Pink delivers a masterful speech which demonstrates many strong speech techniques, including:

• A powerful opening, which establishes a framework utilized throughout;
• Building of ethos and logos;
• Well-timed use of humor;
• Employing contrast and the rule of three;
• Powerful conclusion; and
• Superb delivery.

The strength of this speech isn’t surprising at all, given Pink’s former role as chief speechwriter for Al Gore.

This is the latest in a series of speech critiques here on Six Minutes.

I encourage you to:

1. Watch the video;
2. Read the analysis in this speech critique; and
3. Share your thoughts on this presentation in the comment section.

Click here to view the embedded video.

The Opening – Superb and Yet Flawed

The opening of the speech is very strong. The first words of the speech — “I need to make a confession…” — create mystery and draw the audience in immediately. The humor woven into this opening invoked strong laughter from the audience, but may not have been the best choice. (see below)

The other noteworthy element of the opening is the way that Pink frames his speech as not a story, but a case [1:34 -- these are references to speech times which you can use to view specific parts of the speech]:

“I don’t want to tell you a story. I want to make a case. I want to make a hard-headed, evidence-based, dare I say lawyerly case for rethinking how we run our businesses.”

This is speechwriting genius. In just a few sentences, Pink establishes the framework around his topic. Given that his audience is likely to be skeptical (because his primary message goes against conventional business wisdom), he assures them that what he’s about to say is not a fictional story, but a solid case — a clear, truthful, logical argument.

He specifically refers to the audience as “Ladies and gentlement of the jury…” [1:51] to cement this framework. Later in the speech, he twice references this framework.

• “Let me marshall the evidence, because I’m not telling a story. I’m making a case, ladies and gentlemen of the jury…” [9:05]
• “I rest my case.” [18:28 - the final words of the speech]

But, there’s a small flaw…

In most circumstances, self-deprecating humor is a wonderful speechwriting tool. You get the audience laughing, and you risk offending nobody, because the humor is about you.

However, the self-deprecating humor in this speech pokes fun at the very thing on which Pink has hinged his argument — on his ability to demonstrate a solid, legal case. He playfully (and perhaps modestly?) points out his poor law school performance, and the fact that he’s never worked as a lawyer. This has the effect of undermining his credibility. The skeptical audience member might argue that if he isn’t a smart lawyer, then maybe he can’t put together a strong case, and if he can’t put together a strong case, then perhaps the case being presented in this speech is weak.

The lesson? When using self-deprecating humor, don’t poke fun at your expertise in a way which weakens your credibility.

Build Logos and Ethos

Aside from the self-deprecating humor, this speech is very strong in both logos (logical argument) and ethos (credibility of the speaker).

A few ways in which Pink builds strong logos include:

• “This is not a feeling… [joke] … This is not a philosophy… [joke] This is a fact… [joke]” [8:33]
  This passage was one of the most emphatic in the entire speech, and it strikes at the heart of the audience opposition.
• “Some of you may look at this and say ‘Hm. Sounds nice, but it’s utopian.’ But I say ‘nope’. I have proof.” [16:02]
  Again, Pink directly addresses the opposing point of view, and then proceeds to offer tangible, real evidence to support his claim.
• The speech is littered with references to both academic research as well as case studies taken from contemporary businesses. He specifies institutions, names, and quotations. In doing so, Pink makes it clear that his central argument is not just a theory; it is grounded in reality.

A few ways in which Pink successfully raises his ethos include:

• Through the speech, Pink cites academic research at globally recognized institutions, including Princeton [3:08], MIT [9:10], Carnegie Mellon, the University of Chicago, the Federal Reserve Bank of the United States, and the London School of Economics (“alma mater of 11 Nobel Laureates in Economics”) [10:48]. As the named institutions all have high ethos, referencing them in this way adds credibility by association to Pink.
• “I spent the last couple of years looking at the science of human motivation.” [5:07] This particular line was delivered in an understated way, but I think it boosts his credibility considerably.

Make it personal (and flattering)

About half-way through the speech, Pink makes the first explicit connection between his topic and the audience in the room. He says:

• “Think about your own work… everybody in this room is dealing with their own version of the candle problem” [7:49]

This flatters his audience, because it implies that they are all engaged in truly difficult and challenging work. (i.e. they don’t have careers doing mechanical tasks) More importantly, it makes his speech message more personal. From that moment on, every time Pink references “the candle problem”, each member of the audience hears “my problem”. Having your audience personalize your message is one powerful way to persuade them.

Use Humor

This was not a “fluff” speech by any definition. On the contrary, it is packed with thought-provoking ideas. Yet, Pink wisely injects humor throughout the presentation:

• “I need to make a confession. I did something I regret… in a moment of youthful indiscretion, I went to law school.” [0:38]
• “I graduated in the part of my law school class that made the top 90% possible.” [1:00]
• “I never practiced law a day in my life. I pretty much wasn’t allowed to.” [1:14]
• “Now this makes no sense, right. I’m an American. I believe in free markets. That’s not how it’s supposed to work…” (into the reality show joke which didn’t get much laughter) [4:00]
• Fade-in effect on slide (also with color) to add “For Dummies” to “The Candle Problem” [6:30]
• “This is not a feeling. I’m a lawyer, I don’t believe in feelings.  This is not a philosophy. I’m an American, I don’t believe in philosophy. This is a fact. Or as we say in my home town of Washington, D.C. — a true fact.” [8:33]
• “Is this some kind of touchy-feely socialist conspiracy going on here?” [10:38]
• “London School of Economics. Training ground for great economic thinkers, like George Soros, Friedrich Hayek, and Mick Jagger.” [11:10]
• Atlassian joke [13:45]
• “Fedex days” joke [14:30]

The speech is about 18 minutes long, and includes 10 (mostly successful) attempts at humor.  The timing of the humor is also noteworthy: 0:38, 1:00, 1:14, 4:00, 6:30, 8:33, 10:38, 11:10, 13:45, 14:30. Pink mixes humor every two minutes or so, with a little more in the first 90 seconds (to build a connection with the audience), and then none for the last three and a half minutes (to focus on a powerful closing argument). This humor strategy is worthy of emulation in your speeches!

Employ the Rule of Three

This speech is packed with rhetorical devices, the most frequent of which is the use of triads. Pink employs the rule of three in a variety of ways, including both humor and his most serious statements. A few examples include:

• “(1) This is not a feeling… [joke] … (2) This is not a philosophy… [joke] (3) This is a fact… [joke]” [8:33]
• “Too many organizations are making their decisions… based on assumptions that are (1) outdated, (2) unexamined, and (3) rooted more in folklore than in science.” [11:45]
• (1) Autonomy, (2) Mastery, and (3) Purpose [12:40]
• “(1) How they do it, (2) when they do it, (3) where they do it…” [15:40]
• “… noone gets paid (1) a cent, (2) or a euro, (3) or a yen…” [16:33]
• “If we repair this mismatch between what science knows and what business does…
  If we bring our notions of motivation into the 21st century…
  If we get past this lazy, dangerous ideology of carrots and sticks…
  we can strengthen our businesses,
  we can solve a lot of those candle problems, and maybe, maybe, maybe,
  we can change the world. ” [18:02 -- concluding argument]

Use Contrast

The most memorable catch phrase in this speech was introduced with a slide, and spoken multiple times, at 5:18, 11:35, 17:28, and 18:02. This phrase is cleverly crafted, and is far better than an awkward alternative such as: “Present-day business practices are ignoring the knowledge by scientific research.”

Other uses of contrasting terms include:

• “This is one of the most robust findings in social science [pause]… and also one of the most ignored.” [5:00]
• “That’s actually fine for many types of 20th century tasks. But for 21st century tasks…” [5:40]
• “Routine, rule-based, left-brained kind of work” [7:25] versus “Right-brained, creative, conceptual.. ” [7:45]
• “… productivity goes up, worker engagement goes up, worker satisfaction goes up, turnover goes down” [15:53]
• “This is the titanic battle between these two approaches. This is the Ali-Frasier of motivation.” “intrinsic motivators versus extrinsic motivators… autonomy, mastery, and purpose versus carrots and sticks” [17:05] — Pink amplifies the contrast between these approaches by invoking a comparison to the historic boxing match.

Make Your Conclusion a Concise Call to Action

Pink signals his conclusion with the words ”Let me wrap up” [17:23] followed a lengthy pause of four seconds. This pause is very effective in helping the audience get ready for the words which follow.

