Executive Communications: During a Crisis, Top Executives Using Stirring, Evocative Words to Create a Laser-like Focus Among Employees

In a recent edition of The Wall Street Journal, I read that last month, while trying to energize his employees and get them to launch new initiatives with regard to combating the BP oil spill, Adm. Thad Allen compared the environmental crisis with Apollo 13 rather than with Exxon Valdez, and said: “This isn’t a sprint, or even a marathon. This is a siege.”

I was much impressed by the way Adm. Allen depicted the problem. Clearly, his objective at that moment was to create the right mindset within his organization and inspire everyone on his team to take fervent but appropriate action. It also reminded me of the finest example I have in my possession of a top executive harnessing the power of simple but fresh and imaginative words to create just the right focus in the workplace.

That example goes way back—to the early 1990s! At the time, Taco Bell, the progenitor of “the 99-cent menu,” was in a financial bind. Thanks to steadily rising costs of ingredients, the company’s commitment to continue offering customers an array of items priced at just 99 cents had put a severe crimp on profits. So, in a presentation to his top executives, the objective of which was to create the appropriate mindset and inspire a radical solution to that burning issue, Taco Bell’s then-CEO described the problem as “Our 99-cent handcuff!” Beat that for imagination and evocativeness.

Evisceration of a Presentation or Interview by Relentless Use of Filler Words and Other Tics; A Flood of “You Knows” In an NPR Interview Last Week

Did you listen to the interview with author Kevin Michael Connolly on NPR’s “Weekend Edition” this past Saturday, June 26? If you did, chances are that you came away quite irritated by the unending stream of “you knows” from the guest. During the approximately 8-minute interview, there were at least 29 “you knows,” sometimes as many as three in a single sentence. You can take a listen by clicking here: http://www.npr.org/templates/player/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=128107424&m=128127235

The overabundance of filler words such as you know, basically, essentially, um, severely weakens, even cripples, a presentation or other important oral communication. According to my research, when a disfluency runs riot during a presentation or other communication, 40% to 60% of the listeners are unable to stay focused on the speaker’s message. Why? Because many in the audience start counting the number of occurrences of that particular verbal tic.

Indeed, while presenting my popular module “Diminishers: Communication traits that sharply reduce one’s effectiveness and affect others’ perception of your competence,” whenever I ask participants for their pet peeves, the “overuse of filler words” almost always tops the list.

The problem of verbal tics getting the better of one’s communications is pervasive, and it seems to occur just as much in senior executives as in newly minted college grads. For instance, during his interview on CBS’s “60 minutes” a few months ago, one of America’s top scientists began every sentence with the word “actually.”

Verbal idiosyncrasies such as those cited above are not pathological, and can be cured with some simple steps. People who have been employing filler words ad nauseam for years, even decades, have been doing so partly because no one--neither friends nor colleagues--summon the courage or will to point them out. And the reason for the latter: Fear of causing offense and possibly even ruining a friendship. Not surprisingly, whenever I point out such a mannerism or quirk to an executive or other professional whom I am coaching, their reaction is one of genuine surprise, their typical response being “I had no idea!”

Soon, I will be posting some specific recommendations on how to expunge these annoying and diminishing verbal traits from your “system” so that you can avoid a miscarriage or serious undermining of your presentation or interview.

High Impact Communication Skills for Foreign-born Professionals: Surmounting the Accent Handicap

Yesterday, a friend called me for help regarding one of her former employees—a man in his late 30s and of Asian origin—who is looking for a job but is not doing well in interviews. And the central problem lies in his not being fully understood: Because of his accent, at least one or more words in just about every sentence he utters are not fully intelligible to the typical listener.

Since this is a problem I come across quite frequently when working with foreign-born executives and other professionals, I immediately asked my friend to pass on the following tips to this Asian gentleman:

1. Speak slowly, especially at the beginning of the conversation so that the interviewer can fine tune his or her antenna to your accent.

2. Clearly enunciate every syllable and consonant because that is the most effective antidote to an accent. So, for instance, if the person were uttering the words “….on the third day…,” make sure that the sound of the “d” in the word third is clearly distinct from the sound of the “d” that occurs at the beginning of the word day. Very easy to master and internalize with a little bit of practice.

