero, De Orator, (2 vols), translated by W. Rhys Roberts, London, Oxford University Press, 1953

Quintilian, The Institutio Oratoria of Quintilian – a rather old and disreputable book, with some pages missing which I think is publish by J. Dent around 1913

And then there’s

St Augustine, On Christian Doctrine – which is on the top shelf and I can’t be bothered to get it down;

along with

Bacon Francis, Essays or Counsels Civil and Moral, London, Collins 1954

And finally:

Richards, I.A., The Philosophy of Rhetoric, New York, Oxford University Press, 1965

And that’s enough of that!!

And any more of it, Anonymous from Wisconsin, and I shall start on the other four challenges; and that means we'll be here to breakfast time. So pass the port and pipe down!!

Wow! That was Good

2011-09-05T10:50:00.000+10:00

I have just returned from listening to some remarkable speeches; and there was one speaker who left me with that feeling – “Wow! That was Good.”

I am sure that all of you have been impressed by presentations you have heard at sometime or other, but have you ever given thought to exactly why they impressed you?

At our workshops we ask our participants exactly what they want to get out of their day with us; and usually it is how to get over their fear of standing up and speaking out. But there are times when we are asked to ‘give them the Wow factor’ or ‘tell us how to impress our audience.’

Now there are many ways in which we can show how getting the balance right can improve their chances of doing just that; but I wonder if they have thought about what they consider to be that elusive ‘Wow’ factor; or what it is about a speech or speaker that really impresses them.

That can be a catch, because we are mostly impressed at first by the flamboyant; the highly charismatic speaker; the one that creates emotion in us and can wring us out with it. Alas, not all charismatic speakers have the strong foundation on which to build that truly impressive speech.

To discover what really works, I recommend that you analyse some accepted winning speeches; Churchill’s – ‘Fight them on the beaches’ speech is one that most people agree stirs the emotions. It was first delivered in the British House of Commons; which is not really an auspicious start for a charismatic ‘Wow’ speech.

What about The Gettysburg Address? This is probably one of the shortest speeches in history, but one which has left an echo throughout time. And by all accounts no-one considered Lincoln a ‘charismatic’ speaker; but in this case he certainly delivered on the Wow factor.

Neither of these speakers depended on overblown rhetoric, there was no hand clapping, no energy raising techniques to falsify the emotional impact – there was only clear intent, passionate determination and a speech that was so well constructed that it electrified.

To discover just what these speakers did to create speeches that still resonate today, you can sit down and read exactly what they said and analyse what their aim was. For if we do not have a clear and focused aim; that is a specific outcome that we intend to achieve – we don’t know how to recognise if we have reached it.

Take the speech or the extract and see if you can identify what the message was, what was their dominant purpose? What do you think was the precise effect they want it to have on their audience? Was Churchill’s purpose to soften the British people up for a likely defeat? Did Lincoln want his listeners just to pack up and go home after the dedication just wondering what was for dinner?

So how did Lincoln and Churchill achieve that purpose? What arguments, what rhetorical devices did they use to show the determination of their purpose?

Analysing successful speeches allows us to get a glimpse into the mind of the people who created them. By seeing what stratagems these successful speakers used, we can trial them in our speeches to see if we too can begin to develop the ‘Wow factor.’

Because no matter how charismatic the speaker, unless there is a real message persuasively delivered we may energise our audience for the moment, but we will be a disappointment in the long run.

If we can find the elusive ‘Wow’ factor, it will allow us to use all the charismatic delivery techniques at our disposal, knowing full well that we are building our speech on strong foundations that will stand up to scrutiny when the ‘Wow’ wears off!

And to help you start here are the speeches that I cited:

1. Churchill’s speech to the House of Commons on the 4^th June 1940 – when Britain truly faced the wrath of Hitler alone.

2. Lincoln’s Gettysburg address, Delivered at the dedication of the Soldier’s National Cemetery on 19^th November 1863.

Read them carefully and see what really gives a great speech the ‘Wow factor’

Michele @ Trischel

Vocal + Visual – Verbal = Vacancy

2011-09-01T10:19:00.000+10:00

It’s the *shudder* old myth again!! Pundits propounding in print about the unimportance of the ‘words’ we use to convey our message.

