So do all of your colleagues with average presentation skills.

Let’s see why this is so…

Cookies and the Cookie Police

Suppose you are baking cookies. After mixing up the dough, you scoop up a bit with your fingers, roll it into a ball, and plop it on the cookie sheet. Repeat this 50 times, and you’ve got an oven full of cookies. Repeat this 500 times, and you’ve got a freezer full of cookies — or, perhaps, enough for a bake sale.

Now, suppose that you were being investigated by the Homemade Cookie Police. After you plop each cookie onto the sheet, they carefully lift it up and weigh it. For all 500 cookies, they record the weight. When they finish, they prepare a chart (presumably for their PowerPoint presentation back at Headquarters).

If you are a normal human being, the chart would look something like this:

• Most of the cookies would have a weight very close to the average, give or take a few tenths of a gram.
• Small numbers of cookies would be either very small or very large.

The very small cookies might burn in the oven, and the very large cookies might be raw, but the vast majority of cookies would be delicious!

Humans and the Bell Curve

Why did the cookie weight/frequency chart turn out the way it did? Because you’re human!

You may have recognized the shape of the chart as the Bell Curve. (You might know it as a normal distribution, or some other name.)  It has many fascinating applications in mathematics and statistics, but perhaps the most fascinating is that if you consider any variable in a large population, the histogram (the chart of values versus the count) tends to follow the Bell Curve.

In the case of cookies, the weight is a variable because you aren’t a robot.

As another example, consider adult heights. The average height for North American men is about 69 ½ inches. (North American women are about 64 ½ inches.) Height is a variable, and the distribution of heights follows the Bell Curve.

• A large majority of male adults have heights around 69 ½ inches, perhaps a little above or a little below.
• There are, of course, some really tall people and some really short people. Relatively speaking, however, there are fewer of these people.

When it comes to height, being average is good. In fact, it’s preferred. Clothes, cars, and airplane seats are all designed for you. To be extremely short or extremely tall means a life of physical inconvenience.

As another example, consider a sport like golf and let’s look at how well people can hit the golf ball.

• Professional golfers can really smoke it, but there aren’t many professional golfers.
• Some people can barely hit it at all (perhaps they are too frail or maybe just too clumsy to swing a club). There are only a few of these people, too.
• The vast majority of us are in the middle. We’re just skilled enough to avoid injuring ourselves.

When it comes to golf, we’d like to be able to hit the ball at a professional level, but it’s okay to be average. Being average is mediocre, and that’s fine for golf. It’s understandable because most of us never received any golf lessons. Your golf skills are only used a few times per year (or in a lifetime), and your career success doesn’t depend much on your ability with a golf club.

Public Speaking and the Bell Curve

It’s a little more complex to quantify presentation skills, but suppose for a moment that you could. (Perhaps the number of minutes you can speak without anyone getting bored? Maybe the number of listeners who are motivated by your call-to-action?)

On the high end, you’ve got Winston Churchill, Martin Luther King, and Steve Jobs.

On the low end, you’ve got hermits and people who cannot communicate at all.

In the middle, you have the majority of people with average presentation skills. Is this good? Or is this bad?

Here’s the key to this article: The line between being an effective communicator and an ineffective communicator is not down the middle of the chart. It’s over to the right. That’s where you want to be. That’s where you need to be.

Statistically speaking, you can suck and still be an average speaker. Most of your colleagues are. This is the Death by PowerPoint abyss. This is the 15 filler words per minute zone. This is the “What the heck is this speaker talking about?” zone.

• Presentation skills are not cookies.
  Chocolate chips won’t compensate for you being an average speaker. Your audience spends a lifetime in meetings listening to people who are average speakers and wishing they were somewhere else.
• Presentation skills are not like height.
  The world is not designed for average speakers to excel. People do not rally around you if you have an average ability to convey your ideas.
• Presentation skills are not like golf.
  It’s not okay to be a mediocre. Your communication skills matter!

To Be a Good Speaker, You Can’t Be Average

Why is the average speaker so bad? Like golf, most people in the world never receive any formal communications training, and they never pursue any informal training either. We all pay the price. Think of the last 50 presentations you have attended. How many kept you interested throughout? Ten? Five? Fewer than five?

