Where Have I Been? Well, preparing to publish, and more...

My goodness how time flies! This interlude is disgraceful for a blogger -- more than three weeks. But I have lots of excuses and reasons:

• I have been singing my heart out -- I am a member of A Cappella Pops, an ensemble of about 35 adults, or at least 35 people who are supposed to act like adults. But this is our big season - Christmas. We recently packed them in at Longwood Gardens, the magnificent horticultural gardens outside of Philadelphia. But, like Toastmastering, good singing requires practice, and we would not have packed them in if we had not polished our sound. That requires many nights of practice.
• Toastmasters -- My club in Blue Bell, Pennsylvania, had a Christmas meeting that had a great concept, which was a celebrity roast of Santa Claus. A police officer who tagged Santa for breaking and entering, a union representative for disgruntled elves, and Mrs. Claus all lambasted the jolly old elf. Oh, guess who played Santa? That was fun. A fellow member lent me a really great suit, and it gave me a chance to improvise. I did not hear the speeches in advance, so my rebuttal was off the cuff. As I wrote in my article for Toastmaster magazine, extemporaneous speaking is a great skill for most occasions, but you need to practice.
• But mostly I was preparing my book -- I found a great editor named Karen McConlogue who tuned into what I was trying to accomplish. I now have a printing company who will turn the book out once I give them the pdf's. Now all I need is a designer to create those said pdf's, and I met a lot of terrific ones. I should make a choice any day now. The next step is creating my speaking/book-selling website, my cyberstream storefront. Today I met with my photographer. Next is my web designer.

So no wonder I can't find the time to blog. As it is, I'm doing this at the end of a long day at the office (yes, I have a full time job as director of marketing communications for a Fortune 1000 company). And I must still buy my wife's Christmas gift (shh, don't tell her), and she is preparing a traditional Italian seven-fish dinner for Christmas eve, tomorrow night. See my daughter's blog for an update on that!
So this blogging stuff is a lot harder than it looks. The time commitment is tough, but that's not excuse, as I really owe it to you to get it done in a somewhat timely manner. So forgive me for now, and I hope that all will be forgiven when you buy my book in early 2009 (E.T.A: early- to mid-Feburary).

Work, Not Talent, Tends to Distinguish Speakers

I just read an article from Geoff Colvin, a writer I really like in Fortune magazine. It is titled "Why Talent is Overrated," and it is about how the notion of a "natural" in most endeavors is a myth*. I see lots of parallels in speakers.

1. If at first we don't succeed, we give up. -- Many new speakers get in front of a crowd, and when they aren't the next Orson Welles, they give up. However, it takes some time and practice to become proficient. There are no known genes for public speaking. We need to develop our writing and our speaking styles. Very few speakers step up and hit it out of the park early. That's why pro speaker Darren LaCroix preaches, "Stage time, stage time, stage time."
   
2. We are not always willing to undergo "deliberate practice." -- I spoke about this in my November 12 post. I once heard that successful people are willing to do what unsuccessful people will not do. Author Colvin speaks about deliberate practice, which comprises activities that are meant to deliver performance. I recently delivered a six-year-old, award-winning speech to a large group of Toastmasters. I did not take for granted that I knew the material. I practiced it repeatedly in my car, and gave it to three Toastmaster club meetings, each a different audience. The repetition led to familiarity, and the feedback led to improvement. Nothing magic or accidental there. Sure, there are other ways I would have preferred to spend my time, but I would not have had the payoff I received. More important, my audience would not have received so much value either.


3. We don't set the right goals. -- When we have a speaking project, our goal is not the speech itself. As Colvin points out, "The best performers set goals that are not about the outcome but rather about the process of reaching the outcome. For instance, a speech whose end goal is to inspire the audience requires you to do more that fulfill those objectives. You need to make sure the speech is organized well, that you are using your body properly, that your vocal variety is effective, that you are using your props to full effect, et cetera. Meeting limited goals leads to limited development.