And yet, here we are – together; me at my place and you at yours and all the gestures and body language in the world is not going to add one iota of specific meaning to my message. I can shout at my computer screen (and I often do!), at the top of my voice, I can yell with passion and power; or I can seek to create an emotion with whispers and pauses – but the trouble is that you at your place can neither see or hear me at mine!!

All I have at my command to persuade and convince you of my point of view are my words – and your ability to read and interpret them.

It sort of makes a mockery of the myth that words are the junior component of our communication doesn’t it?

It is certainly true that really effective communication is easier when we can hear and see the speaker as well as receive the words; but increasingly in the real world of electronic communication we are more and more dependent on just the ‘words’ we use to be understood.

And words are tricky little things – they can mean something entirely different to you than they do to me. We come to understand the implicit meaning of words through information and emotion. Information comes through dictionaries, explanations and deduction - (we can often work out the meaning of an unknown word by looking at it in its context). But there is the other aspect of interpretation which often flies under the radar; and that is the emotional baggage that comes with the words from our own experiences.

We do it with names as well – if you have met a rather unpleasant man called Fred (my apologies to all the Fred’s out there, but this is in the interest of research you understand) – as I say if you have met a ‘Fred’ who you have come to dislike, everyone you meet from now on who is also named Fred will bring that dislike to mind. And so strong is the instinctive reaction that it will take a lot of nice ‘Freds’ to overcome that negative response.

That relationship of emotion to name is easy for us to understand, names become a part of who we are – so the person is evoked by the name. But we are often unaware of how other words can create images and emotions simply because of the relationship to our past experiences.

For instance – do you have a dream to go on a luxury cruise? Have you got images of balmy tropical nights watching the moon creating a silver pathway from the horizon to your feet? Sounds absolutely wonderful doesn’t it?

It did to me once, and I grabbed the opportunity with alacrity – but the reality for me was very different. My imagined wonderful weather was in fact stormy and I was dreadfully sea-sick, so much so that I spent the full week in the sick bay on a drip.

Consequently the word ‘cruise’ brings a far different emotional experience to my mind, and that is going to colour every argument that uses the image of balmy tropical nights on board ship to persuade me. My reality is far from the imagined reality – or even the reality of those who have had wonderful experiences.

Our interpretation of certain words can also be effected by our cultural heritage – ‘settlers’ = ‘invaders’ and even the society in which we were raised causes automatic association with words. For many the word ‘Family’ now has a much broader meaning that the one used by traditionalists.

Whatever our experience, our traditions and our culture – while we are engaged in reading the written words we should be aware that we can misunderstand the intention of the message, and even be greatly offended by it, if we assume that our personal interpretation is exactly what the sender meant.

Simple solution is - If in doubt clarify

That way we are not left in the dark as to the real intention of the sender, an intention that their body language, their facial expression and even their vocal expression would have made clear if we could see or even hear it.

But with more and more communication being conducted on the purely ‘verbal’ level we might change our first equation - perhaps we need to know that: -

Verbal minus the Vocal and Visual can equal ... war!!!

Michele @ Trischel

What’s it all about then?

2011-08-29T10:28:00.000+10:00

One of the pleasures of working in communication training is that you receive exciting invitations to attend, or even judge, speaking events across the nation.

I was privileged to be invited to such an occasion recently, where there were a number of speakers on display and they were good! - Passionate about their topic, well researched on their information and mostly, highly organised in their delivery.

I said ‘mostly’ because there was the odd one or two who finished in style but opened with stodge. And that was a shame because their speeches had important messages for us, but we spent a lot of time wondering what this speech was all about because the opening did not make that clear to the audience.

I am not sure if this was due to nerves or to a lack of understanding of the real relevance and importance of creating an opening with impact. If we don’t really understand what the opening part of our speech is designed to do ... we get it wrong.

There are in fact four objectives which we need to meet to ensure that we start off with a bang rather than a whimper.

First – while most audiences will be attentive and willing to listen, we need to get their interest focused on us and what we are about to say. Grabbing the audience’s attention is absolutely essential; and it’s not just about getting them settled and silenced, but more about getting them enthused and excited.

Second – Now that we have their attention and raised their expectations, we can reveal what is the topic and why it is relevant to the listeners. We need that personal identification with our subject to generate real interest.