The small fraction of the population who strive to improve their skills (that’s you if you are reading this article) has a huge advantage.  If your communication skills aren’t already above average, they will be. And above-average communication skills give you a huge advantage in life. Your ideas get communicated and noticed. You excel in interviews. You are seen as a leader.

The good news is that anyone can improve their skills with dedication, effort, and time. Read Six Minutes. Read other speaking blogs. Read communication books. Join a Toastmasters club. Volunteer to speak whenever you can. Practice. Practice. Practice.

Don’t be an average communicator. Be effective.

Similar Articles You May Like... Book Review: Confessions of a Public Speaker (Scott Berkun) Love the Process and Improve Your Speaking Skills 8 Faulty Speaker Assumptions and How to Fix Them How to Deliver Group Presentations: The Unified Team Approach How to Deliver the Talk of Your Life The 7 Deadly Sins of Public Speaking

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.

Imagine yourself speaking at the World Championship of Public Speaking. You’ve written a speech from your heart, and you deliver the best performance of your life. When the winner is announced, it’s you!

Possible? Yes.
You can win.

That which separates those who win from those who do not win is not lifetime speaking experience nor contest experience. Not gestures. Not vocal variety. Not rhetorical devices. Not overall delivery skills.

The most critical discriminator between those who win and those who do not is preparation.

Believing You Can Win

Henry Ford observed:

Whether you think you can or think you can’t – you are right.

If you believe you can win a Toastmasters Speech Contest, then you can win. Believing you can win will motivate you to give it the proverbial 110% (even though that is a mathematical absurdity).

There are no shortcuts. The lessons contained in the previous nine articles of the Speech Preparation Series apply to speeches of all types, including Toastmasters speech contests. So, a necessary first step to preparing a great contest speech is to prepare a great speech. Period.

However, a Toastmaster speech contest is a unique speaking situation, just as pitching a business proposal to angel investors is a unique speaking situation. Both require additional preparation steps which are customized to the situation.

Toastmasters Speech Contest Criteria

To see what makes a Toastmasters speech contest unique, look no further than the Judging Guide set forth by Toastmasters International.

The Judging Guide consists of seven categories totalling 100 points as follows:

• Content (50 total)
  • 20 points: Speech Development
  • 15 points: Speech Effectiveness
  • 15 points: Speech Value
• Delivery (30 total)
  • 10 points: Physical
  • 10 points: Voice
  • 10 points: Manner
• Language (20 total)
  • 10 points: Appropriateness
  • 10 points: Correctness

It doesn’t take a genius to realize that your goal is to attain maximum points in as many categories as you can. Study these criteria and check them against your speech iteratively.

10 Tips for Winning a Toastmasters Speech Contest

Here are the top ten lessons I learned through years of competing in Toastmaster speech contests.

1. Craft Compelling Content

Content counts for one half of the judging points. i.e. content is king. Still, many inexperienced speech contestants sacrifice content in the pursuit of perfect delivery. Don’t make this mistake. Delivery is important, but content is more important.

2. Make it Universal

Once you move beyond the club level, your audience in general (and the judges in particular) almost certainly comprise a broad demographic cross-section. Highly technical topics or those which appeal to only a subset of the audience must be avoided. Winning topics are those which have universal appeal.
e.g. life lessons, love, family, personal development, beating the odds, adherence to a code of conduct

3. Include Humor

You won’t see humor anywhere on the judge’s guide (there is a separate Toastmasters Humorous Speech Contest). Nonetheless, humor is an essential element. Humorous anecdotes or phrases should be used to support your core message.

4. Ask Probing Questions

Because you know your topic so well, it can be difficult for you to analyze speech development and speech effectiveness from the perspective of your audience. When you rehearse, ask your practice audience specific probing questions such as:

• What was the key message? If they respond with something that doesn’t match the message you intended, you have a problem.
• Was the message clear?
• Were there any confusing words, phrases, or parts?
• Did it connect with you? [There is no speech which will connect with every person, but if your test audience is bored, then there's a good chance your real audience will be as well.]

