Match of the Day (football highlights TV programme) January 2009 :

Bolton manager Sam Allardyce gesticulates and yells at the referee with a thunderous facial expression. Former footballing genius, now media pundit Alan Hansen remarks in the Studio, “Talk about 55% body language!”

Those in the know would assume he was remembering accurately(?)  the advice of a communication skills coach, and applying the famous data of Albert Mehrabian. The Wikipedia entry has a concise description of his research, and a link to his website.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Mehrabian

I can’t express it more clearly than that, but in short, Mehrabian deduced from a limited experiment that when people express attitudes or emotions that do not match the words they use, then their facial expression and vocal tone will be trusted more than the words they use. The proportions are 55% Facial 38% Vocal Tone 7 % Words. The key caveat was that this only applied when the speaker was expressing an attitude, an emotion ; liking/disliking was the only communication that his research applied to.

It may just be that Hansen had been taught reasonably correctly. There are examples of everyday communication which are (roughly) consistent with Mehrabian’s conclusions. Allardyce was clearly expressing his dislike, although no-one would suggest his visual and vocal expressions were incongruent with his words.

Similarly, I’ve stood on the Kop many times and expressed my “liking” of a Dalglish chip into the top corner by  use of a vocal and visual combination not inconsistent with the 55/38/7 proportions. Equally, my face and tone matched my (few) words, and so strictly fell outside Mehrabian's perameters, and so the application of the formula here is dubious.

It is of course widely accepted that messages between people are overwhelmingly conveyed by the words they use.  Mehrabian was most interested in how people picked up on inconsistencies between the words and the vocal tone and facial expression, and tended to believe the tone and face more than the words. If Allardyce's words had been "Good show ref, I've always liked you", then Hansen's analysis would have been perfect. We'd have believed the gesture, face and tone.

Lots of coaches have mis-applied the data and presented it as proof that ALL communication was subject to the same proportional weightings.  Now lots of coaches are dropping him like a hot potato and proclaiming that his research was invalid. I believe the endurance of his findings proves that it is certainly not so, eventhough the misuse of it was. It must have struck a chord, and therefore is worth examining for validity.

 “How is this relevant to you?” is a question that I always ask when coaching. In this case, how can we as presenters use the Mehrabian conclusions wisely ? Apart from that the sheer endurance of the myth is a great anecdote,  whose point is that people are suckers for an easy/shocking equation?

First, if the message is “we really appreciate our staff, we admire and respect each and every one of them”, then that roughly falls into the “liking” category, and for the sake of argument , let’s apply the Mehrabian theory. It is essential that this “liking” verbal message is accompanied by a vocal and visual delivery that is consistent with it. Using a hesitant pace, a high-pitched, awkward tone, and a pained facial expression, along  with a couple of tense jerks of the fingers from the inside of one’s trouser pockets would clearly, as with Mehrabian’s subjects, alert the audience to incongruence and lead to mistrust of the words used.

In other words, deliver positive messages using positive vocals and visuals, not negative, awkward ones.

In contrast, negative messages are better  delivered using neutral  signals; the key to successful delivery of bad news is to show strength and authority, which usually means the facial, tonal and gestural aspects are more subtle and controlled. The actual words chosen rise in importance, as does the detailed  grasp the presenter has of the issues in such cases. So the Mehrabian theory should not be applied in the context of a business presentation where “disliking” is the attitude expressed. Whereas, on the football pitch, the formula makes more sense.

Second,  one of the main reasons to present anything to anyone is to make a lasting impression, How can we use Mehrabian’s data (if we can use it at all) when finding ways to make our audience remember our core message?

We cannot expect a presentation to be remembered in any great detail, or for any length of time. It’s advisable therefore to limit one’s expectations, and aim for perhaps one or two  points to stick in the minds of the listeners.

So, how can Mehrabian’s conclusions  help us to deliver in a memorable way?  In my view, enthusiasm is as close as we are going to get to the “liking”, emotional state that allows us to read something into that 7/38/55 equation.