3. Start preparing a list of words that, when uttered by you, are often not fully or easily understood by your audience. After identifying such terms, use some strategy or the other to avoid such “loss of communication” moments. For instance, use a synonym or synonymous phrase immediately after such a term. Alternatively, banish them from your spoken vocabulary until you are able to enunciate them perfectly.

4. When emphasizing something or when using fresh words, use synonyms, just as I did at a key moment during the spontaneous interview at Chicago’s O’Hare airport with a reporter for Houston’s ABC affiliate. [For video clip and a detailed discussion of how and why synonyms help offset the loss of communication that occurs from having an accent, see blog post of May 9.]

5. Use a good bit of nonverbal skills to project conviction and accentuate your points.

Summing up: If you are an immigrant who arrived in this country after the age of 13 (that magical number helps determine whether or not you will have an accent), and if you internalize the above strategies and tactics, there is no question that every oral communication of yours will be much more impactful and effective than would be the case otherwise, no matter which country you originated from, be it China, India, Indonesia, Zimbabwe, Brazil, Argentina, El Salvador…you name it.

Two Interviews That Are a Study in Contrast: A Perfect Illustration of How NOT to Present Yourself In An Interview

In recent weeks, PBS’s highly regarded Nightly Business Report (NBR) broadcast short interviews with Ford Executive Vice President--and President of the Americas--Mark Fields and Chrysler CEO Sergio Marchionne. In sharp contrast to Fields’s persona which was pleasing, projected gravitas, and inspired viewer confidence in his company’s business outlook, Marchionne looked extremely unenthusiastic and, dare I say, even sleepy. With arms folded--clearly a no-no in such situations--and speaking in a monotone throughout the Q&A, the Chrysler chief appeared variously smug, morose, and bored, and his body language was devoid of conviction.

Here’s the most amazing thing about the Marchionne interview: Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm, who sat beside the Chrysler exec, displayed ten times more zeal and passion about the company’s new marketing moves than did Marchionne himself. Unbelievable! By injecting just a handful of appropriate verbal and nonverbal techniques, such as those discussed in my prior posts, Marchionne could have transformed his performance into one that inspired investor confidence in the firm.

I would urge you to access the NBR Web site and watch the two interviews--Marchionne’s was broadcast on May 21, and Fields’s on June 2 (see links below)--because they present a vivid and indelible lesson in how not to be appear or speak during an interview. And that lesson, in one sentence, is the following: If you, the person being interviewed, are exhausted or, for some reason, cannot summon plainly transparent enthusiasm and conviction about your ideas, products, or services, postpone the interview or send a double. Pretend you’ve got diarrhea or something. To do otherwise runs the risk of the audience losing faith in your cause, offering, or whatever. For instance, if a CEO or other top executive looked passionless and displayed no vitality while talking about his or her firm’s new products or strategies, would you feel like buying the company’s stock or one of its products?

For the Fields interview: http://www.pbs.org/nbr/site/onair/transcripts/mercury_brand_is_history_100602/
For the Marchionne interview:
http://www.pbs.org/nbr/site/onair/gharib/sergio_marchionne_and_jennifer_grantholm_100521/

Visual, Evocative Words to Emphasize Something: “Immaculate Calamity”; “Immaculate Infusion” + Other Inspiring / Humorous Examples

Here are some recent examples of highly effective communicators using a vivid, evocative expression to emphasize something--examples which, I hope, will inspire the rest of us into similarly imaginative use of the language, especially when we are trying to break through the clutter.

1. After listening to testimony from former executives of Bear Stearns and other failed financial companies, Phil Angelides--chairman of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission--expressing frustration in his efforts to get to the bottom of the financial crisis and saying: “It appears to be an immaculate calamity where no one was responsible.”

2. In his most recent weekly commentary on NPR, Frank Deford lamenting that it’s hard to find any sport these days that doesn’t have athletes accused of taking performance enhancing drugs, adding: “Athletes accused of taking illegal drugs are invariably just downright flabbergasted to find out what has gotten into their bodies by immaculate infusion.”