5. Avoid Forcing Unnatural Gestures

With a full ten points for gestures (i.e. “Physical”), it is tempting to force gestures into a speech where they might not belong. To avoid doing this, practice the speech out loud before you deliberately script any gestures. Notice the gestures your body naturally makes, and then work on perfecting the delivery of those gestures.

6. Avoid Forcing Unnatural Vocal Variety

Don’t write a speech, and then say “I need to insert loud elements, soft elements, high pitch, low pitch, fast pace, and slow pace using the words I’ve written.” Rather, apply vocal variety naturally to enhance the words. If the resulting speech is still vocally flat, then perhaps you need to rewrite sections.

7. Improve at Every Level

As you progress up through the Toastmasters speech contest levels, competition becomes increasingly stronger. While good speeches may win at the club level, they may not win at area or division. Don’t relax and think that your victory at one level will earn you victory at the next. Solicit feedback and improve your speech at every level.

8. Seek Magic Moments

Assuming your competition is as prepared as you are, the judges will be faced with a difficult decision: how to distinguish between two comparable speeches? The best way to distinguish yourself is to incorporate at least one utterly unforgettable moment. It might be a prop. It might be a gesture. You might sing. You might have a particularly effective method of interacting with the audience. Your speech needs some quality that no other competing speech has.

It may not be enough for you to leave the impression “That was a great speech.” Instead, your goal should be to have the judges thinking “Wow, did you see that?”

9. End Positive and End Strong

You can take your audience for a ride on an emotional trampoline, but always end with a positive emotion or a feeling of hope. Judges are human. Humans like to feel good. The last impression you leave before the judge marks the ballot should put them in a positive frame of mind.

Your conclusion is always an important speech element, but its importance is heightened in speech contests because it is the last thing spoken before the judges switch their attention to the score sheet. Equally important, a strong conclusion will increase applause from the audience. In turn, this will have a positive effect on judges.

10. Don’t “Try” to Win

As you stand ready to deliver your first words, the right frame of mind is critical. For example:

• “I have seven minutes to deliver an important message to the audience.” The focus is on the audience and the message.
• “I have seven minutes to impress the judges and win the contest.” The focus is on you and your ego.

Adopt the former frame of mind. Your passionate performance will propel you to victory.

Conclusion of the Speech Preparation Series

This concludes the Speech Preparation Series. I hope you found it interesting and valuable. I welcome any feedback you have on individual articles, or on the series as a whole. Please share your own advice for speech preparation.

Remember: Proper preparation prevents presentation predicaments!

Prepare well. Speak well.

Similar Articles You May Like... Speech Analysis #5: Toastmasters Evaluation Contests 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 Average Speakers Suck. Don’t be Average. Toastmasters Speech 6: Vocal Variety

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.

1. Uninteresting and tiresome; dull.
2. A speaker reading their entire speech.

Presentations are more lively when a speaker speaks from the heart, from memory, or from minimal notes.

But, what if you simply must read an entire speech or a portion of a speech from script? Is there anything you can do to salvage a successful presentation?

In an article devoted to mastering the teleprompter, Pete Ryckman reminds us that:

[...] sooner or later, you’ll need to give a speech word-for-word from a script.

Maybe your employer or a legal team insists that the speech be read from a script. Maybe the context is too delicate to allow for any ad-lib. Maybe you were not given adequate time to practice thoroughly.

When you simply must read from a script, there are some things you can do to salvage your speaking reputation in this scenario:

1. Author James Humes devotes an entire chapter of Speak Like Churchill, Stand Like Lincoln to a technique used by master speakers. The key of this technique is to only speak to the audience when your eyes are up off the text.
2. Practice with a teleprompter so that when you need to use it, you will already be comfortable with it. CuePrompter.com is a free resource which simulates the teleprompter experience. The graphic accompanying this article is a snapshot from this tool.
3. As much as possible, compensate for your lack of eye contact with excellent vocal variety. This will draw audience attention away from the script you are reading and toward the message you are conveying. To do this, you will need to practice a few times through the script; otherwise, you will almost certainly be monotone and flat.
4. Similarly, compensate with broad gestures and other movement. Lack of movement will certainly make the eyes of your audience droopy.