4. We often don't see the benefits of our hard work; we focus only on the work itself. -- I once heard the great Zig Ziglar speak of his hard work to lose weight, when he arose early every morning just to job, until he reduced his weight and waistline but improved his health. He concluded that "we don't PAY the price of good health, we ENJOY the price of good health." Likewise, we enjoy building a good marriage, raising children and other goals in our loves. Likewise, we should all be enjoying work that goes into our speaking skills. That includes crafting the text of a speech, pulling together the various elements that will make it successful, and test-driving our work in front of various audiences. This is the price we pay for excellence, but it is hardly slave labor. There is always an opportunity to have fun with it.

We all have our barriers. A woman in one of my clubs became a competent communicator despite having a hearing impairment. I constantly struggle with a speech impediment, and I have to write my speeches in certain ways in order to avoid words that I will stumble over. John Stossell of ABC News and actor James Earl Jones had to overcome stuttering. But all of the work is worth it, as it is the only path to success, not the imaginary "natural talent." Geoff Colvin sums up in this way: "...The price of top-level achievement is extraordinarily high. Maybe it's inevitable that not many people will choose to pay it. But the evidence also shows that by understanding how a few become great, all can become better."

* Geoff Colvin's book, "Why Talent is Overrated: What Really Separates World-Class Performers from Everybody Else," is published by Portfolio Books, a member of the Penguin Group.

The Value of Toastmaster Conferences

As I've noted throughout this blog, I'm a veteran Toastmaster, having won four District championships and competed in a Regional competition - the semi-final of the World Championship. My friend, JoAnn, is new to TM and she is working hard to develop her considerable native talent. But we both got a lot out of the weekend conference we attended for District 38 (Philadelphia and NJ). And it just shows the value of Toastmaster events, which are designed to benefit many levels of speakers with a wide variety of abilities.

The way the conference started was fun way for me. I was part of a Friday night "Humor Showcase" -- which basically means that a few of us got to tell funny speeches to a receptive audience that had been drinking. I gave a speech titled "Orchestra in My Pocket," which is about playing the harmonica. I wish I had committed it to YouTube to show you, because apparently it's funnier than it may sound. But the beauty of the event was that I wasn't competing and there were no time constraints, so I just riffed on it, just as Lenny Bruce brought a jazz mentality to comedy. Man, it was fun. Plus JoAnn got to see how I took a club performance, which was more staid, and embellished it without the constraints of time or in some cases taste.

JoAnn enjoyed seeing all the different people, the personalities and characters, that comprise Toastmasters. She also got to see all the elements that go into a good speech: the physicality, the vocal variety, the crisp writing, and in the case of the Table Topics contest, the wonder of extemporaneous speaking. In her words: "Watching all the talent makes me want to step up my game." She's ready to attend another one.

Her reaction and learning points illustrate why I encourage my fellow TMs to attend conferences. Even though I won the District Humorous Speech contest twice and also came in second another time, I still learned from the contestants, who were just remarkable. Like JoAnn, I was reminded of how one has to use the body and vary the voice. If I didn't think I could learn from these events, I wouldn't waste my time or money. But the people in my District are terrific. In turn, I'm very proud that many of them come to me for advice and believe I bring value. I always try to comport myself in a way that makes me worthy of that trust.

So JoAnn has a great attitude. She went there to learn not just to be seen and check it off her to-do She found lessons to incorporate into her speaking career. If you are a Toastmaster, I heartily recommend that you attend your conferences. Odds are that they are a worthwhile investment in your speaking career.

No Substitute for Memorization

Last night at one of my Toastmasters clubs, I delivered a humorous speech that I first gave five years ago. It's called "Orchestra in My Pocket," and it's about playing the harmonica. I'm surprised by its popularity in my local TM District 38. I won my first District championship, and I've been asked periodically to deliver at special occasions (sort of like the guest star; I pick up a free dinner every now and again.) It's sort of being Ron Howard; he won a couple of Academy Awards, but people only remember that he played Opie on Andy Griffith.
Anyway, the feedback was great last night, everyone laughed, we all had a good time, folks were surprised that I actually PLAYED the harmonica, etc.
At the end of the evening, a fellow member shook my hand and said, "Now you didn't memorize that speech, did you?"
I was surprised, because that is my mantra to my fellow TMs: "Always memorize your speeches." I asked why he thought otherwise. "Well, that's the loosest I've every seen you." The implication was that I so relaxed that had to be winging it.
Interesting observation on his part. So it only proves my point. You will never look relaxed if you are struggling to remember what you need to say next. You must memorize. And you must also structure the speech so that one point leads into another, without any sudden twists or turns. for example, I play certain melodies on the harmonica at specific points in the speech to cue the next section.
When I gave the speech last night, it was my first time in about four years. But I rehearsed in my usual way:

1. I did several readings into a cassette recorder until I had about 30 minutes worth of recordings.
2. I practiced by playing the tape over and over while reading the script. This formed a mental bridge in my mind between the aural and the visual. As I progressed through the actual performance of the speech, I could see the words in front of me, what I call a "virtual cue card."
3. I also rehearsed during my driving time by playing the cassette in the car. (When I bought that car four years ago, I had to make sure it came with a cassette player. they are becoming scarce.

Apparently I looked relaxed when I gave it, so it must have worked. So I'm glad that folks enjoyed my speech, but I am also glad for the validation of my methodology.

A World View for My Book?

Got interesting feedback on my book. A publisher outside the country took a quick look at it is has expressed interest. He likes the subject and believes it would fit his titles. But he has an issue; he said that a have a USA book, not a world book. Hmm, that's interesting. He elaborated that I needed to see my subject as encompassing the world, not just the United States. Some three examples:

1. I spoke of celebrating the New Year in Times. As he put it, "New Year's is New Year's. Unless you have a specific reason for mentioning Times Square, don't. Let it relate to your reader's experience of New Year.
2. I spoke about the US economy as "our economy." As he explained, "Many of your readers may be US citizens, but many will not. The economy touches the entire world. When you talk about 'our' you set a barrier between you and anyone who is not a US citizen, which is most of the world's population."
3. To make a point, I used a baseball story. He made the point that if I specifically needed to talk about baseball because it is the only way of making the point, then it may be okay. But if the same point can be made in a more universal way then do so. But I should forget individual teams. (In this case, I talked about the famous Red Sox collapse in 1986.) "For most of the world, these teams are just names," he explained. "Think of universal terms which will grab your reader with relevance wherever they happen to be: London, Sydney, Frankfurt, Singapore or Savannah, Georgia. If you don't, you limit not only your readership, but also your own authority on being someone who is a world expert on the subject."

Wow, good feedback. It's so easy to fall into the narrow American view of the world. I wasn't even thinking about world publication until I met this gentleman. Now that it's a possibility, I'm willing to do what needs to be done.

Anyone else have experience with international communication? I do, but I never thought I could apply it to be first book (still unpublished). Promising stuff.

My Book is Getting Closer

Wow, my first draft is nearly finished. Just checking the punctuation and those awkward phrases that made sense to me at the time, but are incomprehensible to fresh eyes. I've started looking for an editor, and then I go to print. Lots of printers out there for people like me. It's interesting how the term "vanity publisher" has disappeared from the lexicon. Today self-publishing is a very viable business decision.
Just to show you that I am not totally naive about this, check out this entry from Penelope Trunk,
one of my favorite bloggers. She gives five good reasons why you don't need to write a book. I considered what she says, but I still want that product to hand out to people when I speak, much like people get academic degrees or have children. It's another form of validation. So call me shallow. I want to be called an author.

the Most Wonderful Time of the Year (for Toastmasters)

This is one of the two times of the year I enjoy most — the Toastmaster competitions in the fall and spring. As a devoted speaker and club member, I derive benefits that grow stronger every year.

Our club contests are remarkably, joyously NON-competitive, as our members are so happy to give it their best shots with their speeches. Our members also comprise a supportive, appreciative and reactive audience, laughing where they should and giving visual cues throughout each speech. Our winners can count, at the least, for much encouragement before they go to the next level. Some members go the extra distance and actually coach our winners, making them twice blessed. (I can tell you from personal experience how helpful and gratifying that is.)

