To All Communi-Creators:
Whenever a project is initiated, or a product created, a Roadmap is developed to assure all involved know where things are going, and how the team is going to get there. The Roadmap outlines key deliverables, tasks or events over a period of time and serves as an effective means to assure the ultimate objectives are met.
This concept is applicable to performances, especially performances by groups. A group performance is all too often a collection of individual presentations mashed into a single session. Group presentations are more effective when they are one homogenous performance being delivered by multiple persons.
Consider . . .
I recently sat through a group presentation at a community function and it was pretty apparent, pretty quickly, that each speaker had developed their section of the presentation in the privacy of their own office, without discussion or consultation with other team members. I would go so far as to presume this was the very first time each of them was even seeing what the others had developed.
As one would expect the presentation was a bit disjointed, often redundant, totally unpolished and ultimately failed to deliver the intended message successfully. At times speakers actually seemed surprized by what their co-presenters had included, and at one particularly stressful point there was conflicting data presented.
Not an impressive showing.
Now suppose, instead of everyone working in a vacuum on their own super-secret projects some time had been spent developing a "Presentation Roadmap," or a clear outline of what needed to be covered, and in what order, so that the core message could be delivered effectively. From this document individual sections could have been assigned and all would know what was being said before them, after them and by them. When developing this document collective decisions about aesthetcs and style could have been made. Ultimately, a cohesive presentation would have emerged as everyone involved was working from the same page - literally.
A little planning can go a long way in assuring group presentations are effective, while individuals working in isolation rarely create a cohesive product.
THE POINT: When working in a group - know where you're going and get there together, your audience will appreciate it.
Friday, May 27, 2011
Thursday, April 21, 2011
No Crutches.
To All Communi-Creators:
I've said it before and I'll say it again . . . rehearse, rehearse, rehearse.
There is a veritable cornucopia of fine reasons why you should rehearse your performance, but today I focus on just one.
Rehearse - so you can be comfortable with your content and not be dependent on notes. There are few things more painful then sitting through a presentation where the presenter is:
A) Reading their slides with their back to the audience;
B) Reading from the handout they already gave me, which I could have read myself;
C) Reading from cue cards or other notes so they never make eye contact with the crowd.
Besides resulting in a boring presentation where no connection whatsoever is made with the audience - A,B and C all have one other thing in common - they are credibility killers. If you don't know your material well enough to be conversant on the topic for the next 30 minutes or so - I have to wonder why I'm listening to you at all.
Contemporary audiences lend more credence to speakers who can deliver a performance from memory. You need look no farther than the flack President Obama caught some time ago when it was revealed that he almost always uses the teleprompter - more often in fact then any other modern U.S. President. Long speech, short speech - doesn't matter, the teleprompter is always there. His dependence on it is so extreme that when it fails, so does he.
This reliance on a crutch hurts Obama in two ways. First, fair or not, it weakens his credibility and the confidence his audience has in his authenticity. And second, using notes puts distance between him and his audience. It mitigates the connection he wants to achieve.
One television crewman who also covered Clinton and Bush stated, regarding Obama’s use of the teleprompter, “He uses them to death. The problem is, he never looks at you. He’s looking left, right, left, right — not at the camera. It’s almost like he’s not making eye contact with the American people.”
THE POINT: Take time to know your material - not only will you perform better, but your audience will have greater faith in the validity of what you say if you look like you know what you're talking about.
I've said it before and I'll say it again . . . rehearse, rehearse, rehearse.
There is a veritable cornucopia of fine reasons why you should rehearse your performance, but today I focus on just one.
Rehearse - so you can be comfortable with your content and not be dependent on notes. There are few things more painful then sitting through a presentation where the presenter is:
A) Reading their slides with their back to the audience;
B) Reading from the handout they already gave me, which I could have read myself;
C) Reading from cue cards or other notes so they never make eye contact with the crowd.
Besides resulting in a boring presentation where no connection whatsoever is made with the audience - A,B and C all have one other thing in common - they are credibility killers. If you don't know your material well enough to be conversant on the topic for the next 30 minutes or so - I have to wonder why I'm listening to you at all.