Third – So, we’ve got their attention and their interest in our topic – but why should they believe us? Unless we establish our credibility right about now, they probably won’t! So that’s the third objective, and finally –

Fourthly - Briefly preview some of the issues to be covered in the main body of the speech. It shouldn’t be anything other than a teaser of the good things to come, but it helps to enhance the sense of anticipation.

When we look at the timing for our presentation or speech it seems almost impossible that we can meet these objectives in the time available. Especially if there are a number of issues I want to cover in the body, how can I spend all that time grabbing attention, generating interesting, establishing credibility and previewing the body – phew!! By the end of all that it will be time to start the conclusion!!

Well it isn’t quite that bad. We can cover all of these if we choose the right techniques.

And a great technique that can grab attention and create interest in a topic, all at the same time is the rhetorical question.

“How many of you barely make it to work on time in the mornings?” If we are asked this question we are focused on the problem, it is personal and we have an expectation that we are going to learn something that might help us.

Another way to achieve those opening objectives is to tell a personal story that links directly to your first main point.

“I was helping my grandmother clear out an old cupboard on the weekend, and there in the midst of piles of newspapers and books was a packet of photographs. We spent the next two hours revisiting people and places from her early life; and I realised that my grandmother had lived in a society that is rapidly passing out of our memory and I think we are the poorer for losing touch with our past.”

Here the speaker has created a visual link for the audience, established credibility and given the audience a preview of what the intention of the speech will be.

Or what about using a quotation? With access to the internet we have a huge choice of quotations on a variety of topics right at our finger tips - surely we can find one that encapsulates our topic in a concise way. But, and this is sometimes overlooked, it does need to be clearly linked to your main topic and introduce a significant point to be covered in the body.

These are just three of the many ways in which we can ensure that our opening achieves the four objectives listed; and do it in the time frame available.

Clarence Darrow, the American lawyer put it succinctly when he said “Unless a speaker can interest his audience at once, his effort will be a failure.” And that is true for every speaker regardless of gender.

So while I truly enjoyed each of the speakers I heard, I was far more involved and interested in those that had taken the time to create an opening which really worked for me. First impressions really do count, and many people have difficulty overcoming a prejudice created by a poor one.

We don’t need the hassle: so let’s work on ensuring that when we get up to speak we are clear and focused on achieving a great opening and then work up to a crashing crescendo ... but that’s another subject altogether!

Michele @ Trischel

Related Topics :

Closing with Confidence

Giving a Speech and Getting Nowhere

The Importance of Being in Earnest

How Dare you Call Women Passive ... she said aggressively!!

2011-08-22T08:44:00.000+10:00

One of our projects is highlighting the differences between the styles of communication that are used by men and women. Usually it all goes well until we start with the academic words used to describe the differences between the genders.

Words like 'Factual', 'Logical' and then ‘Active’; which are mainly used to describe what is generally known as the ‘masculine’ style or as Deborah Tannen* described it; the Report style. Around about here, we sometimes get a few murmurs like “I am rational and active as well” from some of the female participants.

But they really go to town when we introduce the words associated with the feminine style of communication; the Rapport style: words like 'Empathy', 'Harmony' and 'Passive'!

It’s the ‘Passive’ that does it! Often we have some really feisty women taking umbrage at being called ‘passive’.

Let’s ignore the fact for the moment that we are actually discussing the styles of communication which have been traditionally associated with the genders, and not the specific genders themselves; and let’s have a good look at what those words ‘Active’ and ‘Passive’ really mean.

No! Don’t bother grabbing your dictionary – you’d be better off picking up your book on English Grammar. Are you beginning to see the light? Haven’t you heard of the ‘Active Voice’ balanced by the ‘Passive Voice’?

Because when we are talking about the gender communication we are looking first at a style which is direct, factually based and uses the Active voice. And to balance that style is one which is indirect, empathic and uses the Passive voice.

In this instance it has nothing to do with the gender of the person using the style, women are very good at using the Report Style, and many men are great at using the Rapport style. We have been sidetracked by the insistence that men and women use different styles of communication – all the time. It is a wrong assumption.