Pink then restates his signature phrase (“There’s a mismatch between what science knows and what business does…”) and adds “… and here’s what science knows.” He then follows this with three concise findings. Summarizing your arguments like this helps to aid understanding and memorability.

He concludes with an energetic call-to-action (using back-to-back triads) and a reference to his legal case framework (“I rest my case.”) I love the way that this bookends the speech.

Add Energy with Your Gestures and Vocal Variety

The majority of this review has been devoted to speechwriting techniques, but a full review of Pink’s delivery techniques could easily fill another article.

Although he could reduce the finger-wagging, his use of gestures and body language throughout the speech are superb. He matches his movements and gestures to the large venue. His energy and enthusiasm come through strong when viewing this speech.

As just one example, consider the three frames below, where Pink is indicating the low, medium, and high rewards. If this were a typical, boring PowerPoint presentation, a bar chart could have been used. On the contrary, Pink demonstrates that the most important visual is the speaker!

Similarly, the vocal variety demonstrated by Pink is worthy of emulation. His use of emphasis, pauses, and varied pace and volume are all well done. Not only does this help to convey his enthusiasm and convictions, but it aids understanding and adds drama throughout.

More About the Science of Motivation

After watching this speech, I’m eager to learn more about the science of motivation. I’m going to be checking out two books written by Dan Pink:

• Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us
• A Whole New Mind: Why Right-Brainers Will Rule the Future

Both are highly rated on amazon. I’m curious to hear if you have read these books and, if so, what are your impressions?

Your Thoughts?

What did you think of this speech? What are the best aspects of this speech? How could this speech have been made even better?

Please share your thought in the comments.

Similar Articles You May Like... Video Critique: J.A. Gamache (Toastmasters, 2007) Speech Critique: Jacqueline Novogratz (TED 2009) 5 Presentation Lessons from Randy Pausch in The Last Lecture How to Speak: 7 Speaking Tips from Patrick Henry Winston Speech Critique: Steve Jobs (Stanford, 2005) Video Critique: Al Gore (TED, 2006)

Have a Question? Contact me anytime, or find me on Twitter: @6minutes

Andrew Dlugan is the editor and founder of Six Minutes. He teaches courses, leads seminars, coaches speakers, and strives to avoid Suicide by PowerPoint. He is an award-winning public speaker and speech evaluator. Andrew is a father and husband who resides in British Columbia, Canada.

There are times when applause makes you think you’re the greatest speaker in the world, and there are times when the silence of the audience makes you want to crawl into a hole.

In short, the mental game for speaking in public is a jumble of thoughts, experiences, and emotions.

In this article, we apply the wisdom of the Six Thinking Hats to provide a framework for sorting out this jumble and gaining useful perspectives which can help us improve.

What are the Six Thinking Hats?

Six Thinking Hats is a thinking framework for use by groups or by individuals. It was popularized in the 1985 book Six Thinking Hats by Edward de Bono. Dr. de Bono is a world-renowned author of dozens of books on lateral thinking. In the last 25+ years, the Six Thinking Hats method has been adopted by organizations around the world as an aid for individual and group decision-making and other problem-solving applications.

To apply the six hats method, an individual (or a group) looks at an issue from a series of perspectives, one at a time. Be separating the perspectives in this way, a much more complete and balanced view is achieved.

In Six Thinking Hats, de Bono writes:

The main difficulty of thinking is confusion. We try to do too much at once. Emotions, information, logic, hope and creativity all crowd in on us. It is like juggling with too many balls…
The six thinking hats allow us to conduct our thinking as a conductor might lead an orchestra.

The six hats each represent a frame of mind or a perspective that one should adopt:

1. White Hat - Neutral and objective; facts; figures; missing information
2. Red Hat – Emotional; gut feeling
3. Black Hat – Caution; points out the weaknesses
4. Yellow Hat – Optimism; hope and positive thinking
5. Green Hat – Creativity and new ideas
6. Blue Hat – Control; organizing the thinking process and the other hats

When we wear each hat, we focus entirely on the goal for that hat. The entire process involves moving from one hat to the next (and quite possibly revisiting hats as we move along) until a complete, well-rounded understanding is reached.

Applying the Six Thinking Hats to Public Speaking

I was introduced to six thinking hats framework six years ago, and I have turned to it in a wide range of situations to help sort out my thinking. I’m now preparing to deliver seminars on how to apply the six thinking hats. (Interested? Contact me.)

You, too, can apply the framework to a diverse range of situations. Let’s look at how the six hats can be used to sort out our thoughts and feelings around public speaking.

Blue Hat – Organizing the Thinking Process

When you wear the blue hat, your task is to define the situation, set the parameters, decide how you will proceed with the other hats (which ones to wear, and in which order), and otherwise control the process until a satisfactory resolution is reached. Thus, the blue hat is generally the first and the last to be worn.

Example: A speaker wearing the blue hat might produce one of the following:

• I am an okay speaker, but my growth seems to have stagnated. I’m looking for answers about how I can jump start my progress again. I’m going to start with the white hat to establish the facts, explore my emotions with the red hat, and then wear the yellow, black, and green hats, and then I’ll decide whether to continue or stop.
• My audience feedback is outstanding, but I’m getting very few repeat bookings. I’m going to go through the black and yellow hats first, and then use the green hat to discover possible causes I had not thought of before.

White Hat – Objective Facts and Figures

When you wear the white hat, you take an objective perspective. List facts that are known, and identify facts which are not (but could be helpful).

Example: A speaker wearing the white hat might produce information such as the following:

• I have been delivering presentations regularly for 11 years.
• Most presentations I deliver are half-day or full-day courses.
• Feedback forms show my average rating is 3.6 out of 5.
• My current fee is $1000 per appearance.
• About 20% of my speaking engagements results in a future booking.
• I don’t know the industry average for repeat bookings.
• I don’t know the cost of running an ad in the local chamber of commerce directory.
• I don’t know what the Lessig Method is, or whether I could adopt it in my presentations.
• I don’t know the nomination process or the criteria for selecting speakers for the annual industry conference.

Red Hat – Emotions

When you wear the red hat, you explore your feelings and intuition, whether they are “positive”, “negative”, or (most often) somewhere in the middle.

Example: A speaker wearing the red hat might produce the following:

• I get energized by feedback from the audience, both during my presentation and after a successful presentation.
• I’m frequently afraid of making mistakes in front of my peers.
• I enjoy being up at the front of the room and sharing my knowledge.
• I am sad and embarrassed when I am asked a question that I don’t have the answer to.
• I am amazed when I watch other speakers who seem to be so eloquent and effortless.
• I feel shy approaching high-profile clients.

Black Hat – Caution and Pessimism

When you wear the black hat, you are cautious and careful, and looking for reasons to retreat. You are seeking weaknesses in the available options, and thus have a bias toward inaction.

Example: A speaker wearing the black hat might produce the following:

• I tried a speech coach two years ago, and that didn’t produce any tangible results for me.
• I am too busy right now to spend more time on speech preparation.
• I cannot afford to put more money into marketing.
• I don’t have any experience in developing keynotes.
• If I raise my fee, I might get fewer bookings.
• Client X has a reputation for not paying on time, so it may not be wise to commit to their event.

Yellow Hat – Optimism, Hope, and Positive Thinking

When you wear the yellow hat, you can find the silver lining in any situation. Your glass is half full! You can see all the positive benefits which might be realized by action, and you are optimistic of a successful result.

Example: A speaker wearing the yellow hat might produce the following:

• If I raise my fee, I might garner more serious attention of event planners with larger budgets.
• If I volunteer to teach a course within my company, it will raise my profile.
• I’m reading a great new book, Resonate. I can be more effective if I apply the lessons to my own presentations.
• Adding video clips to my presentations will add excitement.
• Improving my slide design skills would improve my overall effectiveness.
• Updating my website and increasing my marketing efforts may result in more bookings.

Green Hat – Creativity

When you wear the green hat, your challenge is to seek out creative ideas that you have not thought of before, regardless of whether these ideas are feasible in the end. To borrow a tired cliche, this is thinking outside the box.

Example: A speaker wearing the green hat might produce the following:

• What if I quit my day job to focus on a speaking career full-time?
• What if I found a partner to co-facilitate with me?
• What if I stopped speaking to live audiences and focused exclusively on webinar presentations?
• What if I threw out my current slide deck and started from scratch?
• What if I started my next speech out of view of my audience?
• What if introduced music into my presentations?
• What if I changed the “standard” seating arrangement in the room?