Contemporary audiences lend more credence to speakers who can deliver a performance from memory. You need look no farther than the flack President Obama caught some time ago when it was revealed that he almost always uses the teleprompter - more often in fact then any other modern U.S. President. Long speech, short speech - doesn't matter, the teleprompter is always there. His dependence on it is so extreme that when it fails, so does he.
This reliance on a crutch hurts Obama in two ways. First, fair or not, it weakens his credibility and the confidence his audience has in his authenticity. And second, using notes puts distance between him and his audience. It mitigates the connection he wants to achieve.
One television crewman who also covered Clinton and Bush stated, regarding Obama’s use of the teleprompter, “He uses them to death. The problem is, he never looks at you. He’s looking left, right, left, right — not at the camera. It’s almost like he’s not making eye contact with the American people.”
THE POINT: Take time to know your material - not only will you perform better, but your audience will have greater faith in the validity of what you say if you look like you know what you're talking about.
Monday, February 28, 2011
Unrelated To the Topic at Hand.
To All Communi-Creators:
A popular question . . . what to do with the audience member who wants to talk about something other than the actual topic of your performance?
We've all had this happen. You're delivering a performance about the merits of SuperWidget 2.0 and suddenly a hand pops up, so you stop to take the question and the audience member poses an unrelated query about an unrelated product which has no bearing on the subject at hand whatsoever.
Being a professional, you answer the question.
And the audience member has a follow up. Again, unrelated. This time, it comes with a twist. This time they want to share some feedback or some other point along their recently presented, albeit entirely unrelated line of discussion.
So again, you respond.
And so do they. Now you're officially having a one-on-one conversation in front of an audience with on a topic unrelated to what everyone else in the room is there to discuss.
What can you do? There are a a few possible scenarios:
Scenario 1: You state you recognize the value of the discussion and demonstrate a willingness to discuss further offline. You promise to make yourself available after the performance to address whatever questions or concerns the individual has. At this point you are able to move on with your performance, job well done.
Scenario 2: You do everything outlined in Scenario 1, except this time the audience member doesn't concede the floor. They want to have this discussion . . . now. You empathize again with the individual's situation and reiterate your willingness to meet and apologize, but state there is limited time for the performance and you do need to keep the event on track. Frustrated, the alternate speaker concedes.
Scenario 3: Everything just like Scenario 2, except the alternate speaker doesn't concede - now what?
Now you leverage your greatest asset - the audience. You turn to them and say, as professionally as possible, that perhaps this alternative topic is worth discussing, but you know all in the room came to the performance with the expectation of discussing the merits of SuperWidget 2.0. You don't want to waste anyone's time so you're going to put it to a vote - how many want to talk about SuperWidget 2.0, and how many wish to discuss the newly defined "alternative topic?"
In all likelihood the vote will be heavily in favor of discussing SuperWidget 2.0. At this point you reiterate your empathy with the single audience member, reiterate your willingness to meet with them after the session - but state firmly that the rest of the audience would like to return to the original topic and so that is what you're going to need to do. Then do it.
THE POINT: Hopefully it never comes to this, but if it does - "majority rules" is a pretty simple concept to understand.
A popular question . . . what to do with the audience member who wants to talk about something other than the actual topic of your performance?
We've all had this happen. You're delivering a performance about the merits of SuperWidget 2.0 and suddenly a hand pops up, so you stop to take the question and the audience member poses an unrelated query about an unrelated product which has no bearing on the subject at hand whatsoever.
Being a professional, you answer the question.
And the audience member has a follow up. Again, unrelated. This time, it comes with a twist. This time they want to share some feedback or some other point along their recently presented, albeit entirely unrelated line of discussion.
So again, you respond.
And so do they. Now you're officially having a one-on-one conversation in front of an audience with on a topic unrelated to what everyone else in the room is there to discuss.
