Don't confuse "comfort" with "competence"

Don't confuse "comfort" with "competence". Just because you are comfortable doing something does not mean you are good at it.

I was asked recently to review and edit a PowerPoint presentation that was going to be presented to our customers by an executive in charge of P&L. My advice was basic - get rid of the bullet points, condense the content to Key Points, and move much of the text in the slides to the speaker notes. I voluntarily spent a few hours making sample revisions.

The presenter, while admitting to like the edits, said they would not work, since " I like to move around, and as I do not use notes, I depend on the slides to keep me on track and remind me where I am..." I paraphrase, but you get the point. The slides were for him, not the audience. I was tempted to say "just give them the slides and go get a cup of coffee.... they can read, can't they?"

Seth Gordin does a great job talking about the dependence on bullets in executive presentations. I would add their dependence upon dense graphs too.

Seth,in his blog above, gives good advice on how to avoid this. But the real problem is something he admits - most executive presenters do not create their own presentations. Those that do, probably shouldn't be. So the slides take precedence,and the question asked by the presenter is "Do we have everything in the presentation?" not "Are we making our Key Points in a Clear, Concise and Compelling way?"

To change this behavior will take more than a few pointers in a blog. It is a sale to be made to the potential presenters. They need to be shown, and then experience, the benefits of a different way of presenting. They then must have (or be given) the courage to try it themselves. Once they experience success, it can be repeated.

I advocate a "manager-executive only" training on presentation skills. Because they don't know what they don't know, they see no need for new skills.

Most of us will avoid a situation where our incompetency will be exposed. A safe environment is needed where learners can admit to the need for new skills and have the security to experiment. Any managers reading this ready to try?

All Italians talk with their hands

I'm Italian. I talk with my hands. I can say this.

This recent blog by Jonathan Farrington covers Social Style concepts in detail. They did a good job describing each style. Until they starting describing styles as equivalent to roles and results.

Does the blogger commit the sin of assigning business roles to certain social styles? Are all successful salespeople Expressive? Are all high achievers Drivers?

My experience in facilitating says no.

The statistics say no, too.

What do you think?

Rule of Thirds

As a photographer, I appreciated the "Rule of Thirds" when I began creating presentation slides. I learned from my photo experience (as a hobby ... ), to place the "center" of a slide in the upper third of the space - not smack in the center of the slide. When using images of human faces, for example, put the eyes in this upper third. It make for a more interesting image, giving the viewers eyes a "path" through the image.

Another tip I recently learned is to have human images facing towards the center of the image, not towards the edges.

Here is an example of both ideas. Note how the positions implied by these faces are facing towards the center, and I put eyes in "third" positions.

I encourage everyone to consider these ideas when cropping images, and when creating a slide with images and text. Even text only slides (shudder!!!) can benefit from composition. Andrew Dlugan gives a great review of the Rule of Thirds at his blog "Six Minutes ..."

“Who are you to tell us what to do?”

I just learned about “Jante Law”. The Nordic origins of Jante Law is expressed by the saying “Don't think you're anyone special or that you're better than us.” I describe it as a social leveling method, where exceptional individuals are kept humble, and it exists in all cultures. The American version might be “He puts his pants on one leg at a time, just like the rest of us.” What other ways do we maintain social stability?

Jante keeps people from flaunting their success. It is a way for the rest of us to remember the humanity of those people who experience success and attain authority. It makes the rest of us simply feel better to knock down someone else who is more successful.

In sales and presentations, being subjected to Jante law is the opposite of achieving credibility. Credibility is being perceived by customers to have the knowledge and experience that can help them.

Without credibility, a salesperson is unable to exert influence.

With credibility, a presenter is seen as believable and trustworthy. If you are perceived as if you’re special or better than us, you exceed the limits of credibility and are unable to exert influence.

With too little credibility, “there is no such thing as a good idea until the right person thinks of it.” Or, as they say in Jante, “Don’t think that you know more than us.” Unless you hold enough credibility with decision makers, your ideas, even the good ones, will fall flat.

To avoid being subjected to Jante Law, create credibility first and present solutions second.

Safe Phone Sales

Smile – the person on the phone is watching

I was asked if there was any data to support the common advice for phone sales people to smile while they are talking. I have seen telesales people put mirrors on their desks, to check themselves as they speak. It seems the rule is you sound as happy (or sad) as you look – and another person on the phone can “hear” your emotions. Think of saying “Happy Birthday!” with a frown.

The best data I have is from Mehrabian and his "7%-38%-55% Rule" which states that, in situations where your communication contains ambiguity (when your words do not match your expressions, for instance, or, when the receiver does not see and hear you, as on the phone) a message is weighted and interpreted using words (7% of meaning)-Tone of voice(38%)- Gestures(55%).