3. When asked whether current counterterrorism methods in the U.S. were adequate to interdict the “newly developing class of terrorists” (probably a reference to home-grown terrorists–people such as the Time Square and “The Underwear” bombers and the Fort Hood shooter), anti-terrorism expert Bruce Hoffman, telling NPR on Saturday, May 8:

“I think many of the measures that we have in place, indeed the national security architecture that we’ve created, is really an inheritance from the 9/11 Commission and from the attacks that occurred on Sept. 11, 2001 - in other words, nine years ago. We're talking about now, a very different threat and a very evolutionary and dynamic one. What I see as one of the main challenges and indeed, one of the more salient gaps in our national security architecture is who in the U.S. government is responsible for identifying, for instance, a radicalization process, and then interdicting the recruitment of American citizens to become terrorists. And that seems to be something that we haven't both figured out how to do but even more worrisome, who in fact should do it.”

It is because of Mr. Hoffman’s extraordinary precision and vividness of expression that I have long honored him on the home page of my Web site. Also see blog post of December 27’09 about his interview on the BBC.

4. Talking about the recent Greek and euro zone financial crisis during a PBS interview, Mohamed El-Erian--CEO and co-chief investment officer of PIMCO--using a very humorous analogy to explaining why capital that would have gone to Europe is now being diverted to the U.S., thus lowering U.S. interest rates:

“As somebody once said to me, you always want to wear a clean shirt, but there are times you have to settle for your cleanest dirty shirt. Because we live in a relative world, relative to Europe the U.S. looks attractive to foreign investors.

I am afraid Mr. El-Erian wasn’t quite that effective when, moments earlier in that interview, while explaining why investors were nervous about banks that have an exposure to Greece, he compared the function of banks to that of oil in a car. In my opinion, the analogy was much too simplistic and the overall utterance relatively unappealing: “As you know, banks are like the oil in a car--they connect things. If the oil in your car doesn’t work, your car doesn’t go forward. So, there is increased pressure on European banks.”

Building a Strong Vocabulary: New Edition of “Words of the Month”

The latest edition of “Words of the Month,” my free vocabulary enhancement feature, has been online since the first week of this month. Among the featured words, all of which lie within the conversational vocabulary of America’s most articulate:

1. desiccated – to describe a person or thing that is lacking interest, enthusiasm, animation, or feeling; something that is devoid of intellectual vigor.
comment: I am sure you’ve had to sit through many a presentation or speech that was desiccated.

2. farcical – a term for something that is ludicrous, nonsensical, absurd, or laughably inappropriate.
comment: In my blog post of May 15, about BP’s bad PR, I described some of the analogies used by BP’s CEO to minimize the oil well accident as being farcical.

3. petulant – to describe someone who is ill-tempered without reason, someone who is impatient and irritable over a petty annoyance or something trivial.
comment: My favorite example for petulance is that involving homemaking dive Martha Stewart: During her 2004 trial, we learned that she got angry with her stockbroker over the type of background music being played on the phone while she was on hold.

4. doctrinaire – to describe somebody who inflexibly adheres to an abstract doctrine or theory without regard for practical considerations; somebody who is dogmatic about one’s beliefs, ideas, or theories.
comment: Why do you think we can sometimes predict which justice will rule which way on some of the cases that come up before the U.S. Supreme Court? It’s because most of the 9 justices are either doctrinaire conservatives or doctrinaire liberals.

5. genuflect – a term of disapproval for somebody’s display of servile respectfulness or submissiveness—for somebody’s show of abject obedience.
comment: I am sure you’ve come across superiors or colleagues who are “yes-men.” Put another way, these are employees who show no spine during meetings with senior management. All they do is genuflect.

A One-Sentence Articulation of the Central Issue Raised by the BP Oil Well Disaster

Over the past 4 weeks, we’ve been witness to the offshore oil industry’s “Three Mile Island” (what with the equivalent of an Exxon Valdez-sized spill every 4 or 5 days) and BP’s series of desperate, amateurish, and unsuccessful attempts to get a grip on the situation. Because of the unprecedented nature of the disaster and the catastrophic consequences for both the environment and businesses, I am sure this will be Topic No. 1 during some of your casual conversations with friends and colleagues. Here is one approach to articulating the central issue raised by the calamitous event in just one sentence:

“The state of affairs following the April 20 oil well accident demonstrates unambiguously that while the technology for drilling in very deep water is sophisticated, the technology for remedying some of the possible accidents deep in the ocean is relatively primitive and pathetic!”