What can you do? There are a a few possible scenarios:
Scenario 1: You state you recognize the value of the discussion and demonstrate a willingness to discuss further offline. You promise to make yourself available after the performance to address whatever questions or concerns the individual has. At this point you are able to move on with your performance, job well done.
Scenario 2: You do everything outlined in Scenario 1, except this time the audience member doesn't concede the floor. They want to have this discussion . . . now. You empathize again with the individual's situation and reiterate your willingness to meet and apologize, but state there is limited time for the performance and you do need to keep the event on track. Frustrated, the alternate speaker concedes.
Scenario 3: Everything just like Scenario 2, except the alternate speaker doesn't concede - now what?
Now you leverage your greatest asset - the audience. You turn to them and say, as professionally as possible, that perhaps this alternative topic is worth discussing, but you know all in the room came to the performance with the expectation of discussing the merits of SuperWidget 2.0. You don't want to waste anyone's time so you're going to put it to a vote - how many want to talk about SuperWidget 2.0, and how many wish to discuss the newly defined "alternative topic?"
In all likelihood the vote will be heavily in favor of discussing SuperWidget 2.0. At this point you reiterate your empathy with the single audience member, reiterate your willingness to meet with them after the session - but state firmly that the rest of the audience would like to return to the original topic and so that is what you're going to need to do. Then do it.
THE POINT: Hopefully it never comes to this, but if it does - "majority rules" is a pretty simple concept to understand.
Sunday, January 30, 2011
It Happens to Everbody.
To All Communi-Creators:
There is a moment in the course of all performance preparations when the speaker realizes they are about to appear before an audience. It is at this point, in many cases, when the fear sets in.
The brutal realization one is about to measured and judged by a room full of strangers, the desire to present the perfect performance, to make no mistakes, to avoid public humiliation - can be overwhelming.
Don't do that to yourself.
Don't require perfection, it's an impossible standard and your audience won't require you to meet it. Better to assume you will make a mistake, assume the projector will break, assume some interruption will occur - and that's OK. You're prepared and the audience will be empathetic to your plight - after all, they've been there at some point themselves.
Barbara Streisand tells the story of performing in New York City's Central Park before thousands of fans, and completely forgetting the words to one of her most popular songs, right in the middle of singing it.
She just went blank. She had sung the song hundreds of times before and she was drawing a complete blank.
Things happen. It's OK.
Second - no one is judging you. So, don't let yourself get caught up in the pre-public-speaking-death-spiral where you let wave upon wave of crippling anxiety build up. In fact, don't think of it as public speaking at all. Instead, imagine walking into a room and meeting a few friends. Embrace the idea that the audience is on your side and they want you to succeed. Empower yourself with the knowledge that all in the room are with you, and you will do well.
Because they are, and you will.
THE POINT: Stage fright is a mind game it's best to not play.
There is a moment in the course of all performance preparations when the speaker realizes they are about to appear before an audience. It is at this point, in many cases, when the fear sets in.
The brutal realization one is about to measured and judged by a room full of strangers, the desire to present the perfect performance, to make no mistakes, to avoid public humiliation - can be overwhelming.
Don't do that to yourself.
Don't require perfection, it's an impossible standard and your audience won't require you to meet it. Better to assume you will make a mistake, assume the projector will break, assume some interruption will occur - and that's OK. You're prepared and the audience will be empathetic to your plight - after all, they've been there at some point themselves.
Barbara Streisand tells the story of performing in New York City's Central Park before thousands of fans, and completely forgetting the words to one of her most popular songs, right in the middle of singing it.
She just went blank. She had sung the song hundreds of times before and she was drawing a complete blank.
Things happen. It's OK.
Second - no one is judging you. So, don't let yourself get caught up in the pre-public-speaking-death-spiral where you let wave upon wave of crippling anxiety build up. In fact, don't think of it as public speaking at all. Instead, imagine walking into a room and meeting a few friends. Embrace the idea that the audience is on your side and they want you to succeed. Empower yourself with the knowledge that all in the room are with you, and you will do well.
Because they are, and you will.
THE POINT: Stage fright is a mind game it's best to not play.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)