Trying Out Six Thinking Hats

The above examples were varied and intended to give you a flavor of what types of contributions are made while wearing each of the six hats across a range of scenarios.

The real value of this method is when you or your group focuses on a single specific scenario (e.g. Should I raise my speaking fee, lower it, or leave it unchanged?), and wears each of the hats in that context.

I encourage you to learn more about Six Thinking Hats and applying the methodology to your personal speaking challenges, whether your priorities are on developing delivery skills, designing better presentations, or shaping your speaking business.

Give it a try!

Similar Articles You May Like... Speech Critique: Dan Pink (TED 2009) Speech Critique: Elizabeth Gilbert @ TED (Author of Eat, Pray, Love) Professional Speaker Associations Interview with Kristin Arnold, National Speakers Association President Book Review: Boring to Bravo (Kristin Arnold) Speech Critique: Jacqueline Novogratz (TED 2009)

Have a Question? Contact me anytime, or find me on Twitter: @6minutes

Andrew Dlugan is the editor and founder of Six Minutes. He teaches courses, leads seminars, coaches speakers, and strives to avoid Suicide by PowerPoint. He is an award-winning public speaker and speech evaluator. Andrew is a father and husband who resides in British Columbia, Canada.

It is a touching performance. Even though I have seen it numerous times – I use it as part of one of the courses that I teach on public speaking – I never tire of it. Although there is room for improvement, the positive aspects of Gilbert’s talk make it moving and memorable.

This is the latest in a series of speech critiques here on Six Minutes.

I encourage you to:

1. Watch the video;
2. Read the analysis in this speech critique; and
3. Share your thoughts on this presentation in the comment section.

Click here to view the embedded video.

There is a lot that can we learn about public speaking from Gilbert’s talk. For the purposes of this post, I have chosen three things that I liked and three areas where I see room for improvement.

First the positives:

She speaks with sincere passion.

Garr Reynolds, the author of Presentation Zen, has said that if he only had one tip to give to speakers, it would be to be passionate about the topic and let that enthusiasm come out.

“The biggest item that separates mediocre presenters from world class ones is the ability to connect with an audience in an honest and exciting way. Don’t hold back. Be confident. And let your passion for your topic come out for all to see.”

Gilbert is certainly passionate. It is easy to see that she truly cares about the subject matter and that she wants the audience to understand what she is saying and why. Her passion builds to a crescendo as her talk progresses. Note, for example, her description of the moonlight dances in North Africa (15:53) and her encouragement to the audience to “do your job” (18:27).

For me, the passion with which Gilbert speaks is the biggest strength of her talk. It more than compensates for any shortcomings. When you show your emotions like Gilbert did, it’s true that you are taking a risk. You are going out on a limb. But that’s where the best fruit is.

She tells stories.

Stories help us connect with our audiences in a way that all the charts, graphs, statistics and bullet points in the world will never be able to do. They help to make our messages resonate in people’s minds long after the telling.

Gilbert uses the power of stories to great effect. Going through the transcript of her talk, I found five personal stories from her life and five stories about other people. The stories reinforce her points in a powerful way.

Psychologists who have studied the power of storytelling have concluded that people are hardwired for stories. It is perhaps the oldest method of communication. So be sure to incorporate stories in your presentations. You have stories too, and telling them will bring your presentation to life in a way that bullet points never can.

She engages the audience.

As Gilbert’s speech progresses, it seems less like a speech and more like a conversation that she is having with a close friend over a cup of coffee. She engages the audience throughout and that makes her very easy to listen to.

Gilbert does not put on airs. Her voice is natural. She smiles. She makes good eye contact with the audience. She laces her talk with humor at appropriate points. All of these things help to “shrink the distance” between Gilbert and her audience. They make her likable and being liked is very important for a speaker. (Just ask anyone who has ever spoken to a hostile audience.)

Now the areas for improvement:

She needs to slow down and pause more often.

Gilbert makes many important points and backs them up with wonderful stories and anecdotes. However, she often runs her ideas together quickly. Furthermore, often when she comes to a point where it would be good to pause, she fills the space with words like “you know”, “right?” and “OK”. These “filler words” eat away at the fabric of our speeches and make them weaker.

Pausing serves us well in many ways:

1. It allows our audiences to absorb and digest what we have said.
2. It can be used to signal that something important is about to come, and thus focus our audience’s attention.
3. It helps rid us of the bad habit of feeling compelled to fill the silence with awkward filler words.
4. It makes us look thoughtful, confident, and credible.

Pauses need only last a second or two, but the effect can be profound. It’s been said that music is what happens between the notes. I believe that a great speech happens between the words, during those moments when the audience internalizes our words. Always remember to pause.

Her hand gestures were frequently distracting.

It’s obvious that, especially at the beginning of her talk, Gilbert was nervous. (Who wouldn’t be at least a bit nervous speaking at TED?) But the nervous energy was frequently released through the wringing and grinding of her hands (see, for example, at 0:30 and 1:05 to 1:25). This is a shame because at other times she used her hands quite effectively to emphasize her points (see, for example, 6:26 to 7:26, 10:20 to 11:03 and 15:59 to 16:40).

Effective gestures can enhance the impact of your message, but they have to be used properly and in moderation. Think of adding gestures to your presentation the way in which a world class chef would add spices to a fine meal: judiciously, to enhance the flavor of the food, but not to overpower it.

Practice getting comfortable with leaving your hands at your side from time to time when you do not need them. That way, when you do gesture, the gestures will be more effective.

She could have related the message to the audience more than she did.

I love the message that Gilbert conveys – that we should do our work as best we can, even if the recognition and acclaim do not come, because it is the doing that is important. I feel, however, that she could have done a bit more to relate it to the audience. Indeed, in the entire speech, which lasted almost 20 minutes, I counted relatively few times when she expressly mentioned the audience:

• 2:20: “Is it logical that anybody should be expected to be afraid of the work that they feel they were put on this earth to do?”
• 12:12: “And I would imagine that a lot of you have too.”
• 14:35: “I fell into one of those pits of despair that we all fall into when we’re working on something that’s not coming.”
• 15:50: “And I know you know what I’m talking about.”
• 18:31: “Just do your job.”

Don’t get me wrong. I do not question for one moment the sincerity behind Gilbert’s message. I am simply saying that it would have been nice to hear her talk more about the audience and the challenges that the people there might be facing. Also, it would have been nice for her to state that her message about creativity applies to people beyond the fine arts, because I do believe that her words have meaning for us all.

Never forget that a speech is, first and foremost, for the audience and about the audience. Why should the audience care? That is the question that we as speakers must always ask ourselves.

So there you have it. Some thoughts on a great speech by Elizabeth Gilbert.

Your Thoughts?

What did you think of this speech? What are Elizabeth’s strengths? How could this speech have been made better?

Please share your thoughts in the comments.

Similar Articles You May Like... Video Critique: Majora Carter – Greening the Ghetto (TED 2006) Speech Critique: Dan Pink (TED 2009) Speech Critique: Jacqueline Novogratz (TED 2009) Six Simple Techniques for Presenting Data: Hans Rosling (TED, 2006) Video Critique: J.A. Gamache (Toastmasters, 2007) Speech Critique: Steve Jobs (Stanford, 2005)

Have a Question? Contact me anytime, or find me on Twitter: @6minutes

John Zimmer is a Canadian now living in Geneva, Switzerland. A lawyer by training, he has spoken extensively before courts, tribunals, business conferences, bodies of the United Nations, and more. He lectures on public speaking and presentation skills at the University of Lausanne and elsewhere. John is a four-time European champion of Toastmasters International public speaking contests. His writes regularly about public speaking and presentation matters on his blog.

In this speech, Novogratz demonstrates several strong speech techniques, including:

• A direct opening which immediately captures interest and provokes curiosity;
• Contrast as a rhetorical device;
• Relating to the audience;
• Complementary visuals; and
• Masterful delivery.

This is the latest in a series of speech critiques here on Six Minutes.

I encourage you to:

1. Watch the video;
2. Read the analysis in this speech critique; and
3. Share your thoughts on this presentation in the comment section.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Speech Opening

Novogratz opens her speech with the following:

I’ve, um, been working on issues of poverty for more than 20 years, and so it’s ironic that the problem that and the question that I most grapple with is how you actually define poverty. What does it mean?

