Things looking up for Milliband, as Obama looks down.

Two political performers surprised last week, one for the better and one for poorer. Ed Milliband must have read my last post Reading is not communicating. Or perhaps he remembered that David “no notes” Cameron changed his fortunes with the memorable address in Blackpool that won him the Tory leadership.

ed-no-notes

His 65 minute speech lacked substance and if he really wants to bring “nation” alive he should look at Matin Luther King’s ‘I have a dream’.  However deciding to deliver the whole thing from memory, with no notes to hand, was a masterstroke. Not reading freed him up to be himself, to be more natural in his body language and uninhibited, letting his feelings and his passion show. The response has been dramatic. He is, at last, seen as a leader.

obama-romney

By total contrast, President Obama, leader of the most powerful country in the world, was seen as a loser the moment he set foot on the stage to debate with Romney. He seemed unaware that first impressions count looking listless and dejected, clearly wanting to be somewhere else. It got worse as he constantly looked down at his feet rather than confront his opponent.

The other contrast was in the preparation. One  prepared, the other didn’t. Milliband realised he needed to make a different impact and worked at making it happen, not least the impressive memorising of his entire speech, rehearsing several times. Obama must have known that TV debates can be lost on looks  (Nixon/Kennedy!) but was not prepared and his body language  let him down. Apparently, like Nixon, he won the radio audience. Little consolation for a tv debate.

Leave a reply

Reading is not communicating.

One of the more desultory scenes on our television screens is the typical dabate in Parliament. Rows of empty green leather benches, a few disinterested MPs lounging around, attending from duty not interest. The cut and thrust of lively debate and fierce argument shaping our futures is not evident.

parliament-n7

While procedure can be blamed for many of the no-shows, much of the blame lies with the MPs themselves, specifically their lack of any pride in performance. They come fully prepared with their statements, ready for the Speaker’s call to give them their moment in the spotlight, for many the only moment.  Then they produce a sheath of papers and start reading – and losing their audience!

parliament-7

As politicians most will have above average communication skill and yet, in extremis, they fall back on reading their words, forgetting that for the listener this makes them boring and almost impossible to listen-to. It might be ok for radio but across the chamber, or a table come to that, the read presentation is a no-no.

reading-a-speech1

Quite often the politician, or presenter, knows their short 2-3 minute statement by heart and the excuse for the notes is as a ‘security blanket’ in case of  nerves . In practice they will read them because they are there!  Dont take the speech with you. if you need brief aide memoire note, structure your speech (‘rule of three’, for example) with a few signposts to keep you on track.

And if you absolutely must read,  look up at the start and end of each sentence and only down in the middle. That way you are not apparently ‘dismissing’ your own communication.

Leave a reply

Lessons from Michelle and Bill.

Last time around both the Democrat and Republican Conventions gave us memorable performances. The soaring oratory of Barack Obama and the bizarre but compelling utterances of Sarah Palin. This time the formulaic delivery of Mitt Romney was only slightly countered by the ‘plucky-loving-wife’ piece and a bright but nasty contribution from Paul Ryan. (And of course Clint!)

michelle-speech-21

 Luckily for Obama, who no longer soars and is an incumbent who has become less presidential after four years in office, he had two superb ‘seconders’. The first of these was Michelle whose presence on stage was such that many are already sizing her up as a future president. Her speech was well crafted and hit all the right buttons, frequently – my “Barack” and our “poor upbringing”, the importance of “our girls” and of course lots of “love”.

michelle-speech-42

It could have been mawkish but wasn’t because it was not the words that counted. It was her performance. More than any other major public figure she is the embodiment of great communication through body language, gesture, tone of voice, eye contact and facial expression. Check out her speech, and the smile, on You Tube with the sound turned down. You will get the message!

http://youtu.be/IVGAI8o5i4o

clinton-speech-2

But even Michelle was somewhat overshadowed by Bill Clinton, and Obama certainly was. Among recent world leaders Clinton remains in a league of his own. He is known for his legendary charm, with the ability to ‘work a room’ like no other, making everyone he meets feel that they are special, and that he is only interested in them. 

clinton-speech-1

Somehow he has the gift of taking this personal touch on to the platform, holding an intimate conversation with an audience of many thousands. His body language is not expansive but each gesture reinforces a key point. He combines this easy style, brilliantly, with words ‘I can understand, in my sort of language’. 

As Obama said to the New Hampshire crowds, ” President Clinton made the case in the way only he can. Somebody emailed me after his speech- they said, you need to appoint him secretary of explaining stuff. I like that.”

Leave a reply

How well do you execute?

The Olympic coverage gave us more dramatic highlights in 16 days than a year of news, drama, reality shows and football. An integral sideshow to the events themselves was the seemingly relentless track-side interview by the lagubrious-hand-on-shoulder Phil. Athletes, whether in victorious ecstasy or abject misery, couldn’t avoid his questions.

” Can you describe how you feel?” Where do you go from here?”  “Talk us through the race”. Not easy questions to answer on camera seconds after the race of your life, which you have just lost or won. What was very interesting was how many of them both wanted and were able to articulate “I did not execute” or “I executed” (the race just run)

bolt-6

 Usain Bolt would describe precisely how he had maintained the drive phase from the blocks.

ennis-2

Jessica Ennis could relate detail of her best  jump. 

mo-11

Mo Farrah seemingly was aware at every step of his position relative to his key rivals

The brilliant execution of their race strategies is not surprising, all have demonstrated perfection in their preparation for the ultimate competitive moment.  What I found surprising , and most impressive, was that even in the moments of despair or ectasy,  athletes had already critiqued their performances. For them a natural part of the constant search for improvement.

Is there a lesson here? Post -pitch the norm is a perfunctory ‘how did you think it went?’ then off to the pub/back to work. Perhaps a more forensic and immediate critique of ‘how did we execute’ would pay dividends. It works for Usain.

Leave a reply

The power of words

An  exhibition at the Morgan Library in New York, Churchill: The Power of  Words, celebrates  his extraordinary oratory and way with words. It sounds fascinating. The New York Times in its review commented,  “England might well have fallen had not Churchill been a master of words” and referrenced a quote from Edward R Murrow, “Churchill mobilised the English language and sent it into battle.”

churchill-3

Admittedly it is a bit of a stretch from the Battle of Britain to the business pitch but it seems to me that the majority of pitches  neglect one of the more effective weapons in their armoury, words!

Typically the weapons will include a good technical solution, clearly expressed content, a strong core proposition and well rehearsed performances. These constitute the entry level. Superior firepower is the emotional connection of an original idea, relevant theatre, something that makes for memorability.

words31

All pitches are tough and few lack in effort. Too often however so much time is spent on arriving at the content that no time is left to craft words that are compelling, emotive, distinctive and, above all, memorable. Pitch teams may not include poets or lyricists or copywriters but that is poor excuse for not spending time on better language. Churchill spent one hour crafting each 60 seconds of a speech.

coe-2

Probably the greatest pitch of the last ten years was that of the London 2005 bid team. (London 2012. A triumph of emotion ) In making the emotional connection with the voting IOC members it used every weapon in the armoury but arguably it was words that won the day. Coe captured their hearts by saying “To make an athlete takes millions of children around the world inspired to choose sport”. This was London’s promise to the IOC.

inspire-a-generation

 Today those memorable words are translated into the bold promise of London 2012 to “inspire a generation”. Who knows these words just could mobilise and send us into battle to increase participation.

Leave a reply