Remember, this advice is only for those very rare instances when you must read from a script. In all other cases, don’t do it. People don’t like being read to in a presentation. Put in the necessary preparation time to ensure that you do not need to torture your audience.

Similar Articles You May Like... Average Speakers Suck. Don’t be Average. Ethos, Pathos, Logos: 3 Pillars of Public Speaking Book Review: Confessions of a Public Speaker (Scott Berkun) What Does Your Personal Brand Say About You as a Speaker? How to Connect With Your Audience by Moving Closer 8 Faulty Speaker Assumptions and How to Fix Them

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.

This article provides a speech evaluation form and explains how it supports you in studying and evaluating speeches.

Speech Evaluation Form

First things first… download a copy of the free speech evaluation form.

I created this form for use in Toastmasters Evaluation Contests (a topic of a future article here), but I have since used it as a general purpose speech evaluation template.

Why this speech evaluation tool may work for you…

• It is simple — one single-sided page.
• Lots of white space, to facilitate taking notes.
• Flexible. The labels and boxes are not tied to any particular style of speech, e.g. speaking to inform
• Rows recognize the three broad areas to be analyzed: impact, content, and delivery. These are in order of importance from top to bottom.
• The critical nature of the Opening and Closing is recognized with dedicated rows on the form.
• Two columns emphasize the necessity to recognize both the strengths and weaknesses of a speech or speaker.
• Evaluation Opening and Evaluation Summation are for notes which lead to an oral evaluation (e.g. in Toastmasters). They can be ignored if you are analyzing the speech in a different context.

An alternate speech evaluation template…

At a speech evaluation workshop that I recently led, one speaker told me of the speech evaluation template that works for him.

It is wonderfully simple, consisting of just two rows (Content, Delivery) and three columns (I felt, I saw, I heard). “Content – I Saw” might include things like props or slideware, while “Delivery – I Saw” might cover gestures or facial expressions. This template allowed him to effectively analyze the speech his way.

I strongly encourage you to develop a template that works for you. Maybe the examples here are perfect. Maybe they need a tweak. Maybe you need something entirely different as an aid to capture your thoughts and observations. Whatever the case, an evaluation template can help you.

Critiquing a Speech: Advice from the Blogosphere and Beyond

There’s some great advice elsewhere in the public speaking blogosphere and elsewhere on speech evaluation:

• How to Give a Killer Evaluation: lifehack.org
• Speech Self Critique Guide: Navy Speakers Bureau
• Evaluation Resources from Toastmasters New Zealand
  Includes “step-by-step approach” to speech evaluation, 10 steps to becoming an evaluation champion.
• Evaluation Template – Wendy Betteridge [PDF]
• The Seven Habits of Highly Effective Evaluators: Dr. Dilip Abayasekera, former Toastmasters International President

Next in the Speech Analysis Series

The next article in the series is Toastmasters Evaluation Contests.

Similar Articles You May Like... Speech Analysis #5: Toastmasters Evaluation Contests Speech Analysis #3: Modified Sandwich Technique for Evaluations Speech Analysis #2: The Art of Delivering Evaluations Speech Analysis #1: How to Study and Critique a Speech Average Speakers Suck. Don’t be Average. 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.

This article discusses different ways to structure the content of a speech evaluation. The basis for this method is the sandwich technique for evaluations.

Although the focus of this article is speech evaluations, the techniques discussed here can be applied to any situation where you provide professional constructive criticism. e.g. evaluating a co-worker

The Basic Sandwich Technique for Evaluations

The basic technique is as follows:

1. Begin the evaluation by highlighting strengths demonstrated by the speaker.
2. Then, discuss areas for improvement for the speaker.
3. Conclude by highlighting additional strengths of the presentation.

The critical feedback is sandwiched between positive comments. The theory is that the speaker will be more receptive to listening to (and acting on) the criticism if positive statements surround it.

This is a good basic formula for novice speech evaluators. It is the first method recommended in many Toastmasters clubs.