Overall, this is a strong opening which quickly establishes the direction for the speech.

• It establishes her as an authority on poverty (her ethos!)
• It creates surprise. How can this expert not know how to define poverty?
• By asking the question “What does it mean?”, Novogratz also sparks curiosity. The audience is now engaged, and they are trying to answer the question along with her.
• There is no wasted time. She jumps straight in.

Unfortunately, she also does what I often do — utter an “um” or a similar filler word in the opening sentence. I suspect this indicates a bit of nervousness (because that’s what I think causes my similar behavior).

Contrasts

I love the way Novogratz uses contrast.

In this first example [1:15]:

And when we were walking through the narrow alleys, it was literally impossible not to step in the raw sewage and the garbage alongside the little homes. But at the same time it was also impossible not to see the human vitality, the aspiration and the ambition of the people who live there.

Novogratz repeats the words “impossible not to” to emphasize the contrast between “the raw sewage and the garbage” and “the human vitality, the aspiration, and the ambition“. This is wonderfully done, enhanced with photographs to make the words real. Additionally, note the use of the rule of three in the latter sentence.

Later in the speech [6:00]:

I thought I wanted a husband, but what I really wanted was a family that was loving. And I fiercely love my children, and they love me back.” She said, “I thought that I wanted to be a doctor, but what I really wanted to be was somebody who served and healed and cured.

Here, she provides successive sentences with a contrast between the original dream, and the reality which provides happiness to Jane.

This passage is particularly powerful because it circles back to follow up on Jane’s two dreams which were introduced earlier in the speech [at 2:20]. This technique — to introduce a concept early in a speech, and then refer back to it much later — is a powerful one that you can emulate in your speeches.

Giving Meaning to Numbers

Early in the speech [approximately at 0:50], Novogratz describes the Mathare Valley. As part of this description, she wisely decides to provide context by giving the dimensions of the slum. She says:

Now, Mathare Valley is … about three miles out of Nairobi, and it’s a mile long and about two-tenths of a mile wide, where over half a million people live crammed in these little tin shacks …

This is good, but it could have been better. How long is “a mile wide and about two-tenths of a mile wide”? Do you have a real-world sense of this?

I think it would be better to frame this in a way that more people relate to when grappling with the size of this neighborhood. When I think neighborhoods, I immediately think city blocks. So, perhaps this would be better:

“… and it’s eight blocks long and two blocks wide, where over half a million people live…”

Relating to the Audience

Several times during the speech, Novogratz deliberately relates her speech back to her audience.

Early in the speech [1:55], she says:

It was also the day after the inauguration, and I was reminded how Mathare is still connected to the globe. And I would see kids on the street corners, and they’d say “Obama, he’s our brother!” And I’d say “Well, Obama’s my brother, so that makes you my brother too.”

This short anecdote highlights the real connection between the people of Kenya and her TED audience (mostly American).

Later [3:35], Novogratz describes Jane’s economic activity:

And that turned into what she does now, which is to go into the secondhand clothing markets, and for about three dollars and 25 cents she buys an old ball gown. Some of them might be ones you gave. And she re-purposes them with frills and ribbons, and makes these frothy confections that she sells to women for their daughter’s sweet 16 or first Holy Communion — those milestones in a life that people want to celebrate all along the economic spectrum.

Why does she give the detail about the purpose of these dresses? Is it important that the dresses are for “their daughter’s sweet 16 or first Holy Communion”? Yes! These tiny details help the audience to relate to the Kenyan women, because they can easily picture a young woman wearing a special dress on her 16th birthday. Indeed, many in the audience have worn such a dress.

Finally, in the conclusion to the speech [6:40], she says:

And in the middle of this economic crisis, where so many of us are inclined to pull in with fear, I think we’re well suited to take a cue from Jane and reach out, recognizing that being poor doesn’t mean being ordinary. [...] We owe it to the Janes of the world. And just as important, we owe it to ourselves.

This is a fantastic conclusion.

• This speech was delivered in February 2009, when the economic crisis was surely on the minds of many in the audience.
• Novogratz recognizes the strong emotion many were feeling at that time (fear), and hinges her argument on it.
• She uses contrast wonderfully again (“inclined to pull in” versus “reach out”).
• She concludes with an inspirational call-to-action which appeals to the audience’s self-interest: “we owe it to ourselves”.

Complementary Visuals

Imagine this speech without the photographs.

Though this speech is strong with the words alone, it is much more effective with the complementary visuals. Without the visuals, Jane is a character in a story. With the visuals, Jane is real.

To truly appreciate the impact of the photographs, try to imagine this speech being delivered with bullet-point text slides.

Eye Contact

Novogratz delivers her speech without a script or cue cards of any kind. This allows her to connect more directly with the audience.

She frequently looks down, usually as she recalls precise details of a story. I thought this added to her authenticity. As she gazed down, I imagined that she was “seeing” the scenes before her.

More often, Novogratz looks directly at the audience with passion in her eyes.

It is worth noting that the speech opening and closing are both delivered while looking intently at the audience. This provides maximum impact, and suggests that these lines were rehearsed several times until they were memorized. This, like many other traits demonstrated by Novogratz, is something we should all emulate.

Your Thoughts?

What did you think of this speech? What are Jacqueline’s strengths? How could this speech have been made better?

Please share your thoughts in the comments.

Similar Articles You May Like... Speech Critique: Dan Pink (TED 2009) Speech Critique: Elizabeth Gilbert @ TED (Author of Eat, Pray, Love) Video Critique: Majora Carter – Greening the Ghetto (TED 2006) Six Simple Techniques for Presenting Data: Hans Rosling (TED, 2006) Video Critique: Al Gore (TED, 2006) How can you inspire your audience? Ask 10-year-old Dalton Sherman.

Have a Question? Contact me anytime, or find me on Twitter: @6minutes

Andrew Dlugan is the editor and founder of Six Minutes. He teaches courses, leads seminars, coaches speakers, and strives to avoid Suicide by PowerPoint. He is an award-winning public speaker and speech evaluator. Andrew is a father and husband who resides in British Columbia, Canada.

Is fifth grader Dalton Sherman the next Barack Obama?

Of course, it’s far too early to tell, but that’s how he refers to himself in an interview on the Ellen show, where my wife first saw this extraordinary young man who can teach us all something about inspirational speaking.

This article reviews the keynote address at the Dallas Independent School District (D.I.S.D.) Teachers’ Conference delivered by a 5th grade student: 10-year-old Dalton Sherman from Charles Rice Learning Center.

This article is the latest in a series of video speech critiques which help you analyze and learn from excellent speeches.

View Dalton Sherman Speech Video

I encourage you to:

1. Watch the video;
2. Read the analysis in this speech critique; and
3. Share your thoughts on this presentation.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Speech Critique — Dalton Sherman

This speech is remarkable for many reasons, including:

• Repetition of signature phrases
• Connecting personally with audience members
• Vocal variety which signals key statements
• Humor throughout
• The rule of three

These areas are discussed in the speech critique below.

Repetitive Refrain – “Do You Believe…”

Dalton repeats the signature phrase 11 times during his keynote speech. [Note that numbers in brackets refer to the time in the speech.] These lines emphasize the central theme that teachers and students need to believe in each other.

1. “Do you believe in me?” [0:43]
2. “Do you believe that I can stand up here fearless and talk to over 20,000 of you?” [0:51]
3. “Do you believe in me?” [1:12]
4. “Do you believe in my classmates?” [2:05]
5. “Do you believe that every single one of us can graduate ready for college or the workplace?” [2:15]
6. “Do you believe in your colleagues?” [4:32]
7. “Do you believe in yourself?” [5:50]
8. “Do you believe that what you’re doing is shaping not just my generation, but that of my children and my children’s children?” [6:01]
9. “Do you believe that every child in Dallas needs to be ready for college or the workplace?” [6:40]
10. “Do you believe that Dallas students can achieve?” [6:50]
11. “Do you believe in me?” [7:45]

On many occasions, this phrase follows a pause in delivery. By doing this, the repeated refrain also bookmarks the major divisions of the speech (the students, your colleagues, yourself, then back to students). This 4-part structure is highlighted in one of the lines near the end of the speech:

• “We need you to believe (1) in us, (2) in your colleagues, (3) in yourselves, and (4) in our goals.” [7:10]

More and More Repetition

Sherman uses other repetitive figures of speech. Among these, here are two of the most powerful:

• “I can do anything…
  be anything …
  create anything …
  dream anything …
  become anything …
  because you believe in me.” [1:28]

• “We need you” is repeated five separate times in the speech, making this a secondary theme (along with “Do you believe?”). [5:47, 6:34, 6:58, 7:02, 7:10]

Make it Personal

Sherman makes the speech personal by calling out specific groups within the massive audience. On every instance, his reference draws applause from that segment of the audience.