In phone or web presentations, when gestures are eliminated from the equation, the significance of words increases to 13%. Tone of Voice picks up the reminder 87% of the message.

So the assumption is: if you are smiling when you speak, the audience will "hear" that gesture in your tone of voice. The research tells us that tone and gestures are more important than the words you use, when the audience cannot see your gestures or facial expressions, or your delivery is incongruent and you seem to saying one thing but tone and gestures are saying something else.

Mehrabian’s research is applicable to communicating emotions. Data communication may be different, and there is a debate whether Mehrabian's research applies to "non-emotional" communication.

I suggest that all communication is emotional. The audience is looking to the speaker when they evaluate whether to accept the data or not. If the presenter sounds skeptical, even the most solid data will be suspect. Likewise, if the speaker is congruent in their words, tone and gestures, even the most suspect data will more likely be accepted (global warming, anyone?)

It becomes more likely that the receiver will trust the predominant form of communication, which to Mehrabian's findings is non-verbal (38 + 55 %), rather than the literal meaning of the words (7 %).

Why would I believe you, and do what you are asking, if I infer that you are not being honest or forthright – if your Intent is suspect?

I win,You win,We all win

When I ask participants in my training sessions about the goal of their presentation or sales call, I am often told "They just need to know this..." The presenter or sales rep has been told to deliver the message. This is never the right goal.

This is transactional, task-based activity. It is self-centered versus customer-centered. I suspect we all would admit it given some time. But sometimes not. In my experience, sales reps have been held to a daily call average. More calls is good. Fewer sales calls is bad. A sales manger explained this way: "You may have grown the business, but who knows how many more sales we might have had with even more sales calls?"

Well, marketing should know. This exposes an almost fanatical product orientation. Marketing is following the "better mouse trap" strategy. If you build it, they will come. They only need sales to get the word out and keep customer problems off their marketing and product manager desks.

Every customer interaction must have a benefit for the customer, with a call to action. What can the customer do with this information? If the answer is "nothing", then why are you telling them? Always have a call to action, tied to the payoff, for your customer and audience. Always. Otherwise you are wasting their time.

Is it ever OK not to have a SMART call to action? I used to say no. Further thought leads me to think there might be another reason for a meeting or sales call besides advocating a solution. That other reason is creating a relationship.

Opportunities to demonstrate your knowledge and to improve your understanding of the customers situation are good reasons to ask for your customers time and attention. But you still need to know what is in it for them. This is the hard part - proving your value to a customer while still establishing their trust in you.

Do this by creating expectations and stating your intent to use this information to provide better solutions. Give some examples of how you can help, based on what they tell you. Remember to follow up on these expectations with performance, when you are ready.

So next time I am told "they just need to know this", my response will be, pick one:

1. they will either use this information to do something better or different, or
2. you will use this opportunity to increase their interest in working with you...

Just delivering the message is not an option.

The Importance of Telling Stories.

Dave Stein quotes James Mayfield Smith about a top-performing IBM sales person:

“(he)… is a master of many skills, and chief among these is his ability to find the story that his customer lives and to build himself into that story as a solution provider.”

Story-telling is an important skill in giving presentations to make a point, and captivate an audience.

Three components make a story: a character, a situation, and an outcome.

The character is best when your audience can relate to him, empathize with her, care for him, or are otherwise entertained by them. If all else fails you, make your character a pet (dogs are best) or a child. But never put the child in danger.

The situation should be one that has happened to us all, or specifically relevant to your audience. The best contain an element of danger, or embarrassment, or an unintended consequence.

The outcome is how the character handles, or miss-handles, the situation.

Stories bring your presentations to life.

At the same time, I heard Lisa B. Marshall in Quick & Dirty Tips: The Public Speaker ,speak about cultural differences in communication styles. She gave a brief and clear review of anthropologist Edward T. Hall’s concept of High-Context and Low-Context communication.

Low-Context verbal communication can be understood easily by anyone, anywhere, based only on the words and symbols used. Think of programming languages. The program is independent of its field information like when or how it was written. It can be understood without knowing or seeing who “spoke it”.

High Context communication is dependent on associated information in delivery for meaninig. A wink cannot be understood without knowing who winked, where, and when. We do not know what “let me think about that” really means without knowing who and how they said it , For accurate meaning we need the surround situations, or “context” in which the communication was made. This includes the cultural rules of the communicator.

Put together the use of stories and the problems working within high-context situations, and it is clear. Stories about universal human themes transcend high-context communication. Everybody understands them. That makes them even more flexible, and useful, in your presentations.