A Case of Bad PR, with Inane Analogies; Is BP’s CEO Being Guided by a Misguided PR Department?

In an interview with the Guardian yesterday, BP’s CEO Tony Hayward described the oil gushing from that failed well in the Gulf as “relatively tiny” compared with “the very big ocean.” I reacted with indignation to that statement because, just one day earlier, scientists from Purdue and elsewhere--working independently of one another, and using sophisticated analysis of seafloor video--had rejected BP’s estimate of the leak at 7,000 barrels a day, with some saying that it was at least 10 times larger, implying an Exxon Valdez-sized spill every 4 days since the April 20 accident!

Mr. Hayward made a similarly misplaced and ill-advised statement earlier this week on NPR when, in an interview with “All Things Considered,” he analogized the oil well disaster to the Air France accident last year off the coast of Brazil. As the fast worsening and out-of-control situation in the Gulf has demonstrated unambiguously, an oil well blowout in extremely deep water, howsoever improbable, can have catastrophic consequences for the marine and coastal environment, in addition to wreaking havoc on the livelihoods of a big swath of the population and threatening the safety of seafood from that region for years to come. In comparison, the direct and long-term consequences of the Air France tragedy--as in the case of any other air accident--were infinitesimal and mundane, except for friends and relatives of those killed.

One thing that I stress in my workshop on “How to disarm and neutralize one’s critics and detractors without being offensive or disrespectful” is that following a high-profile misstep, blunder, or accident, any statement by the company’s execs that flies in the face of clear evidence and thus insults the public’s intelligence will do irreparable harm to the firm’s image. I’m afraid Mr. Hayward’s above comments and farcical analogies will only serve to heighten millions of Americans’ disdain for BP, and make the company even more of a target for scorn and derision, especially among those who attach deep importance to the health of our oceans and marine wildlife.

BP and its PR department would be far more successful in their efforts to disarm and neutralize critics if they pursued the techniques used by such eminent “disarmers” as then-New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, then-IRS Commissioner Charles Rossotti, and then-NASA Administrator Sean O’Keefe, all of whom were adept at neutralizing their critics when things were going south.

For Foreign-born Executives and Other Professionals: Simple Verbal Techniques to Compensate for Accent; My Interview on Houston’s ABC Channel 13

Ideally, every word uttered by the speaker should be intelligible to the audience. And that, of course, poses a problem for foreign-borns—people like me, who speak with an accent.

Foreign-born professionals should constantly employ verbal strategies and tactics that help compensate for the loss of communication that invariably results from having an accent. This is something that I stress in all of my communication seminars and workshops, particularly when there is at least one foreign-born among the audience (as was the case when I presented in recent months at the USDA’s NRCS unit in Ft. Worth; Rice University’s Jones School of Management; Toastmasters District 56 Conference; and the annual day of Shell Oil’s employees of foreign origin).

The use of synonyms, especially when the presenter is trying to emphasize something, is perhaps the easiest and most effective means of ensuring complete understanding by the audience. I use it all the time, often reflexively!

For instance, last week, when I was interviewed spontaneously at Chicago’s O’Hare airport by a television news reporter, and thus “put to the test,” I automatically used synonyms at the points of emphasis in my replies to the reporter’s questions. On Saturday, May 1, just as I was getting ready to board my flight back home, Kevin Quinn of Houston’s ABC Channel 13 approached me and inquired if he could interview me for my take on the upcoming merger between Chicago-based United and Houston-based Continental. I consented, and Quinn promptly thrust the mike toward me with his first question—“What did you think about the merger?” My indignant response, which you can see in the video clip below: “I think this is a reverse step, a backward step, unquestionably. It’s becoming more and more of an oligopoly. And who gets screwed? The customer does, as there’s less and less choice.”

A quick analysis of the above statement: The word backward acted as a synonym to the previous adjective reverse, and helped achieved two purposes: (i) it reinforced the thrust of reverse; the two adjectives in quick succession worked as a boxer’s left hook followed by a right hook, and (ii) it helped ensure that everyone in the audience would understand my sentiment 100% because of the very highly probability that at least one of those two key adjectives in the first sentence would be fully intelligible to every listener.