• Early in the speech, Dalton calls out personnel from his own school, Charles Rice Learning Center. [1:10]
• “Let me ask you a question, Dallas I.S.D.” (Dallas Independent School District) [1:55]
• He refers to several large geographic regions: Sunnyside Dallas [3:10], Pleasant Grove [3:20], Oak Cliff [3:25], North Dallas [3:35], West Dallas [3:38]
• Finally, he refers to the different educational roles in sequence. Nearly everyone in his audience should fall into one of these groups; the effect is that his message seems personal for everyone.
  “So whether you’re a councilor, or a librarian, a teacher’s assistant, or work in the front office, whether you serve up meals in the cafeteria, or help keep the halls clean, or whether you’re a teacher or a principal… we need you.” [5:15]

Lower and Slower Voice to Emphasize Key Points

Dalton Sherman delivers most of his speech with a loud and energetic voice. However, on four different occasions, he slows down and lowers his voice to deliver key points. This vocal variety is a signal to the audience that important words are coming, and the lines become more memorable as a result.

1. “… is to believe that we can reach our highest potential.” [2:55]
2. “As you know, in some cases, you’re all we’ve got.” [3:50]
3. “… who love us when sometimes it feels like noone else does.” [4:10]
4. “If you don’t believe — well, I’m not going there.” [7:22]

Humor Both Implicit and Explicit

The premise of this speech — a 10-year-old fifth grader giving the keynote address at a teachers conference — seems wonderfully absurd, and this fact alone provides much implicit humor in the speech. Numerous audience outbursts testify to their enjoyment.

In addition, Dalton’s speech includes a couple explicitly humorous lines:

• “You better, because next week, we’re all showing up in your schools — all 157,000 of us.” [2:32]
• “We all know, that sometimes, we kids can make it tough.” [5:00]

Rule of Three

The classic speechwriting Rule of Three technique is present a couple times in this speech:

• “You’re the ones who feed us,
  who wipe our tears,
  who hold our hands or hug us when we need it.” [4:00]
• “Believe in them.
  Trust them.
  And lean on them when times get tough.” [4:50] (refers to colleagues)

Did Dalton Sherman write this? Was he coached?

The speechwriter? As pointed out by this Dallas Morning News article, school district officials wrote the speech. The full speech text is also available here.

The coach? The article also reveals that Dalton was coached by his parents and an oratory coach from his school for several months. His preparations involved delivering the speech three times a week at his family’s church.

For these reasons, some Internet critics attack Dalton Sherman, suggesting that he’s a puppet reciting someone else’s words.

What do you think? I think this underscores how good you can be if you devote yourself to consistent practice and obtain speech coaching.

Although the delivery of some lines is choppy (which indicates memorized, but unnatural text), the majority of the speech is wonderfully delivered. As the video demonstrates, Dalton nails most of the choreographed body language, and he receives loud applause from his audience.

As just one example of this young man’s personal speaking strength, consider the opening to his speech. Despite standing before 20,000 while delivering this keynote address, Dalton Sherman still has the presence to wait for applause to die down before beginning [0:30 - 0:39]. Many adults have the tendency to talk over the audience applause, but he avoids this temptation. This a testament to the courage of this remarkable young man, and demonstrates that he has considerable talent.

Dalton Sherman on Ellen: “… the next Obama”

Here’s the appearance of Dalton Sherman on the Ellen show.

When asked what he wants to do when he grows up, Dalton responds that he wants to be a news reporter and “the next Obama.” Aim high, young man!

Click here to view the embedded video.

Dalton Sherman on Oprah

Update — After this Six Minutes article was originally published, Dalton Sherman appeared on the Oprah Winfrey Show in an episode seeking to highlight some of the world’s smartest and most talented kids.

What did you think?

I’d love to hear your opinion on Dalton Sherman’s keynote speech.

If you are a teacher or have a career working with youth, does this speech inspire you? Does the speech achieve its goal as the keynote address at a school district conference to start the year?

Similar Articles You May Like... Video Critique: J.A. Gamache (Toastmasters, 2007) Speech Critique: Steve Jobs (Stanford, 2005) Speech Critique: Dan Pink (TED 2009) Video Critique: Al Gore (TED, 2006) Critique: Lessig Method Presentation Style (Dick Hardt, Identity 2.0, OSCON 2005) Speech Critique: Elizabeth Gilbert @ TED (Author of Eat, Pray, Love)

Have a Question? Contact me anytime, or find me on Twitter: @6minutes

Andrew Dlugan is the editor and founder of Six Minutes. He teaches courses, leads seminars, coaches speakers, and strives to avoid Suicide by PowerPoint. He is an award-winning public speaker and speech evaluator. Andrew is a father and husband who resides in British Columbia, Canada.

The “elephant in the room” — Pausch’s diagnosis of terminal pancreatic cancer — serves as an emotional backdrop for this memorable lecture.

In addition to illuminating many of life’s important lessons, Randy Pausch’s last lecture also provides five lessons which can help you connect with your audience.

Randy Pausch and the Famous Last Lecture

Randy Pausch was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer in September 2006. Pausch delivered his last lecture at Carnegie Mellon University (where he is a Professor) on September 18, 2007. In the seminar series (aptly titled “The Last Lecture”), professors were challenged to deliver the message of a lifetime as if it was their last lecture. The irony makes his words that much more poignant.

The Last Lecture has become one of the most viewed lectures on the Internet. Its popularity is increased by appearances on the Oprah Winfrey show and an appearance on ABC with Diane Sawyer titled The Last Lecture – A Love Story For Your Life.

Watch it now…

Click here to view the embedded video.

Five Presentation Techniques Taught by Randy Pausch

When I first viewed the Last Lecture months ago, I hesitated to review it because of the emotional impact. However, on the encouragement of several friends and Six Minutes readers, I asked myself: “Is the speech memorable because of the context, his delivery, or both?”

There is no denying that the context makes the speech memorable, but that quality is enhanced by five timeless presentation techniques exhibited by Randy Pausch. Each of these helps you connect with your audience and helps them remember your words into the future:

1. Introduce the elephant in the room.
2. Define the scope.
3. Conclude strong.
4. Show enthusiasm. Immerse yourself.
5. Get personal.

1. Introduce the Elephant in the Room

Randy Pausch opens his lecture in the best way possible for this lecture, this audience, and this venue — by relieving stress.

Following an easy joke about the title of the lecture series, he introduces the elephant in the room; that is, he spends a minute discussing his pancreatic cancer. Then, he raises the emotion in the room by doing a series of pushups. If he had not opened this way, the audience would have been distracted for the entire lecture, and unable to fully immerse themselves in the powerful lessons to come.

Key Lesson: If there are issues distracting your audience, address them sooner rather than later.

2. Define the Scope

Pausch then proceeds to define the scope of his lecture. He outlines what he will talk about and, more importantly, what he will not talk about. This is a classic speech outline technique.

Declaring the scope is important because it establishes the starting point and the boundaries for your presentation. It brings your audience to the starting point with you, and ensures they are in the right frame of mind to receive the message you are about to deliver.

Ideally, the scope for your presentation will be conveyed to the audience via pre-talk advertising or by your introduction. If this isn’t the case, however, it is worth addressing early in your presentation.

Key Lesson: Before you get into the heart of your talk, frame your speech for the audience.

3. Conclude Strong

As strong as the opening was, I suspect that the conclusion is far more memorable for most people who view this lecture.

Pausch follows conventional advice for a conclusion by summarizing his key points. It is a good practice for any length of speech, but especially so for longer speeches like this one (~75 minutes). He actually provides several “recaps” throughout the speech.

In addition, he reaches back to one of the concepts introduced earlier — the head fake — and reveals that his entire speech has been a pair of head fakes. It makes the audience replay the entire lecture in their heads in the context of this new revelation.

Key Lesson: Finish strong. Leave your audience thinking.

4. Show Enthusiasm. Immerse Yourself.

Randy Pausch smiles and laughs many times in this lecture. Okay, fair enough. That’s not too unusual. However, he also:

• Wears an Alice in Wonderland hat.
• Dons a football jacket.
• Does pushups.
• Gives away stuffed animals.