Weaknesses of the Basic Sandwich Technique

I see three potential weaknesses with the basic sandwich technique:

1. Good – Bad – Good

• The sandwich technique is often misinterpreted to be:
  good comments – bad comments – good comments
• Weakness: Critical feedback should not be viewed as a “bad” comment.

2. Serial Position Effect

• The serial position effect states that people tend to remember information from the beginning (primacy effect) and end (recency effect) of a series more than information presented in the middle.

• Weakness: Individuals will tend to remember their strengths, but not the critical feedback, thus hampering their ability to improve.

3. Incomplete “Critical Feedback”

• Critical feedback often consists entirely of “areas you can improve” or “things you need to work on” or “things I didn’t like.”

• Weakness: Most speakers need help not only realizing where they can improve, but how they can improve. In other words, they need specific suggestions for improvement.

A Modified Sandwich Technique

In an attempt to address these weaknesses, I suggest a modified sandwich technique with three components rather than two.

1. Sandwich Layer: Bread
   Evaluation Element: Praise – strengths exhibited by the speaker
2. Sandwich Layer: Condiments
   Evaluation Element: Areas for improvement – where can the speaker improve
3. Sandwich Layer: Meat, cheese, vegetables
   Evaluation Element: Specific suggestions – how can the speaker improve

Further, I suggest that feedback corresponding to these three elements can be mixed in any reasonable order, provided that all three elements are represented.

Advantages of this modified sandwich technique are:

• More emphasis on terms such as “praise”, “areas for improvement”, and “specific suggestions” will help avoid the good-bad-good pitfalls.
• The strict order of the basic sandwich technique (start and end with a compliment) is relaxed. The evaluator orders the elements in a more natural and authentic way.
• An increased emphasis on specific suggestions for improvement. Associating these with “meat, cheese, and veggies” indicates that they are the most nutritious element of the sandwich which helps the speaker grow and mature.

To illustrate the modified sandwich technique, I will run through a few helpful and not-so-helpful evaluation sandwiches.

The Whitewash Evaluation

• Sure, a whitewash sandwich (only bread!) tastes okay, but it is rather dry and will get boring very fast. There is minimal nutritional value.

• The whitewash evaluation should be avoided.

• A whitewash evaluation contains only praise. No areas for improvement. No specific suggestions. Often the result of a very inexperienced evaluator, or an evaluator who is trying to “be nice.”

The False Praise Evaluation

• Like the whitewash sandwich, this one consists of only bread… er, bread crumbs. It is light and airy and, in reality, consists of nothing at all.

• The false praise evaluation should be avoided.

• A false praise evaluation contains only praise, but it is not genuine. The evaluator says they like it the speech, but they really do not. Often the result of an evaluator trying really hard to be nice at the expense of their integrity. In the end, nobody wins with false praise. Be honest.

The All-Criticism Evaluation

• Imagine serving a guest in your house a big jar of mayonnaise for lunch. Even if they like mayonnaise, they would likely start getting sick after the first tablespoon. Condiments are valuable, but they need the rest of the sandwich to be nutritious.

• The all-criticism evaluation should be avoided.

• The all-criticism evaluation consists only of areas for improvement: “Your gestures were off, your eye contact was poor, your visuals were hard to read, your voice was scratchy, …” Everyone likes (honest) praise, so be sure to give them some. And areas for improvement are nice, but how do I improve?

The Narrow Evaluation

• Imagine a sandwich comprised of lots and lots of (the same) meat, a sprinkling of (one) sauce, and a nondescript bun.

• The narrow evaluation is perhaps not the best over time, but is acceptable in a pinch.

• The narrow evaluation has three components – praise, areas for improvement, and specific suggestions – but has very little variety. For example, imagine an evaluation where the evaluator discusses only one area for improvement, perhaps with a specific suggestion how to improve it. Sometimes, this is exactly what the speaker needs to overcome a certain deficiency in their skill set. However, when you are the evaluator, try not to serve up narrow evaluations like this all the time. Think variety!

The Layered Evaluation

• A layered sandwich has all the fixings, in ample quantity. It can be served traditionally as shown here, or open-faced, or in any other combination.

• The layered evaluation is my favorite. Supportive, dynamic, and educational.