The natural style is often associated with how we have been socialised and there does appear to be a different approach to what the communication needs to do. If you want to pursue a strong communication, then regardless of gender you will use the Report (masculine) style and that will mean using the ACTIVE voice:

The active voice is a simple, direct construct that tells it like it is.

“Cats eat Fish” uses the active voice – so does “I created that layout”

To describe it in grammatical terms it the usual spoken voice where the sentence construction is merely subject + verb + object; normally it is a simple recital of facts, but if taken to excess it can become aggressive. “I won that contract!” Place the emphasis on the word 'I' and hear the difference.

If, however, you want to avoid being seen as too aggressive, or boasting; if your aim is to create a more inclusive communication style, then regardless of gender, you will choose the Rapport (feminine) style; which often means adopting the PASSIVE voice.

The passive voice is used to take the focus off the subject and place it on the object. So instead of “Everybody drinks water”, put into a passive voice it becomes “Water is drunk by everybody”

Now if you repeat those two sentences aloud, which one sounds stronger? Most people will say the ‘active’ voice.

Which is probably why when someone uses the passive voice to extol their virtues and their achievements; “The contract was won by me” it is not given the same degree of respect as when it is announced in the active voice – “I won the contract”. If your intention was to have your input recognised and appreciated you chose the wrong style.

When we are communicating, especially in business, we need to understand exactly what we want to achieve. Then we can decide which style will work best for us to achieve it, and regardless of gender use that style, whether that be active or passive.

Michele @ Trischel

*Deborah Tannen, Ph.D.(1990) You Just Don't Understand. William Morrow and Company, USA

Just how much do you share?

2011-08-18T09:33:00.000+10:00

Flying from Melbourne to Sydney I sat next to a stranger. The weather had been dreadful, flights had been cancelled; we had been ‘off loaded’ and ‘up loaded’ a number of times. Finally we managed to get a seat on the last flight out and consequently I sat next to a friendly stranger and we got talking.

While I had never seen him before we were rapidly on first name terms, and by the end of the flight we knew an awful lot about each other even to sharing business cards. It was a pleasant way of passing a rough flight, and we departed with a warm glow of friendship.

However, on another flight between Brisbane and Port Moresby – I again sat next to a complete stranger who looked upon me as a long lost friend and proceeded to share the intimate secrets of her life. At the end of this flight I was so glad to be free that I ignominiously hid in the crowd and hovered until she had gone through customs before I moved on.

What was the difference I wondered; why did I react so differently to the second stranger than I did to the first?

Well, with my first encounter we kept our disclosures to impersonal stuff. We discussed the amount of travel we engaged in, what we did, our hobbies and all that kind of stuff. We even touched on politics, but finding we differed a little we tactfully withdrew from that subject and discussed gardening instead.

In the second, before the wheels had even left the tarmac it was revealed that her marriage was in tatters, and her children were causing her concern. She was travelling to Papua New Guinea for an interview and I can only hope that she was less forthcoming with them than with me. It was far too much and far too soon.

There are levels of Self-disclosure which we should be aware of. If we open up too much to strangers we can embarrass and overwhelm them. At the same time, if we close up too much we can appear cold and unfriendly. It’s a hard world out there!

So, how do we know what to do? How to tell what is appropriate in this conversation? Well, of course there are no hard and fast rules, but we do have some guidelines which can help us make more comfortable decisions.

1. Only open up with the kind of information that you would be happy to know about them! In these circumstances how much information do you really feel comfortable knowing? That’s the level for you to operate on. My first encounter was at this level, we did not delve into the intimacies but at the end of the meeting we knew enough about each other to know that if we ever met again we would be happy to continue the conversation.

2. Are you willing now to take the risk? Taking the risk of moving from the impersonal to the slightly more personal that is. Getting to this step can take some time; but eventually there comes a time when either the relationships stays on the light and friendly or moves onto to the more personally friendly.

Work colleagues are like this. There are those that we are happy to chat with about the footie, the television programmes and the weather; and then there are others that you just want to talk over the dreadful argument you had with the bus driver.

All communication is conducted on ‘levels’ – so when you feel you have met a kindred spirit you might want to up the level, and to do so you will have to take the risk of opening up more and to self-disclose on a more personal level.