The next level kicks up your adrenalin as you strive to clear that higher bar. Now you are stepping out of your comfort zone, facing unfamiliar contestants. What are their special speaking gifts? What are their unique topics for their prepared speeches? How well and quickly can they speak off the cuff for Table Topics and Evaluation?

These factors make attending other contests valuable, as they become opportunities to learn. Additionally, they tap into our capacities to contribute. I will be traveling among contests this fall, volunteering to be a judge, interview, ballot counter, back-up timer… anything that will help the cause, as others helped me compete over the last few years. And I will learn from others.

General Powell's Grace Notes

General Colin Powell taught us much in his appearance on Meet the Press on Sunday, October 19, and it was not just that he is endorsing Barack Obama for President of the United States. Mr. Powell’s opinions on the U.S. Presidency are of little importance to this blogger, nor are my political opinions of much importance to you. I write about communication, and the good general taught us a great deal about presenting one’s self with grace and dignity.

First, consider how he framed the rationale for his endorsement, comparing our current turbulent time to another problematic period 30 years ago:

GEN. POWELL: “…I think about the early '70s when we were going through Watergate, Spiro Agnew, Nixon period, that was not a good time. But right now, we're also facing a very daunting period. And I think the number one issue the president's going to have to deal with is the economy. That's what the American people are worried about.… And also I think the president has to reach out to the world and show that there is a new president, a new administration that is looking forward to working with our friends and allies. And in my judgment, also willing to talk to people who we have not been willing to talk to before. Because this is a time for outreach.”

When host Tom Brokaw asked General Powell if he was prepared to endorse a candidate, he once again framed his response in a way that indicated he had clearly thought about his decision. (General Powell’s words below are taken from a transcript from his appearance on Meet the Press. I have edited for space; the added emphases are my own.)

GEN. POWELL: “…I know both of these individuals very well now. I've known John (McCain) for 25 years…And I've gotten to know Mr. Obama quite well over the past two years. Both of them are distinguished Americans who are patriotic, who are dedicated to the welfare of our country. Either one of them, I think, would be a good president. I have said to Mr. McCain that I admire all he has done.… And I've said to Mr. Obama, "You have to pass a test of do you have enough experience, and do you bring the judgment to the table that would give us confidence that you would be a good president."
…I have especially watched (Mr. Obama) over the last six of seven weeks as both of them have really taken a final exam with respect to this economic crisis that we are in and coming out of the conventions. And I must say that I've gotten a good measure of both. In the case of Mr. McCain, I found that he was a little unsure as to deal with the economic problems that we were having and almost every day there was a different approach to the problem. And that concerned me, sensing that he didn't have a complete grasp of the economic problems that we had. And I was also concerned at the selection of Governor Palin. She's a very distinguished woman, and she's to be admired; but at the same time, now that we have had a chance to watch her for some seven weeks, I don't believe she's ready to be president of the United States, which is the job of the vice president. And so that raised some question in my mind as to the judgment that Senator McCain made….”

Notice the deference to Sen. McCain, whom General Powell obviously admires. Notice, too, the respect shown to Sen. Obama, calling him “Mister Obama,” as General Powell apparently doesn’t know him well enough to address him by his first name.

“On the Obama side, I watched Mr. Obama and I watched him during this seven-week period. And he displayed a steadiness, an intellectual curiosity, a depth of knowledge and an approach to looking at problems like this and picking a vice president that, I think, is ready to be president on day one. And also, in not just jumping in and changing every day, but showing intellectual vigor. I think that he has a, a definitive way of doing business that would serve us well.… (Mr. Obama) has given us a more inclusive, broader reach into the needs and aspirations of our people. He's crossing lines--ethnic lines, racial lines, generational lines. He's thinking about all villages have values, all towns have values, not just small towns have values.”

When General Powell discussed the issue of Senator Obama’s alleged relationship with former Weatherman William Ayers, his logic was cut from the fabric of Senator McCain’s own words:
“…This Bill Ayers situation that's been going on for weeks became something of a central point of the campaign. But Mr. McCain says that he's a washed-out terrorist. Well, then, why do we keep talking about him?”