He could have assumed a very reserved, somber tone for this speech. He could have treated every word as if it were a matter of life or death. But that would have drawn more attention to his condition instead of his core message.

Key Lesson: The audience is more apt to have fun and cherish life if they see you doing so in your speeches.

5. Get Personal

This may seem obvious, but the last lesson I’d like to highlight is to get personal with your audience. Or, phrased in the opposite way, don’t hide your personal side from the audience.

To some extent, this entire speech is personal. Fair enough. The content of the speech are the personal lessons Randy Pausch has learned through life, and he illuminates these through personal stories.

Still, there is a way to tell personal stories while still remaining distant and somewhat clinical. You can tell a story about visiting Disneyland, but if you don’t show a glint in your eye, you’re holding something back.

Randy Pausch holds nothing back. He conveys the personal emotions in his stories. One of the most memorable moments in the lecture is when he has the audience sing Happy Birthday to his wife.

Key Lesson: Let your guard down. Showing emotion is one of the best ways to connect with an audience.

The Last Lecture: Video, Transcript, and Book

• Download the entire video. You can then watch it offline or schedule a viewing with your family, colleagues, Toastmasters club, etc.
• Download the speech transcript.
• Read The Last Lecture book, on which Randy Pausch comments:

A book allows me to cover many, many more stories from my life and the attendant lessons I hope my kids can take from them. … The book is a far more personal look at my childhood dreams and all the lessons I’ve learned. Putting words on paper, I’ve found, was a better way for me to share all the yearnings I have regarding my wife, children and other loved ones.

Thank you, Randy, for sharing these lessons with us.

Similar Articles You May Like... Speech Critique: Dan Pink (TED 2009) How to Speak: 7 Speaking Tips from Patrick Henry Winston Video Critique: J.A. Gamache (Toastmasters, 2007) Speech Critique: Steve Jobs (Stanford, 2005) Video Critique: Al Gore (TED, 2006) Critique: Lessig Method Presentation Style (Dick Hardt, Identity 2.0, OSCON 2005)

Have a Question? Contact me anytime, or find me on Twitter: @6minutes

Andrew Dlugan is the editor and founder of Six Minutes. He teaches courses, leads seminars, coaches speakers, and strives to avoid Suicide by PowerPoint. He is an award-winning public speaker and speech evaluator. Andrew is a father and husband who resides in British Columbia, Canada.

This article focuses on the sixth step: critiquing your speech so you can learn from your strengths and weaknesses. Thus, a self-critique is really the first step in preparation for your next speech.

Why Critique Your Presentation Skills?

Great speakers realize that presentation skills are not easily mastered in one or two or ten speeches. Speaking skills are improved incrementally one speech at a time.

To realize these incremental improvements, it is essential to periodically review your skills. Some people prefer to do this review once a week or once a month; I recommend that you review your skills after every speech, especially if you are a novice speaker just dipping your toes into the public speaking pool.

Critiquing Your Own Speech

It only takes a few minutes to review a speech, and the best time to do it is the same day that you delivered it. Your delivery is still fresh in your mind, as is your preparation for the speech.

When critiquing your own speech, you can apply many of the same criteria that you would when critiquing someone else’s speech. You will find an extensive list of these criteria in a previous Six Minutes article about speech analysis.

Those criteria are a great start, but you can also ask yourself many other questions too.

• Overall, were you satisfied with your final speech? If not, why not?
• Did you achieve your objective? Was your core message received by the audience?
• Were you confident during your delivery? Were you more nervous or less nervous than previous speeches?
• What audience feedback did you receive during or after delivery of the speech? What strengths were mentioned? What weaknesses were revealed?
• What did you think of your delivery?
• Did you have any stumbles? Were they caused by nervousness, or was there another cause?
• How long did you speak? Was this shorter or longer than you had planned? If you were under time, this may be an indication that your speaking rate was a bit fast. If you were over time, this may be an indication that you should have cut more material.
• Did you try any new techniques, either in the preparation phase or in your delivery? If so, what did you think? What lessons can you extract?

Depending on the context of the speech, a few other questions include:

• Was your pre-speech audience analysis accurate? If not, what did you learn about this audience that you could apply to the speech to make it better?
• If you led a Q&A session during the presentation, how did it go? From the types of questions asked, did it seem like your audience “got” the message?
• If you obtained an audio recording, what did you learn from listening to it? Was your voice clear throughout? Did you have any distracting habits? (e.g. um’s, ah’s, trailing off at the end of sentences)
• If you obtained a video recording, what did you learn from watching it? How was your posture and eye contact? Were your gestures varied and timed well? Did you have any distracting habits?

And, one final question:

• If you were going to deliver the same speech to the same audience, what would you do differently?

Remember that the aim of the self-critique is not to beat yourself up over any slips or mistakes you might have made. Instead, the true aim is to celebrate your successes and look ahead to see how you can improve for your next speech.

Self-Critique Example — Face the Wind

Overall, I’m very happy with my 2007 contest speech Face the Wind. I won the club, area, and division contests, and presented on the “big stage” at the district conference.

Unfortunately, I didn’t achieve the goal I had set for myself — winning the District 21 Speech Contest. I felt that I could have won, but the field of ten contestants was very strong.

Here’s my self-assessment, aided by the fact that I have an excellent video of my performance!

Speech Self-Critique: Strengths

• I did my best. I honestly felt that I delivered the best possible speech that my skills allowed at that given time. As I was walking off the stage, I wanted to give someone a high-five because I knew the delivery was my best.
• Gestures and Staging. I felt my choreography was second to none. I received numerous compliments on this aspect of the speech. This made me quite happy because I had spent a great deal of time working on gestures and staging.
• I got laughter from the audience in most places where I was aiming for it.
• Several audience members suggested that I have the skill set to be a full-time motivational speaker.
• I had lots of fun through the whole process! I received such positive encouragement from so many people. The organizers of the district speech contest treated the contestants like royalty!

Speech Self-Critique: Weaknesses

• I felt that some body movements were a little rigid at times, particularly during the speech opening. Was this the result of too much preparation (robotic), or not enough preparation to make the movements more fluid?
  • In the future, I should videotape my rehearsal sessions to see if I can pick up on this trait.
• I think my timing and pauses could have been a little better in my delivery of humor punchlines.
  • In the future, I need to work on writing so I have better punchlines and punch words.
• In a few instances, when I lowered the volume of my voice, I think I went too quiet. It may not have been loud enough for everyone to hear.
  • In the future, I need to keep my voice strong even during “quiet” lines.
• Some feedback I received hinted that the core message could have been stronger by eliminating the entire Maximus story, and instead using the time for a stronger (and lengthier) call-to-action. Personally, I thought I needed this story to make a human connection. However, I concede that I’m probably a little too close to the story (i.e. my nephew!) to be entirely objective.
  • In the future, I need to solicit more feedback specifically about the core message and what might be done to strengthen it. Perhaps I need to devote a little more time to speech writing, and less to delivery techniques.

A question for you, my esteemed readers… How could I have improved the speech?

Next in the Speech Preparation Series

The last article in the Speech Preparation Series examines Toastmasters Speech Contests and the preparation necessary to be successful.

Similar Articles You May Like... Speech Preparation #8: How to Practice Your Presentation Speech Critique: Dan Pink (TED 2009) Six Thinking Hats and the Public Speaker Speech Critique: Elizabeth Gilbert @ TED (Author of Eat, Pray, Love) Speech Critique: Jacqueline Novogratz (TED 2009) How can you inspire your audience? Ask 10-year-old Dalton Sherman.

Have a Question? Contact me anytime, or find me on Twitter: @6minutes

Andrew Dlugan is the editor and founder of Six Minutes. He teaches courses, leads seminars, coaches speakers, and strives to avoid Suicide by PowerPoint. He is an award-winning public speaker and speech evaluator. Andrew is a father and husband who resides in British Columbia, Canada.

Have you heard this claim?
“Practicing makes me robotic. My speeches are better and more natural if I just work from my outline.”

This may be acceptable for scenarios where you don’t care about the result, but in all other cases, it’s hogwash.

The eighth in the Speech Preparation Series, this article provides practical ideas for maximizing the benefit from your practice time.

Why Practice? Does Practice Make Perfect?