© Copyright 2010 V.J. Singal

Communicating For Results: Citing the Mona Lisa, or David, When Justifying the Preservation of an Endangered Bird or Animal Species

“The monarch has the most fantastic migration of any insect in the world,” says Lincoln Brower, the world’s leading expert on that butterfly. So, last month, in a CBS “Sunday Morning” segment about the rapid decline in the monarch’s population (being caused by massive illegal logging within “protected zones” in Mexico), when he was asked how the world would be different without this phenomenal migration, Brower responded: “My answer to that is: What good is the Mona Lisa? What good is Mozart’s music? We could live without it, but we would be diminished as a culture and as a people. There’s nothing like it. It’s unique.”

The moment I heard Brower’s reply, I realized that his is an unusually compelling and effective response to anyone challenging wildlife preservation. In the past, whenever someone has asked me why I care so passionately about conserving wildlife, I have tended to wax eloquent on the morality issue, saying that other animals have the same basic right to exist as does homo sapiens. Of course, this argument does not appeal to many, especially those who take a more egocentric view of man. Well, in future, when talking about the need to save, say, the ocelot and the red wolf--two North American animals that are fast becoming extinct--I will simply resort to the analogy used by Brower, citing things like the Mona Lisa, the Sphinx, and Michelangelo’s David, to make my point.

High-Octane Presentations; Recommended Actions BEFORE You Start Speaking—Part II: Using the Introduction to Whet the Audience’s Appetite

First, something that I forgot to mention in Part I (post of March 21): while milling around the room, remember to flash a big smile – what I call the “all-32-teeth-showing-smile” --as you introduce yourself to everyone you meet. The reasons why such a smile works in your favor were outlined in my post of Dec. 31’09.

Now, to the subject of this post. In addition to the usual biographical stuff, have your introducer also say something that will whet the audience’s curiosity and thus build anticipation. This will help ensure that the moment you begin speaking, you will have everyone’s undivided attention--you will have conquered any and all distractions in the room, including BlackBerries bulging with fresh, unread emails.

So, for example, if your topic is on how to raise an organization’s productivity, and you are planning to share several steps that are surprisingly simple but highly effective, could you insert one of these imaginative suggestions in the introduction, as a teaser? And if you are a NASA astronaut giving a speech on what the soon-to-be-concluded space shuttle program has yielded to the taxpayer, you could stir the audience by having the introducer state one or two little known but fascinating facts--for instance, how something learned from the program will shape space flight for decades to come.

Two other items that ought to be included in the introduction that is going to be read (or circulated) prior to your taking the floor:
(i) If you are not a widely known authority on the subject, a mention of your credentials with regard to the topic.
(ii) Why this is the right time for the topic. So, if you were to going to speak on how to make your next flight more enjoyable, have the introducer mention a recent study that suggests flying will become increasingly stressful.

One caveat: Do not let the “anticipation-building passage” in the introduction border on hype or overpromise, nor let it dissipate the thunder of your presentation.

Part III of actions to take before you start speaking will be posted in about 10 days.

Visual, Evocative Words to Emphasize Something—Some Inspiring Examples

A new regular feature of my blog will be the highlighting of some examples of highly effective communicators using a vivid, evocative expression to emphasize something--examples which, I hope, will inspire the rest of us into similarly imaginative use of the language, especially when we are trying to break through the clutter.

Here is my first such list. Some are very recent, others a bit ancient—stuff that I came across while cleaning out drawers overflowing with old video tapes, newspaper clippings, and the like.

1. Talking about the 19th century botanist Robert Fortune, thanks to whom the British were able to replace China with India as their primary supplier of tea, Sarah Rose--author of “For All the Tea in China: How England Stole the World’s Favorite Drink…”--telling NPR that Fortune went about some of his exploits in Chinese disguise, dressed up as if he were a wealthy Chinese merchant, and adding: “I don’t know if it captured the imagination of the Victorians, but that certainly captured mine, that notion of cultural transvestitism.”

2. In a speech about his proposed regulatory overhaul of the financial industry, President Obama saying: “…the cascade of mistakes and missed opportunities (of the past decades).”

3. Walter Mossberg, comparing Google to other notable search engines in a 2001 Wall Street Journal column: “I know that people have other favorite search sites, and whatever works for them is fine. But Google is a beacon in a sea of confusion.”