3. Take your cue from their response – so having taken the risk, now be guided by their response. If they are happy to share their personal feelings with you then you are on the road to a real friendship; but if they close up on you, this may not be the right time to push it. Change the subject to a more impersonal one and see how things go.

4. Deepening friendships need deeper self-disclosure. Sound obvious doesn’t it? But again there is a fine line between appropriate disclosure and overwhelming personal details. I think the touchstone is still ‘How much am I comfortable with sharing their personal issues?” Pouring out your heart to someone while not wanting to hear their heartfelt issues is not a recipe for reciprocating friendship – so monitor your enthusiasm.

In this day of immediate responses (and communication processes rapidly becoming electronic rather than personal), there is a temptation to pour out our hearts on facebook or twitter without giving much thought to how it will be received – or, indeed, how it could be used!

Personal relationships depend on sharing – sharing ideas, opinions, and beliefs. We are attracted to those who also share those emotional constructs which we have developed; and as friendship is based on trust, we need to know that we can trust our friends with our deepest secrets. But such trust is not to be rushed – and those used to opening their hearts up on such sites as facebook or twitter are unused to considering how others may react to their disclosures.

Photo Credit: Mark Resch

Much like my second encounter, they can overwhelm their audience with far too much information which is inappropriate to the level of the conversation. Revealing too much about oneself before that bond of trust is established in real time can lead to alienation and embarrassment.

Self-disclosure is essential for a strong friendship to develop – but knowing what is appropriate and when to share it is the secret.

So, how much do you share? Want to catch up for coffee??

Michele @ Trischel

You might also like:

The Sound of Silence

Getting a word in edgeways

Conversational Skills

Without the seed there can be no fruit

2011-08-15T11:33:00.001+10:00

I sometimes wonder why certain things happen to me! When I am frantically searching for an item that I absolutely need right now, and cannot find I have often been heard to mutter “why does this always happen to me?”

Can you guess why that particular occurrence may happen to me ... and possibly to you too? Bet it was because the last time you used it you failed to put it back in its rightful place!

Everything has its place and everything should be put back in its place!” was a maxim of my super organised grandmother – and I can hear the echo of those words when I am once more frantically searching for that file or folder before I have to leave the house.

The problem is that life is hectic and when I had finished with it last time, I was immediately focused on the next task and so put the file down on the nearest available space and forgot it. Over the next few weeks or so, I may have seen and possible even moved it to get at something else, but the one thing I failed to do was to replace it in ‘its own place’. Consequently when I next really needed it ... well, you know what happened.

This simple, and I suspect usual, scenario leads me into today’s thoughts – we often sow the seeds of our own disasters without a care in the world, and only when they come to fruition do we realise the extent of our failure.

The temptation then is to blame someone else, or our circumstances; or even ‘things beyond our control’ – but it doesn’t change the facts; we planted the seed so we harvest the fruit.

Good intentions are no guarantee that our fruit will be sweet; sometimes the seeds we planted with all the best intentions in the world can produce the bitterest of results. Again the temptation is to blame outside influences, everyone else and fall back on the self-indulgent thought that at least our intentions were good, so the unpleasant results must be someone else’s fault.

The English poet, William Henley, suffered from tuberculosis of the bone which led to the amputation of his lower leg. He was often in great pain but devised a philosophy which enabled him to live a full and active life despite his disability. Many of us will know his poem “Invictus”; especially the last verse:

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the master of my fate:
I am the captain of my soul.

Here, Henley was talking about self-determination; the truth of life. It is us that controls our destiny; not fate, not other people – but us. Our choices, our attitude, our decisions and our actions – these make us the ‘master of our fate’ and the ‘captains of our soul’. And each one of these is a seed we plant to be harvested in the future.

My failure to put the file I used away is a simple example of how my simple choice actually impacted on my future. When I harvested the fruit of that seed, I arrived at the meeting out of breath, frustrated and without the file containing the vital information that I needed. The consequence of that was that I lost the contract and the respect of these I hoped to work for.

A simple seed, so carelessly sown – but the fruit was very bitter to taste.

Today I have taken the decision to be more thoughtful of the kinds of seeds I sow, and more careful of the possible fruits I may harvest in my future. My actions will lead to consequences; if I do not like the consequences then I must change the actions.