• The layered evaluation consists of three components – praise, areas for improvement, and specific suggestions. There is lots of variety for all components. The evaluation is balanced, easy for the speaker to digest, and contains lots of helpful advice. An evaluation like this every day would make a very strong and healthy speaker.

In Summary

No matter how you choose to structure your evaluation, be sure it has the three necessary components of the modified sandwich technique:

1. Praise (bread) – to encourage the speaker
2. Areas for improvement (condiments) – to let the speaker know where you think they can improve
3. Specific suggestions (meat, vegetables, cheese) – to help the speaker know how they can improve

Similar Articles You May Like... Speech Analysis #5: Toastmasters Evaluation Contests Speech Analysis #4: Evaluation Forms, Tools, and Resources Speech Analysis #2: The Art of Delivering Evaluations Speech Analysis #1: How to Study and Critique a Speech Average Speakers Suck. Don’t be Average. 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.

The first article of the Speech Analysis Series explained how to study and critique a speech.

In this second article, we examine how to improve your own speaking skills by teaching others in the form of speech evaluations.

You should regularly provide evaluations for other speakers — not only because it is a nice thing to do, but because the process of evaluating another speaker helps you improve your own speaking skills dramatically.

Speech evaluations are a core element of the Toastmasters educational program. After every speech, one or more peers evaluates how well the speaker delivered their message. Frequent feedback from peers helps speakers improve their skills.

However, speech evaluation is not limited to the Toastmasters program.

• You can evaluate a co-worker’s presentation.
• You can give feedback to the leader of a volunteer group in your neighbourhood.
• Or, in a more formal relationship, you might provide a critique to a client you are coaching.

I recently led a speech evaluation workshop. In that workshop, we discussed the following tips for delivering helpful, encouraging, and effective speech evaluations.

1. Effective speech evaluations benefit everyone

I often hear statements like “Only the speaker gets any benefit from an evaluation of their speech.” This is false.

• You (as the evaluator) improve as a speaker by providing an evaluation. A great way to solidify your own knowledge is to teach it to others.
• The speaker becomes aware of both their strengths and areas with potential for improvement.
• The audience for the evaluation (if there is one, as in Toastmasters) benefits from hearing the evaluation and applying the lessons to their own presentations.
• Future audiences benefit from improved speakers.

2. Learn the objectives of the speaker.

Before the speech takes place, ask the speaker what their objectives are. Sometimes the objective is obvious, but not always.

Perhaps the speaker has just read the Presentation Zen book and is experimenting with a modern style of visuals which goes against common practice.

• If you know this, you can tailor your evaluation accordingly.
• If you don’t, you may unfairly criticize them for not considering the expectations of the audience.

3. Consider the skill level of the speaker… sometimes.

Evaluating the (very) inexperienced speaker:
Treat novice speakers with extra care. Be a little more encouraging and a little less critical, particularly if they exhibit a high level of speaking fear. Compliment them on tackling their fear. Reassure them that they aren’t as bad as they imagine.

Be supportive. Ask them how they feel it went.

Evaluating the (very) experienced speaker:
A common misconception is that you cannot evaluate a speaker if they are more experienced than you. This is false. Though you may have limited speaking experience, you have a lifetime of experience listening to presentations.

Your opinion matters. As a member of the audience, you are who the speaker is trying to reach. You are fully qualified to evaluate how well that message was communicated.

Every speaker, no matter how experienced, can improve. Perhaps more importantly, every speaker wants to improve. You can help.

4. Take advantage of available tools.

A speech evaluation is a pretty simple thing. Just listen to the speech, take some notes, and then share your opinion. Right?

That’s a good formula when you’re learning the art of delivering evaluations, but to really improve your skills, you’ll want to start assembling the many tools at your disposal:

• Study other evaluators and apply their techniques.
• Solicit feedback from others on your technique.
• Develop evaluation templates or forms that work for you.
• If available, utilize audio or video recordings to complement your evaluation. As an example:
  • Without video, you can only tell when a gesture could have been used.
  • With a video recording, you can show exactly where a timely gesture could be used.

5. Be truthful.

If you did not like the speech, do not say that you did. If you did not like a component of the speech, do not say you did.