Practicing your speech is essential, but I’d be foolish to suggest that practice alone will result in a “that was the best speech I’ve ever heard” response from your audience. For this, you need to master essential public speaking skills and build up experience doing so.

So, while practice you won’t necessarily make you perfect, you will reap significant benefits by practicing your speech at least a couple times:

• Discover awkward phrases and tongue-twisters that you did not notice when writing and editing. Speaking the words out loud exposes flaws that reading does not.
• Gauge your energy level. Does delivering this speech fire you up? Or are you bored with it?
• Gauge your timing. Once you get more experienced, you will learn how many words can fit in a 10-minute time slot. Until then, however, practicing the complete speech is the best way to know if you are under or over time.
• Reduce nervousness. Rehearsing even one time will improve your confidence in your material.

How to Rehearse Your Speech

You might practice for 60 hours. You might practice for 60 minutes. Either way, here are a few tips that will help you achieve maximum benefit from time spent rehearsing:

• Re-create the speech setting
  Reading your speech at a desk (or from your computer screen) is not optimal unless you are preparing for a webcast. Try to duplicate the speech setting as much as you can.
  • Practice in the room where you’ll be speaking, if you can.
  • Stand up. You get more realistic voice projection.
  • Rehearse with props and visual aids.
  • Arrange an audience. Practicing with an audience is better than practicing without one… even if it is not your target audience.
  • Consider what you will wear when your speech will be delivered. Will it add complications? Inhibit gestures or movement in any way?
• Take notes
  Don’t hesitate to stop yourself in the middle of your rehearsal to jot down ideas as they come to you. Capture internal feelings immediately.
• Experiment
  Try out different voices, gestures, or staging. This is especially important for your opening, conclusion, and any other key points. Give yourself confidence knowing that these lines will be delivered precisely as you intended.
• Time yourself
  You can easily do this yourself, but it helps if someone else can time you. Insert planned pauses, and insert delays when you expect laughter or some other audience response. This may feel funny, but an accurate timing estimate will tell you if you need to do more editing.
• Use all that you learn to edit your speech and make it better.

Soliciting Feedback

Practicing your speech is good.
Practicing your speech with an audience is better.
Practicing your speech with someone who will give you honest feedback is best.

Practicing with an audience gives you valuable feedback:

• Is your humor drawing smiles and laughs or is it missing completely?
• Are you keeping the audience’s attention throughout?
• Are you receiving positive feedback in the form of nodding heads and smiles, or is a blank stare the most common expression?

After the rehearsal, actively solicit feedback. Make it clear that you want honest opinions about what could be improved. A dozen “Good speech!” comments may boost your ego, but it won’t boost the quality of your speech. To reap feedback that will improve your speech, ask open-ended questions like these:

• What was your favorite element in the speech? Why?
• What would you like to see improved?
• How can I improve my speech for next time?

This is far better than asking yes/no questions such as “Did you like it?”

If the presentation is important to you, and you don’t have a test audience that provides you with valuable feedback, hire a coach! Hire me or one of thousands of speech coaches.

Audio Recordings

Audio recordings help you gauge many delivery qualities, including speaking pace, pitch, and pauses.

• Assess which phrases sound “good” and which are awkward to listen to.
• Listen for um’s, ah’s, and other filler words.
• Notice if and when you stumbled.
• Time the overall speech (which would be easy to do with a watch), as well as individual segments of the speech (which you cannot do unless you stop and start numerous times).

I recently acquired the inexpensive Olympus WS-311M digital voice recorder for speech rehearsals. It is small (easy to carry) and has all the features I need for recording and playing back speeches. I encourage you to check it out along with competing products.

• As I’m writing this article, it is selling for $79 US [$49 off the list price]. That’s much less than I paid. That’s life.

Video Recordings

A video recording of yourself speaking is an incredibly powerful tool. All of your habits — both good and bad — are captured. In addition to the audio assessments mentioned in the previous section, you can also learn:

• Are your gestures working?
• Are your gestures synchronized well with your words?
• Are your gestures varied, or are they monotonous?
• Are you smiling?
• Are you fidgeting, or displaying any other distracting mannerisms?
• Does your body sway from side to side?
• Eye contact is difficult to assess if the recording was made without a full audience, but you should be able to tell at least if your eyes are up, or down at your toes.
• If you are using visual aids, are your transitions smooth?
• If you are using a prop, was it handled smoothly?

I own an older model Sony DCR-TRV33 which records digitally on MiniDV tapes, but I’m sure any modern video camera is sufficient. The one luxury upgrade I wish I had is a lavalier microphone to capture better sound quality than the camera’s built-in microphone.

Practical Example — Face the Wind

I practiced my 2007 contest speech Face the Wind more than any other speech I’ve ever delivered. Here are the most valuable lessons I learned:

• The speech (in various iterations) was delivered formally four times at the club, area, division, and district speech contests.
• I rehearsed over 100 times. I rehearsed the speech in the car driving to/from work every day for about six weeks. I rehearsed in front of my wife and daughter. I rehearsed in the hotel room before the district contest. I rehearsed every chance I could.
• In the car, I obviously couldn’t do the gestures or staging, but I experimented heavily with different vocal variety, and then jotted down my observations when I reached my destination.
• After each of the first three contests, I sought feedback from audience members. In all cases, I received wonderful suggestions which made the speech better. Significant editing was performed after each contest.
• I sat down with a trusted fellow speaker and walked through the entire speech, line by line. This detailed review helped me perform some tough editing. It is easier to cut lines you love when someone looks you in the eye and tells you that they aren’t working.

Next in the Speech Preparation Series

You are ready to deliver your speech. Good luck! You will be awesome.

Immediately after the speech, the time is ripe for preparing for the next one. Productive self-critiquing is the focus of the next article in the Speech Preparation Series.

Similar Articles You May Like... 5 Speaking Resolutions to Wow Your Audience in 2012 Speech Preparation #9: Prepare Now for Your Next Speech Speech Critique: Dan Pink (TED 2009) Six Thinking Hats and the Public Speaker Pump Up Your Speaking Voice with a Strength Training Workout Speech Critique: Elizabeth Gilbert @ TED (Author of Eat, Pray, Love)

Have a Question? Contact me anytime, or find me on Twitter: @6minutes

Andrew Dlugan is the editor and founder of Six Minutes. He teaches courses, leads seminars, coaches speakers, and strives to avoid Suicide by PowerPoint. He is an award-winning public speaker and speech evaluator. Andrew is a father and husband who resides in British Columbia, Canada.

Majora Carter’s TED talk has both incredible strengths — passion, energy, authenticity — and one unfortunate weakness — rapid speaking rate. Both extremes are worthy of public speaking analysis.

I encourage you to:

1. Watch the video;
2. Read the analysis in this speech critique; and
3. Share your thoughts on this presentation.

Click here to view the embedded video.

What is Phenomenal about this Speech?

Guy Kawasaki has written a thorough 15-point speech review, describing the many wonderful aspects of this talk. His entire review is worth reading, but I’d like to quote a few excerpts which echoed my own analysis:

• She immediately provides a clear problem statement. (1:00-2:00)
• She personalizes her story all the way through the speech.
• She shows raw emotions and unveils a piece of her soul when she breaks into tears when talking about her brother being gunned down. (5:10)
• She capitalizes on alliteration: “pimps and pushers and prostitutes” (6:50) and repetition: “economic degradation begets environmental degradation which begets social degradation” (7:24).
• Her presence exudes power and confidence without a trace of arrogance, fear, or condescension.
• She ends with an insanely great call-to-action: “Please don’t waste me.” (17:57)

In short, Majora Carter exhibits incredible passion — more in 19 minutes than many of my college professors in an entire semester. Her message is captivating, and her enthusiasm is infectious. All speakers can learn from Majora Carter.

But… it could be much, much better

This talk by Majora Carter is not without flaws. Here’s what Guy Kawasaki wrote about her speaking rate:

• She speaks rapidly—bordering on too rapidly, but she is articulate at all times. And she slows her cadence for her most important points. You can tell that she’s trying to observe her time limit—communicating that she respects the audience’s time.

While I agreed with much of Guy Kawasaki’s analysis, I believe he is being too generous on this point.

Majora Carter speaks too fast for much of this talk. Period. It does not “border on too rapidly.” It is too rapid.

Her talk is packed with dense information, often delivered at a rate too fast for many in the audience to absorb. Garr Reynolds recently wrote about a presentation by economist Robert Frank. One of Frank’s slides asks these questions:

• How much can I cover today?
  vs.
  How much can my students absorb today?