What sort of seeds are you carelessly sowing today, and will you remember that it was you that actually put the chain of events in motion? If your fruit is bitter to the taste will you recall the single seed that you planted, then germinated and grew this?

“Although we are responsible for what we sow, we forget that we’ve planted these seeds and either give credit to or blame people or things outside of us when they ripen ... But we lose sight of the fact that each thought, word, and action will produce a result. When the fruit finally ripens, we think, ‘why did this happen to me? I’ve done nothing to deserve this.’ - Chagdud Tulku Rinpoche

So here’s to more productive gardening in the future where, if I do sow seeds of my own disappointment, I will be strong enough to say “Well, that didn't work out, so what can I learn?” rather than wailing “Why does this always happen to me?”

Michele @ Trischel

Related Topics

Making Life Choices

Not Quite the Olympics - but this is personal

I'm not sure about fairies, - but dragons are another..

A spoonful of rate, pitch and volume makes the energy go up!

2011-08-08T11:26:00.001+10:00

That is a really bad pun, but the best I can do on a Monday morning! However I was forced to watch some horse racing on televisions over the weekend (yes – forced! The husband nodded off and was sitting on the remote; it was a delicate situation)

Anyway – being too lazy to walk over and fathom out how to do it manually, I spent a very idle half an hour watching the racing as I said.

I love horses, and spent a great deal of my younger days riding them, and I know horses love to run and when I have actually been at the races in person it was the thundering hooves, the sound of the horses dragging in every breath they could and the creaking of the saddle girths which energised me – and of course, my horse winning.

Sitting in my lounge room, far away from the reality – I was still excited and energised about the racing by the enthusiasm of the race caller. Without leaving my chair I felt my heart rate increasing, I sat up in the chair leaning forward and urging my chosen horse onto the winning post – alas unsuccessfully I may add. But, what was it that drove that energy and passion in me as I sat hundreds of miles away from the race course?

It was of course the excitement that the professional caller generated with his voice. The heart rate increased as the rate; the pitch and the volume rose. The excitement took hold as the words got faster, the voice got higher and the volume increased.

Our voice is the one thing that reflects our emotional engagement with what we are doing, or what we are talking about. Think about the last time you had to give some bad news to someone – did you sound ‘happy’? Were you energised? Or were you subdued with quieter voice, and slower delivery. Perhaps you instinctively included more pauses to show sympathy.

On the other hand, how about discussing that amazing win by your team at the very last minute – (yes Brisbane Broncos I am talking about you!) Wasn’t that amazing? The last minute field goal that put us one point ahead – tell someone else about it and listen to the voice!

There you go, increasing the pitch, the rate and the volume and now the folks at the next table are wondering what you are going on about!!

So what are pitch, rate and the other stuff really about?

Pitch – pitch refers to the highness or lowness of the tone. Like a singer we can change the pitch of our voice deliberately. But it will increase – that is the voice will reach for a higher tone – when we are excited. And to generate energy and excitement in our listeners, we can choose to deliberately raise the pitch of our voice.

Volume – refers to the loudness of our speech. Softly spoken people do not generate excitement, but they can sound thoughtful, sympathetic or even sad. Alternatively, we may have to chastise loudly spoken people who let their excitement run free in closed spaces.

Rate – is simply the speed, how fast or how slow we speak. Often this is a cultural thing; I have never really believed in the slow spoken Australian – they seem to speak at a perfect rate to me; that was until I returned to England for a couple of months and when I came back I was constantly being asked to ‘slow down’! So I guess there is something in it.

And there is one more aspect of our voice which can add – or detract – from what we are saying and that is the quality of the voice itself; (Sometimes referred to as the ‘timbre’).

The quality of our voice is its natural sound, the one that makes us easily recognised on the telephone. But we often change that quality to match our purpose; just think about the quality of Mae West’s voice when she said ‘Come up and see me sometime’!

What about that whiny child who wants another chocolate? Or the quality of command in the voice of a military officer issuing an order.

The quality of our voice is actually a powerful tool to reflect our emotion or our attitude towards our topic.

All of these can be deliberately manipulated to generate the emotion in our listeners. We want them to be enthusiastic about our subject; then we must use our voice to demonstrate just how enthusiastic we are ourselves: Increase the pace, just a fraction; raise the pitch, slightly; increase the volume, a trifle, and we will generate a voice that is redolent with energy and enthusiasm.