4. Some seven years ago, Bill Gross, America’s bond “guru,” expressing pessimism about America’s international economic dominance (as a consequence of the Sept. 11 attacks), and saying: “While the United States rules the waves as well as turf and sky, I’m not so sure that we are, or perhaps will be, the economic powerhouse we once were.”

5. In describing the revulsion some Orthodox Christians have at the very thought of a rapprochement with the Roman Catholic Church, Tufts University’s Sol Gittleman writing in a letter to the editor of The Wall Street Journal: “(While touring a Greek Orthodox monastery in Athens) I asked the priest how he felt about the pope’s effort to bring about a reconciliation…. ‘Never!’ he cried, and all pleasantness left his countenance. ‘We will never forget 1203, the Fourth Crusade and the murder of….’”

Building a Large Vocabulary: New Edition of “Words of the Month”

The latest edition of “Words of the Month,” my free vocabulary enhancement feature, has been online since March 1. Words featured this time: parsimonious, Potemkin, effervescent, impolitic, animus, invidious. As in previous editions, all of the featured words are within the conversational vocabulary of America’s most articulate.

Here are some of my favorite examples from the new edition:
1. At our workshop tomorrow, we will be serving sandwiches instead of a sumptuous lunch as in the past. These latest budget cuts have forced us into being a bit parsimonious.

2. in January 2009, while visiting a critically ill relative in Chicago’s Northwestern Memorial Hospital and driving on downtown streets that were rife with potholes and seeing rusty bridges and other images of disrepair, this author remarking to his fellow passenger with disgust: “Looks like the supposedly great metropolis of Chicago is, in reality, a Potemkin village.”

3. My understanding is that every major decision taken by our CEO, Robert, is really at the behest of the company’s largest shareholder. Robert seems to be a CEO only in name, a Potemkin CEO if you will.

4. White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel was forced to apologize for using the word “retarded” during a meeting with some fellow Democrats when someone offered a suggestion he felt was absurd. The question that has since been occupying this author’s mind: When referring to somebody’s quality of thinking, will the conversational use of words such as idiotic, stupid, and moronic also come to be regarded as impolitic, even if these words were to be uttered facetiously or jocularly?

5. I realize you want to limit the number of guests, but if you are inviting everyone who contributed to the project’s success, you should certainly include the design folks. Leaving them out would seem invidious to me.

“Cocaine Pricing” – a Strong and Stirring Metaphor from Harvard’s Robert Darnton

The other night, as a guest on “Charlie Rose,” Robert Darnton, director of the Harvard University Library, used the term “cocaine pricing” to describe the modus operandi of publishers of some highly advanced scientific journals who seduce librarians into buying an initial subscription (at a low price) and then, having hooked a library’s customers, start ratcheting up the cost, making the journal so expensive that libraries have to cancel several other subscriptions. The publishers of these scholarly journals know full well that librarians will be compelled to keep renewing because of pressure from readers.

As soon as I heard Prof. Darnton explain the insidious workings of some of these publishers, I realized that “cocaine pricing” is an incredibly appropriate and evocative metaphor to describe their MO--a metaphor that you and I can apply in many a situation.

For more on Robert Darnton’s use of the term “cocaine pricing” and his point of view, check out his interview on NPR.

High-Octane Presentations; Recommended Actions BEFORE You Start Speaking—Part I: Mingling With the Audience

When delivering one-on-one coaching on public speaking, or delivering presentation skills training to large groups, I invariably urge my audiences to make a special effort to create the right atmospherics before starting their speech or presentation because that will help beget a friendly reception of their message, even if their ideas are a bit contrary to those cherished by the audience.

For instance, milling around the room before the speech; using the introduction to whet the audience’s appetite; making a broad “visual sweep” of all those in attendance; not picking the wrong moment to start speaking . . . These are some of the easy preliminary steps to create the right ambience and ensure a high-impact presentation. This week, in “Part I,” I focus on mingling. Parts II and III next month and beyond.

Mingling with the audience before the presentation: By arriving early and engaging in light conversation or banter with some of those who will comprise your audience--something which I’ll readily admit is not possible in all situations--has several benefits. Among them:

(i) You will be able to “connect” with the listeners. It’ll be an opportunity for you to be seen as an endearing, warm-blooded person. And we know from research that there is a much greater chance of people accepting a presenter’s point of view if they like the speaker “personally.”