Finally, General Powell took up a topic that I was hoping that someone in public service would address, namely the demonization of the Muslim religion:
“…I'm also troubled by, not what Senator McCain says, but what members of the party say. And it is permitted to be said such things as, "Well, you know that Mr. Obama is a Muslim." Well, the correct answer is, he is not a Muslim, he's a Christian. He's always been a Christian. But the really right answer is, what if he is? Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer's no, that's not America. Is there something wrong with some seven-year-old Muslim-American kid believing that he or she could be president? Yet, I have heard senior members of my own party drop the suggestion, ‘He's a Muslim and he might be associated terrorists.’ This is not the way we should be doing it in America.

“I feel strongly about this particular point because of a picture I saw in a magazine. It was a photo essay about troops who are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. And one picture at the tail end of this photo essay was of a mother in Arlington Cemetery, and she had her head on the headstone of her son's grave. And as the picture focused in, you could see the writing on the headstone. And it gave his awards --Purple Heart, Bronze Star-- showed that he died in Iraq, gave his date of birth, date of death. He was 20 years old. And then, at the very top of the headstone, it didn't have a Christian cross, it didn't have the Star of David, it had crescent and a star of the Islamic faith. And his name was Kareem Rashad Sultan Khan, and he was an American. He was born in New Jersey. He was 14 years old at the time of 9/11, and he waited until he can go serve his country, and he gave his life. Now, we have got to stop polarizing ourselves in this way.…”

Tom Brokaw was obligated to ask the thorny question of race, acknowledging that “there will be some who will say this is an African American, distinguished American, supporting another African American because of race.” General Powell responded this way:
“…If I had only had that in mind, I could have done this six, eight, 10 months ago. I really have been going back and forth between somebody I have the highest respect and regard for, John McCain, and somebody I was getting to know, Barack Obama. And it was only in the last couple of months that I settled on this. And I can't deny that it will be a historic event for an African American to become president. And should that happen, all Americans should be proud--not just African Americans, but all Americans--that we have reached this point in our national history where such a thing could happen. It will also not only electrify our country, I think it'll electrify the world.”

General Powell comported himself well in his presentation in the following ways:
1. By comparing this period to another difficult time, he put his thinking into a context that many citizens could understand and related to.
2. General Powell was always respectful of the candidates titles (he used Mister and Senator), and he did not resort to demonizing the Senator McCain or Governor Palin.
3. He described how he actually knew the two candidates and observed them, supporting the thesis that this was a considered decision.
4. He gave specific examples of the behavior he was judging, including the candidates’ reactions to the economy and their choices for vice president.
5. When he discredited the discussions of William Ayers, General Powell wondered aloud why the Republican Party was focused on him, when Senator McCain himself discounted him as irrelevant.
6. He discussed his feelings about the portrayal of the Muslim religion in America by painting a vivid picture of an American Muslim killed in the service of his country. Yet, he did not diminish Senator McCain with the story.

I encourage all students of public discourse to view the clip of General Powell’s appearance to watch his bearing and hear the measured tone of his distinguished voice. We are privileged to have his example available to us.

Straight from the Heart -- John McCain's Acceptance Speech

As usual, the pundits from various points on the political spectrum are weighing in on Senator John McCain's acceptance speech last night. Let me give you my point of view as a communicator, a speechwriter, an emotional Italian-American who is ultimately unabashed about his patriotism, and an objective admirer of McCain. I found it to be a one of the most moving, heartfelt speeches that I ever heard from a politician.
Consider all that the Senator did in his speech to remain true to himself:

1. He acknowledged an unpopular President who is a millstone around his neck, showing respect for the office of the Chief Executive without embracing the man himself.
2. He spoke about our need to serve the country.
3. He criticized his own party for their behavior while holding power over the last eight years. (There were times I wondered, "Are you actually addressing the party that chose you as their standard bearer?" It was an astonishing display of candor.)
   