What happens  visually, vocally and facially when we express ourselves with enthusiasm? I would suggest there is an increase in the amount of animation. A greater sense of purpose, more energy.

I wouldn’t suggest that up to 93 % of what we make memorable happens through non-verbal communication. However,  IF we accept that the addition of animation to our most important sentences makes them more memorable, then we should be aware of that and allow the level of non-verbal energy to increase for the duration of those key sentences.

Such an increase should ensure that an upbeat message is accompanied by an upbeat delivery. A Major Key; no room for a throwaway approach to key messages which contain your attitude.

Overall, I am amazed that Mehrabian has been such a phenomenal presence, and for such a long time in the business of coaching. However, it would be a shame if unthinking adherence to data that he never intended to be used in this field were to be replaced by complete dismissal.

Research into how people communicate can lead and inspire us to useful insights, on the basis that we keep an open mind.  What is inspiring is that he held our attention and gave us something to remember. Content may be King, but its enforcers are Vocals and Visuals. Delivery matters.

Please have a look at

http://www.speakingaboutpresenting.com/presentation-myths/stickiest-idea-presenting-wrong/

Not so much for the critiques of Mehrabian and the misuse of his research, as for the links to some very informative websites, including Olivia Mitchell’s own.

The Habit of Art at The National Theatre is a fine piece of work by Alan Bennett. Beautifully written and performed, it was my most enjoyable night at the theatre for years.

The title comes from a quotation by the American writer Flannery O’Connor , who once wrote : “scientists have the habit of science, I have the habit of art.

This reminded me of one of the quotations by Aristotle  that appears on this site and features heavily in my coaching :

“Excellence is an art won by training and habituation...is not an act but a habit”

Aristotle’s theory is that a person will lead a more virtuous life when they practise good habits with energy.

I infer that a person will improve their ability to communicate by practising good communication as habits and with energy. That means actively doing things which are consistent with enhancing your presence. Seemingly minor examples include asking “how are you” as you meet a colleague you might not know too well next to the coffee machine or in the lift; and then maintaining good eye-contact as you exchange pleasantries.

Or introducing yourself to the person sitting next to you at the theatre. At The National, I was lucky enough to meet Charlie, a great example of an habitual communicator, and his charming wife,  who was not at all surprised to see her husband make yet another contact. For me, making such contact doesn’t come naturally, and it is a bit of a risk to leave the comfort zone and reach out. However, when it happens and works, it really helps your confidence to grow.

The French have a saying, “C’est en forgeant qu’on devient forgeron” – “It is by forging that you become a blacksmith”.  It is by communicating that you will become an expert communicator.

Cicero declared that a person becomes courageous by doing courageous things. It’s the same with confidence. A nervous, shy person will become more confident by regularly taking a small step outside their comfort zone and making contact with people.

Rather than daring yourself to go as far as making friends with a stranger, try simply saying hello to more people to-morrow than you did to-day. It’s easy to jump aboard this particular virtuous cycle of improvement because no-one need know that you are doing it.

Susan Boyle’s neighbour in Blackburn was interviewed a couple of weeks ago, and gave a telling insight: “We always knew she would do well  because we could hear her always practising her scales.”  Practice is the key. Similarly, now that “SuBo” has left her comfort zone and become an international star, she has found her initial awkwardness in the spotlight has subsided. She is on the same path as all of us in that it gets easier with experience and practice.

Bennett, like his subjects Auden and Britten, has practised with energy his  skills for decades, pursuing excellence habitually and with energy.(I would define energy as a combination of a strong sense of purpose and a sound ethical motive.) The Habit of Art is a culmination of that practice, demonstrating the virtue of habitual practice that Aristotle and Flannery would have applauded.