(ii) For neophyte speakers, this can be a confidence booster. It helps lessen nervousness. By mingling and “connecting,” a speaker quickly realizes that many in the audience are unquestionably supportive and want the presenter to succeed.

(iii) It’s an opportunity to ask people at random what issues or aspects they are expecting you to talk about. You might be surprised to learn there’s a misconception with regard to your topic or subject matter--something that you should definitely address during the presentation. Such informal one-on-one quizzing of the audience before the presentation becomes even more valuable if some of your material is controversial.

(iv) Continuing on the issue of a controversial or charged subject matter, the chit-chat will lower the probability of those opposed to your point of view being totally impervious to your ideas. And there will be less likelihood of your encountering hostility during the Q&A.

(v) Finally, if you are a foreign-born and have an accent, as I do, it’ll enable listeners to fine-tune their antennas to your style of speaking and idiosyncrasies well in advance.

Part II of actions to take before you start speaking will be posted next month.
________________________________________________________________

 

An Apology; End of My Long Slumber

Forgive me for not writing for almost 5 weeks. I was in one of the periodic Rip Van Winkle phases of my life.
_________________________________________________________

Subject: Nov--Dec 2015 website update cycle: #5 -- Final email -- Contents of "What's New" box

 

please make the following changes in the "What's New" box on home page: 

 

First bullet:

 

Latest rendition of “Employee Recognition: How to deliver effective praise in Just Three Sentences”  

(embed the new link you are creating for the Oct. 15 seminar in Dallas in the words “Employee Recognition: How to deliver effective praise”) [note: the words “in just three sentences” should not be part of the link]

 

Second bullet:

 New seminar topic: Enhancing morale and harmony in a highly diverse workplace

(embed following link in the words “New seminar topic”)

http://www.verbalenergy.com/coaching.html#keynotes

 

Third bullet:

 

“Campaigning like she’s in Napoleon’s march on Moscow” -- visual, evocative expression for emphasis

(embed following link in the words "visual, evocative expression”

http://thearticulateprofessional.blogspot.com/2015/09/campaigning-like-shes-in-napoleons.html

 

Fourth bullet:

 

Senior executive at ExxonMobil on the long-term benefits of my one-on-one coaching

(embed following link in the words "long-term benefits of my one-on-one coaching”)

Same link as last time

 

Fifth bullet:

 

November/ December 2015 Words of the Month

 

Sixth bullet: 

September /October  2015 Vocabulary Quiz

 

 ________________________________________________________________________

 

No more emails for this cycle.

 

Thanks,

 

V.J.

 

The New, Capacious Definition for “Anniversary”; Will Terms Such as “1-Week Anniversary” or “3-Day Anniversary” Become Common?

This past Thursday, February 11, in his setup to a report from Haiti, Brian Williams of “NBC Nightly News” began: “Tomorrow is the 1-month anniversary of the earthquake that…….” Immediately, I said to myself, “What’s wrong with him! Doesn’t an anniversary refer only to the annually recurring date of a past event, by definition?” Of course, I was wrong and Brian Williams was right because, as per “Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary – 11th edition”--the most authoritative dictionary for American professionals--one of the senses of anniversary is: “a date that follows such an event by a specified period of time measured in units other than years; example: the 6-month anniversary of the accident.”

That brings me to the title of this post. Now that the definition of the word anniversary has become more expansive, I suppose utterances such as “Yesterday was the 1-week anniversary of my first ever presentation to the board” and “Today is the 10-day anniversary of my starting work at this company” will become common. And to extend this logic a bit: I know of a certain culture whose members hold a religious ceremony for the departed 3 days after death. Well, they can refer to that day as “the 3-day anniversary of…”.

Men Trivializing Women in a Professional Setting

Last weekend, while viewing some 2008 & 2009 recordings on my DVR, I came across a public affairs program broadcast on KTRK-TV, the ABC affiliate here in Houston, that left me indignant because of the blatant gender bias, however unintended it might have been.