And if you want to become more familiar with what your voice can do, or to improve your vocal variety you just cannot go past fairy stories. Yes! Fairy stories! Where else do you get a collection of characters just itching to be vocalised?

Try how changing your voice can really introduce a difference in the character when you are reading aloud – plus the children, grandchildren, nieces, nephews or even the next door kids will just love you.

The spoken English language has a sense of rhythm; it has a natural rise and fall unique to it; reading aloud will let you begin to feel that rhythm and once you do, you will always know just how to modulate your voice to achieve the right emotion to reflect your words.

This is what the race caller did on Saturday when he excitedly told me my horse had lost - alas, I did not feel the same enthusiasm; but that’s another story.

Michele @ Trischel

Related Topics:

Do You Suffer from a Vocal Virus?

Better than Silence - speaking for a purpose

Data Processing and the Fairies

It’s easy as One, Two Three – Four!!

2011-08-04T11:24:00.000+10:00

I noticed Barry about half way through the Barbecue; while everyone else was waving glasses in the air, punctuating their conversation with highly visible visuals, he was standing alone, alongside a large pot plant, looking like he was going to disappear behind it any minute.

‘Ahhh’ I thought ‘here’s someone who needs help’ and I started to edge my way towards him. I probably wasn’t as subtle as I thought, as the closer I came, the further away he moved. Finally I cornered him near the Lemon tree, and was moved by the look of sheer terror in his eyes.

I was not deterred however and gently engaged him in conversation, trying not to frighten him with direct and detailed questions. Eventually he began to relax and after accepting another beer, he confessed his problem.

It wasn’t all that unusual – it was that he hated to be in a group of people he did not know. He was never sure how to conduct himself and it was absolutely impossible for him to start up a conversation with others who he had only just met.

Here at Trischel our main aim is to improve business communication, as the lack of personal communication skills in a business environment can lead to 17 hours down time every week. Even our one-on-one coaching plan is focused on improving work related presentation and communication skills; but the plight of Barry – and of others who suffer the same debilitating condition – has moved me to consider the way that our personal communication can so often fail us in our ... well, our ‘personal’ communication!

While conversation is not necessarily communication; it is a very necessary skill to build up relationships and to make the usual social interactions effective and pleasant. And how many of you will admit (to yourselves of course) that making polite conversation to strangers can be quite daunting?

But there is a simple technique that can help in overcoming the natural hesitation in making the first move. Because if you don’t (make the first move that is) you can be stuck in a group of silent, brooding people all waiting for someone else to do so!!

So the simple rules of engagement of social conversation with those you do not know are as easy as One, Two. Three ... Four:

1. Practise introducing yourself – have your opening gambit ready and rehearsed before entering the gathering. “Hi, my name is Michele, what is yours?” Stopping by a stranger and offering a warm handshake and this simple recipe served with a smile, is guaranteed to get a response. Good manners decree that the other person must accept your handshake; state their name and do so with a smile. Step one completed.

2. Comment on the weather – a good British technique, but it is non-confrontational, and is usually effective to indicate that you are willing to take the conversation further. ‘Isn’t it cold for this time of year?’ is the standard; but once you get a little more confident you can try ‘What a lovely garden, I wonder how they keep it so beautiful in this heat’. Probably a little expansive for a beginner, but it shows what can be done if we try.

3. Refer to the people and/or occasion – here you can drag in the host, or the occasion to invite further comments from your conversation partner. ‘How long have you known Peter and Janet?’ or even ‘I’ve never been to a book launch before, do you know the author personally?’ These should be good to start a discussion on the hosts or authors or books.

4. Confess your likes and dislikes – yes; really!! Done tactfully it can prompt another nervous beginner to open up a little. On the Positive side you can refer to some film or book you really liked ‘I’ve just seen the final Harry Potter film, it was fabulous – are you a fan?’ – even if they’re not, after that they probably won’t confess it! Or on the negative side why not step outside the comfort zone with ‘I’m not a fan of cricket, I much prefer rugby league – what’s your favourite sport?”

By now you are probably aware that each one of these techniques ends in a question – but none of them are really confrontational and should be a comfortable prompt for your conversation partner to start feeling confident enough to continue in the same vein.