There is a tendency to want to be nice and embellish the positives. Dishonest praise will only damage your credibility and character.

6. Express your opinion.

Avoid speaking on behalf of the audience with phrases like “Everyone thought…” or “The audience felt…” You can only accurately talk about are your own thoughts and feelings.

On the other hand, suppose you observe a spectator crying as a result of an emotional speech. In this case, you can remark on this as evidence that the speech had emotional impact.

Magical phrases in a speech evaluation start with personal language: “I thought… I liked… I felt… I wish…”

7. Avoid absolute statements.

There are very few public speaking rules. For every best practice, there’s a scenario where a speaker would be wise to go against convention. Phrases such as “You should never…” or “One should always…” should rarely be part of an evaluator’s vocabulary.

8. Be specific. Use examples. Explain why.

How can you make sure that the constructive criticism doesn’t completely outweigh the praise and end up discouraging the speaker?

The answer: be specific. Studies have shown that specific praise is much more encouraging than generic praise. This applies to criticism as well. Specific feedback (positive or negative) is more meaningful than generic feedback.
e.g. “I liked the dynamic opening of your speech.” is better than “I liked your speech.”

In addition to being specific and tying comments to examples from the speech, it also helps to explain why you liked or didn’t like a particular aspect of the speech.

Consider the effectiveness of the following four statements:

1. “Gestures were poor.“
2. “Gestures were limited in the first half of the speech.“
3. “Gestures were limited in the first half of the speech because the speaker gripped the lectern.“
4. “Gestures could have been improved in the first half of the speech. By removing her hands from the lectern, she could more easily make natural gestures.“

Statement #4 is phrased in a positive manner, it is specific, it references an example from the speech, and states why it is good not to grip the lectern.

9. Don’t evaluate the person or their objective.

Evaluate how well the message is delivered, not the messenger. Keep your comments focused on the presentation.

Similarly, avoid evaluating the speaker’s objective. For example, suppose the speaker’s objective is to convince the audience that recycling is a waste of time. If you always reduce, reuse, and recycle, don’t let that influence your evaluation. (By all means, start a debate about it later, write an article, give your own speech, etc.) As an evaluator, your primary role is to help the speaker achieve their objective in the most convincing way possible.

10. Evaluate whether the objective was achieved.

Everything other than the speaker themself and their primary objective is fair game for your evaluation: content, speech structure, humor, visuals, eye contact, gestures, intangibles, etc. and everything else covered in the first article from this series.

11. The best evaluations are a combination of praise, areas for improvement, and specific suggestions.

All three elements are essential, but can be mixed in numerous ways. This is the focus for the next article in this series: The Modified Sandwich Technique for Evaluations.

Similar Articles You May Like... Speech Analysis #5: Toastmasters Evaluation Contests Speech Analysis #4: Evaluation Forms, Tools, and Resources Speech Analysis #3: Modified Sandwich Technique for Evaluations Speech Analysis #1: How to Study and Critique a Speech Average Speakers Suck. Don’t be Average. 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.

The Speech Analysis Series is a series of articles examining different aspects of presentation analysis. You will learn how to study a speech and how to deliver an effective speech evaluation. Later articles will examine Toastmasters evaluation contests and speech evaluation forms and resources.

The first in the series, this article outlines questions to ask yourself when assessing a presentation. Ask these questions whether you attend the presentation, or whether you view a video or read the speech text. These questions also apply when you conduct a self evaluation of your own speeches.

The Most Important Thing to Analyze: The Speech Objectives

Knowing the speaker’s objective is critical to analyzing the speech, and should certainly influence how you study it.

• What is the speaker’s goal? Is it to educate, to motivate, to persuade, or to entertain?
• What is the primary message being delivered?
• Why is this person delivering this speech? Are they the right person?
• Was the objective achieved?

The Audience and Context for the Speech

A speaker will need to use different techniques to connect with an audience of 1500 than they would with an audience of 15. Similarly, different techniques will be applied when communicating with teenagers as opposed to communicating with corporate leaders.