The purpose of that show was to give Houstonians an insight into the four Republican candidates vying for the position of Harris County District Attorney. Here is the exact wording of the opening questions by host Art Rascon to the two men (Doug Perry and Jim Leitner) and two women (Kelly Siegler and Pat Lykos).
- (to the person on the extreme right) “Kelly Siegler, let’s start with you. There is a public trust problem with the DA’s office…..”
- (to the second person from the right) “Mr. Perry, what do you plan on doing to restore public trust in the DA’s office…”
- (to the 3rd person from the right) And how open should that office be, Pat Lykos? …
- (to the 4th person) “Mr. Jim Leitner, how much information is too much information for the public’s need to know…”

You can bet that the above will be "exhibit one" in future renditions of my sessions on “Diminishers” and “How to Minimize the Diminution of Women’s Communications in the Workplace.”
Incidentally, Pat Lykos went on to win the election and is the current Harris County District Attorney.

High Impact Communication Techniques: Adopting Metaphorical Language Used by Others; To be the "Mountain Goat" of Something

Reference my blog of yesterday about President Obama using the term “Bolshevik plot” metaphorically during his Q&A session with the Republicans, and the term being widely quoted in the media. That is a perfect example of how all of us can enlarge our vocabulary of stirring and impactful terms by adopting somebody’s imaginative metaphor, simile, or other analogy.

Take for instance the term Bolshevik which is not commonly heard metaphorically, even though the Bolshevik Revolution is pretty common knowledge. Well, Obama’s use of Bolshevik this past Friday, and the resulting laughter among the audience and flutter in the media, reminded me how evocative and how strong a term of opprobrium it is in Western democracies, and immediately suggested to me that it would be a wonderful addition to my arsenal of metaphorical terms, especially when using the technique of exaggeration to create humor.

Specific examples of how I expect to use it in the near future: when referring to someone in the third person who is sort or rebellious or borders on being a bit of a revolutionary as “Oh, that guy is a Bolshevik.” Or, I could tamp down people’s anxieties following some tumultuous happening or political upset by saying “Come on, this is not the Bolshevik Revolution or something. They will recover.”

I am constantly picking up imaginative terms from the few talking heads who are extremely articulate and who regularly grace radio and television, and so can you. I refer to people such as George Will, featured every Sunday on “ABC This Week,” and Mark Shields, who appears on “PBS News Hour” at least once a week. Several months ago, I heard Shields describe a politician as “He is extremely surefooted, never makes a mistake. He is the mountain goat of politics.” Beat that for evocativeness! I have since used the term “mountain goat” metaphorically several times, and always elicited laughter from my audience.

Communicating Successfully: Obama’s “Bolshevik Plot” Line Instantly Becomes Airborne, Illustrating the Power of Fresh, Evocative Metaphors

During the fascinating 1.5 hour Q&A the Republicans had with Barack Obama at their party’s caucus yesterday, when the president, describing how his healthcare initiative had been treated by the other side, said “…as if it was (spontaneous pause) some Bolshevik plot,” there was laughter and even applause from many in the all-Republican audience. Radio and TV news channels of every political stripe began broadcasting that line immediately, and have done so incessantly during the past 24 hours.

Well, what accounts for Obama’s choice of words becoming airborne the moment they were uttered? It’s that the metaphor he used was so fresh and evocative. Further, it created much humor because embedded in those words was the technique of using exaggeration, a specialty of the late Louis Rukeyser. I can bet Obama’s “Bolshevik plot” line will be recalled for years to come by people on both sides of the political divide.

For ordinary mortals like me who are constantly trying to invigorate their communication skills, there are two important takeaways from the above:

(i) The wall-to-wall reporting of Obama’s statement containing the words "Bolshevik plot" graphically illustrates how someone who is trying to emphasize a point can get tremendous mileage by using an out-of-the-ordinary, strong, and easy to grasp metaphor or simile.

(ii) The use of spontaneous, split-second pauses at key moments can be very rewarding for they enable a speaker to come up with fresh and penetrating words on the spur of the moment. It was that mini pause, just after the words “As it was,” that facilitated Obama’s coming up with the term "Bolshevik plot" because it gave time to the random access drive in his brain--a device that we all possess--to seek some out-of-the-ordinary word(s).

Bottom line: Without a spontaneous pause, it’s unlikely a speaker will be able to come up with synonyms, metaphorical language, or other analogy to emphasize a point or buttress a communication, unless of course if the person has conjured up and made a note of such terms before the dialogue.