Steve Jobs has recently had to present some bad news :

Over the last few years, many people have had to present bad news; from announcing redundancies to explaining poor investment performance. It’s relatively easy to satisfy an audience of customers with good news. Detailed knowledge of processes isn’t really necessary as long as your figures look good. When the news is bad, on the other hand, your audience will only be happy if they know that the utmost expertise is in force. A demonstrable grasp of the issues, evidence of firm managerial grip, and a guarantee of clear ongoing communication can go a long way.

Steve Jobs has a reputation for those attributes, and so is more likely to be trusted than a relatively unknown CEO such as BP’s Tony Hayward, whose recent presentations to the media and Congress didn’t enhance his reputation in the eyes of his American audience.

Steve Jobs’ key sentence from his press conference was :

“We're not perfect, phones aren't perfect. But we want to make all our users happy”

It is an example of a mini-list (of two things that are not perfect), followed by a contrast. It leaves the listener with a positive intention, and the overall aim is achieved – to apologise, explain and then set out the way forward.

He could have tried to hide the unfortunate fact, rather than leading with it: “We want to make our users happy” would make more obviously cheerful reading on that screen, and “Phones aren’t perfect” would be a reasonable generalisation as well. Choosing “We’re not perfect” works precisely because the loyal customers will appreciate honesty, above platitudes; it almost risks gaining a notorious catch-phrase, but avoids this because of the humility of the phrase.

When delivering a difficult message, clarity and a clear acceptance of your predicament can work in your favour. Choosing to set out in stark terms what the bad news entails can engender confidence. It’s the opposite of obfuscation. Steve Jobs chose a most effective format for his words : the “three-word strap line”

Other examples of powerful three-word strap lines include “Every Little Helps”, “Vorsprung durch technik”, “Beanz Meanz Heinz”, “Labour Isn’t Working”, and “Coke Adds Life” (showing my age there!).

In general, short sentences work far better than long ones. If you can encapsulate a thought in a few words, then that thought is probably a good one. If you can describe your job or career in a few words, it can help you to keep a sense of perspective, and others to understand you.

As an actor, when asked what being an actor means, I say “I tell stories in teams”. I don’t do any more than that; although the process can be complex and require research and emotional digging, a problem can often be solved by reminding oneself of that key  phrase that sums up what you do.

“I coach people” is a similar phrase. It reminds me to keep my anecdotes relevant, and to focus on my audience. The courses are about the participants. What Steve Jobs was recognising was how his enterprise is about his customers, or as he put it “all our users”.

It’s about time I added a few of my own to the great many “Top Ten Presentation Tips” out there. I’ll try to steer clear of the more common ones, for the sake of brevity and my desire to stand out a bit!

I’ll split them into three sections (There’s a tip in there somewhere already)

CONTENT & STRUCTURE

When setting out to prepare, start with the Big Idea. Decide what this is by asking yourself what is the biggest question in the mind of the audience. What do they expect/want/need to know from you?  Research your audience to find out.

A three-part structure is standard and helpful. The classic “where we were, where we are, and where we are going” shape can fit many presentations where a structure does not immediately leap out at you from The Big Idea.

Begin with something meaningful. “Sorry I have a cold” might be the one thing they remember hearing if you begin your presentation with it, so avoid that!

Repeat your core message. Define it in a very short sentence. Lead with it, repeat it and finish the presentation with it. If you have a Q & A session, wind up proceedings with a short phrase of your own – possibly even a call to action.

Cross-refer to other parts of your presentation, or to the presentations of others in your team. Use phrases like “as I said earlier”, “as Tom will explain in more detail”, etc. A presentation is a narrative, so tell the story and guide the listeners towards the most important sections.

Then repeat the core message.

VOCAL

Be bold vocally, without being loud. A muscular delivery will probably match the intention of your message. Projection is a mental effort more than a physical one. Try to throw your thoughts to the ears of your listeners (rather than trying to throw your voice!). Use the “T” consonants, especially at the ends of words. “T”s enhance clarity.

Use pauses to hold attention and suspense. Especially near to the start. Fill those pauses with mental questions. Focus on your listeners during those pauses.