• Where and when is the speech being delivered?
• What are the key demographic features of the audience? Technical? Students? Elderly? Athletes? Business leaders?
• How large is the audience?
• In addition to the live audience, is there an external target audience? (e.g. on the Internet or mass media)

Speech Content and Structure

The content of the speech should be selected and organized to achieve the primary speech objective. Focus is important — extraneous information can weaken an otherwise effective argument.

Before the Speech

• Were there other speakers before this one? Were their messages similar, opposed, or unrelated?
• How was the speaker introduced? Was it appropriate?
• Did the introduction establish why the audience should listen to this speaker with this topic at this time?
• What body language was demonstrated by the speaker as they approached the speaking area? Body language at this moment will often indicate their level of confidence.

The Speech Opening

Due to the primacy effect, words, body language, and visuals in the speech opening are all critical to speaking success.

• Was a hook used effectively to draw the audience into the speech? Or did the speaker open with a dry “It’s great to be here today.“
• Did the speech open with a story? A joke? A startling statistic? A controversial statement? A powerful visual?
• Did the speech opening clearly establish the intent of the presentation?
• Was the opening memorable?

The Speech Body

• Was the presentation focused? i.e. Did all arguments, stories, anecdotes relate back to the primary objective?
• Were examples or statistics provided to support the arguments?
• Were metaphors and symbolism use to improve understanding?
• Was the speech organized logically? Was it easy to follow?
• Did the speaker bridge smoothly from one part of the presentation to the next?

The Speech Conclusion

Like the opening, the words, body language, and visuals in the speech conclusion are all critical to speaking success. This is due to the recency effect.

• Was the conclusion concise?
• Was the conclusion memorable?
• If appropriate, was there a call-to-action?

Delivery Skills and Techniques

Delivery skills are like a gigantic toolbox — the best speakers know precisely when to use every tool and for what purpose.

Enthusiasm and Connection to the Audience

• Was the speaker enthusiastic? How can you tell?
• Was there audience interaction? Was it effective?
• Was the message you- and we-focused, or was it I- and me-focused?

Humor

• Was humor used?
• Was it safe and appropriate given the audience?
• Were appropriate pauses used before and after the punch lines, phrases, or words?
• Was it relevant to the speech?

Visual Aids

• Were they designed effectively?
• Did they complement speech arguments?
• Was the use of visual aids timed well with the speaker’s words?
• Did they add energy to the presentation or remove it?
• Were they simple and easy to understand?
• Were they easy to see? e.g. large enough
• Would an additional visual aid help to convey the message?

Use of Stage Area

• Did the speaker make appropriate use of the speaking area?

Physical – Gestures and Eye Contact

• Did the speaker’s posture display confidence and poise?
• Were gestures natural, timely, and complementary?
• Were gestures easy to see?
• Does the speaker have any distracting mannerisms?
• Was eye contact effective in connecting the speaker to the whole audience?

Vocal Variety

• Was the speaker easy to hear?
• Were loud and soft variations used appropriately?
• Was the pace varied? Was it slow enough overall to be understandable?
• Were pauses used to aid understandability, heighten excitement, or provide drama?

Language

• Was the language appropriate for the audience?
• Did the speaker articulate clearly?
• Were sentences short and easy to understand?
• Was technical jargon or unnecessarily complex language used?
• What rhetorical devices were used? e.g. repetition, alliteration, the rule of three, etc.

Intangibles

Sometimes, a technically sound speech can still miss the mark. Likewise, technical deficiencies can sometimes be overcome to produce a must-see presentation. The intangibles are impossible to list, but here are a few questions to consider:

• How did the speech make you feel?
• Were you convinced?
• Would you want to listen to this speaker again?
• Were there any original ideas or techniques?

Next in the Speech Analysis Series

The next article in this series – The Art of Delivering Evaluations – examines how best to utilize speech evaluation skills as a teaching tool.

Similar Articles You May Like... Speech Analysis #5: Toastmasters Evaluation Contests Speech Analysis #4: Evaluation Forms, Tools, and Resources Speech Analysis #3: Modified Sandwich Technique for Evaluations Speech Analysis #2: The Art of Delivering Evaluations Average Speakers Suck. Don’t be Average. 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.