4. He spoke humbly about his own particular story as a prisoner of war, and not in a self-aggrandizing way. He ultimately turned his story to the service of others, those who supported him in the Hanoi Hilton. There have been times lately that I found his references to his captivity downright cloying and even dishonorable, as when he tried to rationalize how he didn't know how many homes he owned on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno. However, he redeemed himself to me last night.)
   
5. He was comfortable with showing his own fragility as a human being, calling himself "an imperfect servant" of his country.

Was the speech effective? Apparently not to many, who said he muffed the opportunity to give specific examples of how he would work with the Democrats, or how many of his proposals were rehashed from Bush 2000. But for me, the self-deprecation and raw emotion that enveloped his vivid description of his capture and his captivity moved me. In a week of speeches that I found to be overblown, mean-spirited and divisive, it was a welcome change for me.

How Did Gov. Palin Do as a Toastmaster?

I sat there as dispassionately as possible last night as Governor Sarah Palin addressed the Republican National Committee. I wondered how I might evaluate her if I were hearing her at a Toastmaster event (disregarding the fact that most of those prepared speeches are five to seven minutes in length). I'm reading a lot of feedback today, but, predictably, they fall along partisan lines. But the focus of this blog is communication, not politics. So here are my thoughts on her speech.

OBJECTIVES CLEAR?: There were several objectives that came out of this speech:

1. Introduce herself to the public.
2. Show support for John McCain for President.
3. Address the criticisms of her background.
4. Display her values.
   

ORGANIZATION: The organization of the speech was a bit haphazard, veering from one point to another. Part of that was the scatter shot nature of her objectives. That was a lot of territory to cover in one speech. Most other political speeches tend to be more focused. For example, on the previous night, former Sen. Fred Thompson could concentrate on the differences between McCain and Obama. He did not have to speak about himself at all. Palin's goals were more wide-ranging, so harder to embrace.
CONFIDENCE and DIRECTNESS: Superb. There was nary a stumble or evidence of lack of confidence in her delivery or eye contact. There was an aspect of her speech that made me feel she was speaking to me. She is a natural.
USE OF LANGUAGE: Satisfactory at best. Part of that is due to the fact that she was addressing an eager audience with low expectations. They really wanted her to come on strong. Still, compared to what we have heard from other speakers, there was no soaring language in this speech. Also there were no clever turns of phrases. When her words were memorable, it was due more to her sarcastic and attacking tone than the wordsmithing. (Compare to a very good phrase that Bill Clinton had in his speech to the Democrats, and I paraphrase: "People around the world at one time knew us better by the power of our example than from the example of our power.")
USE OF BODY: Limited. After all, she was at a podium, and she was dependent on the TelePrompTer. But others also face that burden and handle it better than she did. For example, she did not use her hands to her advantage.
VOCAL VARIETY and TONE OF VOICE: I found her voice grating and nasal. Also, she had a quality that was a nightmare for many women, unfortunately -- when her voice rose, it became shrill. Still, she registered some differences in her voice between talking about her family, her husband, McCain and Obama.
AUDIENCE RESPONSE: Powerful, but come on! It was the most receptive audience she will ever face in her life!
OTHER FACTORS: Palin was not served well by the constant interruptions in which her family were introduced. It took the focus off of her. While the home-town crowd of the RNC may have eaten it up, it was tedious to those of us watching at home.
OBJECTIVES MET?: A strong performance in this area. She revealed herself as a viable candidate and looked strong up there. The audience in the room went crazy It was a most auspicious coming out party. However, it remains to be seen how the audience across TV Land bought her act.
WHAT DID THE EVALUATOR PARTICULARLY LIKE ABOUT THE SPEECH?: Her confidence. Her preparedness in a relatively short amount of time. The ability to use and deliver words that were obviously not her own.
WHAT RECOMMENDATIONS CAN THE EVALUATOR MAKE FOR THE FUTURE:
Palin needs to make sure the act doesn't wear thin. Speaking powerhouse Patricia Fripp warns that the greatest enemy of a speaker is sameness. Last night's performance played well to her core audience, but she has many different people to win over. She runs the risk of appear one-dimensional is she doesn't start using more inspirational language.