However, if you find that you are not getting any positive responses or that they seem to want to disagree with everything you have mentioned; there is one final technique you need to know – it’s the ‘disengagement’.

Take a deep breath, hold out the hand and with a smile say something like ‘It’s been lovely talking to you, but I must just say Hi to Janet’ (substitute the name of someone at the other end of the room)’ Again good manners decree that they should murmur something similar while returning a limp handshake before taking off to the nearest pot plant.

You are now free to wander off in the direction of ‘Janet’ until you find another likely candidate for conversation whereupon you can hold out your hand, and say with a smile ‘Hello; my name’s Michele - what’s yours?’

The recently introduced Michele @ Trischel

A Route Map for Success

2011-07-29T10:05:00.000+10:00

So; you have a presentation to give, and you are not sure where to start. The temptation is to switch on the computer; create a new PowerPoint document and stare at the blank screen; - and what’s wrong with that?

Well, it’s like deciding you want to go on holiday and simply arrive at the station and find the train timetable. There’s the timetable – but what use is it if you don’t know where you want to go?

You must first decide your preferred destination; then you need to research the ways in which you can get there; and having decided that you would like to use a train then, and only then check what trains are available to take you to your desired destination.

Once you have embarked on your journey you will need to check off the stations to ensure that you are still on the right track – and if you have planned your journey correctly you should arrive at exactly where you planned to be, even if you have had to take a detour on the way.

Any journey needs some planning, and if we need to arrive at a certain place within a certain time frame, it will need careful planning indeed.

So what’s that got to do with creating a presentation?

If we have not decided exactly what this presentation needs to achieve we could be like the person who vaguely thinks tropical Cairns might be good this time of year, but ends up in chilly Melbourne.

So the first task in creating that stunning presentation is to be absolutely clear what you want to achieve at the end. Is the presentation designed to sell the product? Then if you do not generate a sale, no matter how colourful and startling the PowerPoint production is, you would have failed to meet your objective.

If you really want to generate support for your point of view and get that petition signed, but at the end of the show your audience says ‘Interesting’ and simply walks out – then you too, no matter how impassioned your appeal, will have failed.

So the first objective in your presentation route map is to decide where exactly this journey will be taking both you and your audience. And write it down.

Only now can you consider what facts, figures, evidence or emotional factors will actually get you there. Most probably you will find enough information for a dozen journeys – just like the holiday makers who feel tropical Cairns would be good at this time of year; they could fly, sail, drive straight through, in easy stages or take a train.

Their decision would be dictated by the time available for the holiday. If they only have a short time then the direct and fastest route will be the most effective. If they have a fair amount of time up their sleeve they might choose to take a leisurely cruise or even drive, exploring as they go. Strangely the same factors will impact on the way in which we choose to arrive at our presentation destination as well.

If we have a short time available to us, then we must decide precisely what the audience needs to know for us to obtain our aim. We don’t have time to explore side issues; we must keep to the main line stopping only at the essential information stations as we rattle through on the express.

However, if we have much more time, we can decide to detour to explore other factors along the route, as long as we keep progressing towards our destination.

So we select our evidence, our facts and figures carefully to ensure that we are moving towards our desired outcome – and having written it down, we keep it close to us to remind us that we have to reach it in limited time.

Once we have got our information together, and have sorted it out in the right order to keep us on track, then – and only then – do we switch on the computer and select that new PowerPoint file.

This time, instead of sitting in front of a blank screen we are well aware of where we are going, how we intend to get there and the stops along the way.

This time, you will be like the Brisbane holiday maker heading for Cairns, who sees Gladstone, then Rockhampton followed by Townsville passing by and then gently rocks into Cairns with the carefully planned journey safely completed.*

Creating a presentation is no different to creating the perfect holiday – both need a fair degree of careful planning. If we set out on either journey without a clear route map we might find ourselves ending up somewhere completely different – and no matter how pleasant that journey it will always end with a sense of failure.

So plan your route map with your destination firmly in mind and you can set out with a certainty of success.

Michele @ Trischel

* For non Australians, a quick look at the map of Queensland, will demonstrate how effective this route map is to take you from Brisbane to tropical Cairns.

Powerful presenters make emotional connections

The Star of the Show