Relish words, and appear to choose them with care. Take your time. Vary the pace. Decide where to use chest resonance (e.g. for your opinions) and where to use more head resonance (e.g. for hard facts and figures). Speak with enthusiasm and animation.

Use short sentences.

VISUAL

Keep your hands either calm at your sides (clasped in front if at your sides feels too uncomfortable), and still. When you use hand gestures, make sure you can see them in your peripheral vision. The closer to your eye-line your hands are, the more powerful the gesture.

Move between two places. One a standard position and one for important moments. This can be as subtle as a shift of weight, a slight step forward. If using a lectern, find a really important moment to come out from behind it.

Look into the faces of your listeners. Eye contact in a small group should be directed into eyes, but for a larger group, as long as you are looking into the body of the room, and changing focus every few seconds, you will look as you are talking to (or even “with”) your listeners.

Keep your eyes longer on an individual if you want to highlight what you are saying.

Of course I have simply scratched the surface!

Try to bring the practice of communication skills into everyday life. Increase your awareness of how public figures communicate. Form opinions on what you see and hear from newsreaders, politicians, comedians and other public communicators. Copy their good habits, and notice their bad ones. There will be plenty of material in the forthcoming UK General Election campaign (though more bad habits than good, I fear)

Michael Bublé, the Canadian singer with 20 million album sales to his name, recently appeared as an act and consultant on the UK’s “the X-Factor”. Being a fan of his, and a bit of an addict of the show, I hung on his every word of advice to the individual contestants.

What stuck out for me was his advice to Lucie Jones : “...and when you get to those high notes, choose them wisely”.

The performance was good, but I’m not sure how much that phrase meant to her. Bublé is widely regarded as a master of his craft. His insight sounds simple and complex at the same time. How do you “choose wisely” a note that is clearly written as a high G or whatever in the sheet music? The answer to that is not only the key to how Bublé prepares his material so well, but it also could open the door to more effective preparation of a business presentation.

I’ve already written a bit about spontaneity. What happens in the moment just before one of Bublé’s “high notes” is what gives his work spontaneity. It is as though only that note could possibly convey his feeling/thought. How about we replace the “high note” in this with “really important message” when applying the technique in front of colleagues?

“Choose your words wisely” is the equivalent advice to a business presenter. The use of momentary, suspensory pause is vital. It allows us time to allow a question and a thought to occur in response. Having said that, a pause need not hold up the pace, as a pause can last a fraction of a second; just enough time for a thought.

Here’s a possible example. The thought directions are in red, the speech in black.

The sentence is “We are changing our focus from cost control to growth”

The process :

 (thought = What are we doing)... “We are changing our focus from  (short pause for the thought , “from what? And then choose the words” cost control  (pause to establish there’s a contrast coming) to (pause to allow the word “growth” a moment to develop as the chosen word) growth.”

The longer the pauses, the more ham-fisted it will seem, so pace is of the essence. Also, this applies only to really important parts of what you are saying. The high notes only. A presentation where every sentence was subject to the same attention would be over-done. Of the British presenters most on our TV screens, I suppose Robert Peston sails closest to the wind  and is an example of how to over-do this technique.

Michael Bublé is not the only artist using this technique to add value to a performance. Any decent actor will deliver their Shakespearean soliloquy as a series of answers to imagined questions from a rational alter-ego. Decent actors choose the important words with wisdom.

A later post will deal with the differences between acting and business presenting, but for now, please be assured that telling the truth convincingly may accommodate the techniques of theatre, without compromising integrity, or winning arguments by invalid, damaging use of the dark arts of spin and conjuring. You might need a good coach to assist you with drawing the line between a devious trick and a respectable technique.

The substance of what we say is of course most important. How we say it will however determine the impact of what we say. If we choose our important words with wisdom, we might not become as successful as Michael Bublé , but at least we’ll be remembered, and have something in common with the best presenters.