While Majora Carter may be respecting the audience’s time, she is not respecting the audience’s capacity to absorb information.

I have the luxury of watching this video three times, pausing, and rewinding to get the meaning. This is a luxury that your audience rarely has. More importantly, your audience will rarely give you more than one opportunity. Overloading them with information is not effective.

Her speaking rate is so fast that she trips over her own words multiple times. At times, she seems breathless. Used sparingly, a rapid speaking rate can be used to very good effect by a speaker. However, when most of the talk is delivered at this rate, that’s a clear sign that too much information is being presented.

What’s the Solution? Aggressive Editing.

If you have a 20-minute time slot and 40 minutes of information, the solution is not to double your speaking rate. The solution is to cut the material in half. Keep the best lines, the best stories, and the most powerful images. Be ruthless in trimming the rest.

Depending on your speaking scenario, you may be able to include additional facts, figures, statistics, stories, and diagrams in handout material for the audience.

What about Reading from a Script?

It is generally better to avoid reading from notes, but that in itself didn’t bother me in this presentation. Despite frequently reading, Majora connects deeply with the audience throughout the talk. Her face is expressive, her body is active, and her vocal variety is excellent. She compensates well for the use of notes.

The indirect problem with reading notes is that it encourages rapid delivery. This is a problem that I have personally battled. In the past, I often wrote with red pen in margins of my notes: “SLOW DOWN!” In recent years, I go without notes or with only a few key phrases to guide me along. The time it takes me to occasionally catch my thoughts is time well spent — it allows the audience time to digest what I’ve just said.

Critical analysis notwithstanding, this is still a fantastic talk from Majora Carter. It could have been better with some aggressive editing and a slower delivery. [For contrast, watch this 2-minute video from Majora Carter demonstrating a much better speaking rate.]

Your Thoughts?

Did you enjoy this speech? What did you like most? What did you think of the speaking rate?

Similar Articles You May Like... Speech Critique: Elizabeth Gilbert @ TED (Author of Eat, Pray, Love) Six Simple Techniques for Presenting Data: Hans Rosling (TED, 2006) Video Critique: Al Gore (TED, 2006) Speech Critique: Dan Pink (TED 2009) Speech Critique: Jacqueline Novogratz (TED 2009) Video Critique: J.A. Gamache (Toastmasters, 2007)

Have a Question? Contact me anytime, or find me on Twitter: @6minutes

Andrew Dlugan is the editor and founder of Six Minutes. He teaches courses, leads seminars, coaches speakers, and strives to avoid Suicide by PowerPoint. He is an award-winning public speaker and speech evaluator. Andrew is a father and husband who resides in British Columbia, Canada.

Many of the techniques described in this series of articles were honed during several years of attending and competing in Toastmasters Evaluation Contests. In both 2006 and 2007, I reached the District 21 finals, taking 2nd place in 2007. [Update: I won the District 21 Evaluation Contest in 2008.]

This article, the fifth in the Speech Analysis Series, inspects Toastmasters evaluation contests from several angles:

• How does the contest work?
• Why should you attend?
• Why should you be a test speaker?
• Why should you compete?
• How can you win?

Why have Toastmasters Evaluation Contests?

The official contest rules (PDF) state the following motivation for annual evaluation contests:

1. To encourage development of evaluation skills and to recognize the best as encouragement to all.
2. To provide an opportunity to learn by observing the more proficient evaluators who have benefited from their Toastmasters training.

How a Toastmasters Evaluation Contest Works

Each evaluation contest follows a simple, standard agenda:

1. The contest begins with a short speech given by a test speaker.
2. Contestants watch and listen to the test speaker. Most critique the speech with the help of an evaluation template.
3. At the conclusion of the speech, contestants are ushered out of the room.
4. They are given five minutes to review notes. At the end of this period, their notes are gathered.
5. One at a time, contestants are brought back to the room to deliver a two- to three-minute evaluation, with their notes (if desired).
6. Judges score each contestant. Scores are tallied to determine the winners.

The contest cycle begins each year at the local club level. Winners then proceed to area, division, and district level contests.

Why You Should Attend a Toastmasters Evaluation Contest

If you are truly interested in improving your speech evaluation skills, I encourage you to attend one or more contests, even if you are not a Toastmasters member (generally speaking, contests are open to the public).

• Contests are entertaining.
• Contests are inexpensive. Generally, a nominal fee is charged to cover the cost of refreshments.
• You can learn from the test speaker (often quite experienced).
• Contestants are generally quite proficient in the art of evaluation. This is particularly true at higher levels of the contest.
• The variety of approaches and analytical observations will surely complement your existing evaluation skills. My eyes were opened the first time I attended a contest outside of my club; the observations made by the contestants were very different from the status quo for me.

Why You Should be a Toastmasters Evaluation Contest Test Speaker

A few years ago, I was invited to be the test speaker for a nearby club contest. Prior to this, I had never visited that club. After delivering the test speech, I then listened with fascination as the five contestants evaluated my speech. I learned a great deal from this process.

• The breadth of comments was much wider than you can get from a single evaluation (or even from a self-evaluation).
• Receiving multiple evaluations really puts a spotlight on any glaring areas needing improvement. When four of five evaluators suggest you have a weakness in a certain area, then you really need to listen with open ears.
• As with areas needing improvement, multiple evaluations will also highlight your strongest skills and techniques.

One word of caution – I don’t recommend being a test speaker if you are a very inexperienced speaker. While some people crave as much feedback as possible, others are not yet ready to be reminded that there are so many things for them to improve. It can be a very humbling experience.

Why You Should Compete in a Toastmasters Evaluation Contest

I recommend that you compete the next time you have the opportunity to do so.

• You will have fun!
• The added pressure of a contest (and perhaps a new venue) forces you to step outside your speaking comfort zone. By doing so, you will grow, not just as an evaluator, but as a speaker as well.
• You might win!
• Whether you win or not, you will learn new techniques from the other contestants.
• Generally, each level that you advance brings a larger audience.
• Stage time, stage time, stage time.

How to Win a Toastmasters Evaluation Contest

If you have dreams of winning, then you must familiarize yourself with the judging criteria:

• 40 points: Analytical Quality
• 30 points: Recommendations
• 15 points: Technique
• 15 points: Summation

Based on my own experience and from conversations with other contestants, judges, and spectators, I think the most common reasons for not winning are:

1. Contestant delivers great “praise” and “areas for improvement”, but neglects specific suggestions to improve. This contestant will score well on Analytical Quality (40 points), but poorly on Recommendations (30 points).

• Tip: Remember the meat, vegetables, and cheese from the sandwich technique.

2. Contestant fails to watch the clock and does not have time to summarize — a potential loss of 15 points.

• Tip: Don’t try to cover everything. Use the five minutes with your notes wisely to pick out only your best points. With my speech evaluation form, I typically capture about twice as many things as I can describe in a 3-minute evaluation.

3. Contestant covers only the points mentioned by other contestants. It is possible to deliver a good (or even great) evaluation, but still score poorly because you will invariably be compared to other contestants.

• Tip: Hone your speech critique skills. Try to avoid the obvious elements of the speech which all other contestants will notice. Instead, aim to analyze elements many will miss.

4. Contestant has marvelous analysis, but poor evaluation delivery. They score low on the 15 points for Technique.

• Tip: Based on my personal experience, I think delivery tends to be weighted even higher by most judges. Particularly at higher levels when many contestants are very strong, the contestant with the most dynamic delivery often wins.

How about you? Are you an evaluation contest champion? A veteran competitor? A first-time contestant?

Share your evaluation contest experiences and tips in the comments below.

Good luck, and happy evaluating!

Similar Articles You May Like... Speech Preparation #10: Prepare to Win a Toastmasters Speech Contest Interview with LaShunda Rundles: 2008 World Champion of Public Speaking The Olympics of Oratory: World Championship of Public Speaking Lessons I Learned from Toastmasters Speech Contests Speech Analysis #4: Evaluation Forms, Tools, and Resources Speech Analysis #3: Modified Sandwich Technique for Evaluations

Have a Question? Contact me anytime, or find me on Twitter: @6minutes

Andrew Dlugan is the editor and founder of Six Minutes. He teaches courses, leads seminars, coaches speakers, and strives to avoid Suicide by PowerPoint. He is an award-winning public speaker and speech evaluator. Andrew is a father and husband who resides in British Columbia, Canada.