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 is he isn’t a smart lawyer, 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 three 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.

Here are five best practices of public speaking that speakers don’t always follow, but should resolve to in 2012:

1. Pick up the phone before you pick up the pen.

You can only learn so much from event planners and the demographic information provided by the group you are addressing. It takes actual conversations with expected audience members to get a handle on their interests, needs, and knowledge of your subject.

While e-mail is passable in a pinch, it is far better to pick up the phone and talk to five rank-and-file people who likely will be in your audience. Have a few questions planned, but only use them to keep the conversation going or ask for clarification.

Chris Lu, a senior official at the White House recalled, “When I was drafting my first college commencement speech, I called several graduating seniors to learn about their campus experiences – their triumphs and struggles, favorite professors and hangout places, and common bonding moments. Drawing on these references and vignettes in my remarks, I was also able to make my speech more relevant to the audience. Afterward, several long-time professors said it was the best commencement speech they had heard.”

As Lu successfully did, make sure to listen for stories and examples you can weave into your speech, as well as inside information or jokes you can allude to. This shows your audience that you have done your research and aren’t giving a canned presentation.

2. Have a laser-focused point.

No, not a laser pointer, a laser-focused point.

It may sound obvious, but too many speakers don’t have a succinct main idea. If you can’t explain your speech in a sentence, you certainly won’t explain it in an hour.

Use a short, clear phrase or sentence that summarizes the point of your presentation to tell your audience what to expect. It doesn’t have to be the first thing out of your mouth, but should come during the introduction and set-up of your speech. Then, make sure you relate your main points back to that central idea as your presentation progresses.

3. Rehearse six times for success.

We all know that practice makes perfect, but exactly how much? Rehearse at least six times. That’s right, a minimum of six times.

Why six? There is something special about the sixth rehearsal. It’s the rehearsal when speakers truly master their content, can recover quickly from hiccups in their delivery, and feel significantly more comfortable at the lectern.

A case in point is that of work-life integration coach Carolyn Semedo, a participant in a recent series of small-group coaching classes. During one session, she acknowledged feeling frustrated that she was stumbling over the content of a presentation she was slated to deliver.

She chalked it up to being a mediocre presenter. In response to a question about her method of rehearsing, she said that she had practiced once over the weekend and again on Monday evening as she was driving to class.

Of course Carolyn’s delivery was rocky! Even the most celebrated speakers don’t have their material down on a second run through. On the contrary, speakers who make presenting look easy are those who have practiced their material the most.

Carolyn is by no means a mediocre presenter. Like many speakers, she just needed some coaching on how to rehearse. She said, “I thought that by rehearsing two or three times, I should have it nailed. It was very helpful to learn that more rehearsals were the key to a better speech.”

4. Get feedback – before and after your speech.

You can learn a lot by asking listeners how your speech was effective… and how it was not.

Get a gut check before the curtain goes up; have a trusted colleague and/or a speech coach evaluate the content and delivery of your presentation. This will help prevent a situation where your presentation misses the mark or humor falls flat. It also will help you identify what works, as well as what needs refining. Make sure you ask for specific suggestions on how to improve the speech.

It is just as important to get feedback after the presentation. Written evaluations can be especially easy if the conference or event already is collecting data from listeners. Review the questionnaire ahead of time and ask to see the results. If the questionnaire isn’t thorough or specific enough, ask to add some questions or supplement it with your own form focused on the reception of your speech.

If a formal evaluation isn’t possible or appropriate, interview a few members of the audience after your presentation to see what stood out to them – asking about strengths as well as areas that need improvement. In some settings, like toasts and graduation speeches, it can be difficult to get specific feedback from members of your audience because they’re listening mainly for pleasure. In these instances, it is helpful to talk to a few known and trusted audience members beforehand, asking them to listen to the speech critically and provide an evaluation.

5. Get caught on camera.

Video is an unparalleled learning tool. Though some speakers find it painful to watch themselves on camera, reviewing recordings of rehearsals and presentations will open your eyes to bad speaking habits and other issues.

“Although I was initially apprehensive about watching the video recordings of my practice speeches,” admitted Kristie Patton, who works at the National Council on Aging, “I came to view this exercise as extremely helpful.

“It offered a valuable window into how I was communicating with my audience, both verbally and non-verbally. In addition to observing standard communication errors, like speaking too quickly or using filler words, it was also instructive to note that something as seemingly innocuous as my earrings could serve as a distraction to my audience.”

Furthermore, video is a great way to document progress. Like taking photos before starting a new diet and exercise regime, comparing video provides motivation when you see progress and the payoff for your hard work. And when you get more proficient in speaking and comfortable watching yourself on camera, recordings will become a useful tool for spreading your message well beyond your physical audience – whether you put them on YouTube, your website, social media, or other platforms.

Resolve to follow these best practices in the New Year, and your audience, undoubtedly, will see a dramatic improvement in your presentations.

What are YOUR resolutions for 2012?

In addition to these five best practices, what will you resolve to improve in 2012? Please share your resolutions in the comments.

Similar Articles You May Like... Love the Process and Improve Your Speaking Skills 8 Faulty Speaker Assumptions and How to Fix Them The 7 Deadly Sins of Public Speaking Speech Preparation #8: How to Practice Your Presentation Speech Critique: Dan Pink (TED 2009) 3 Common Ways Speakers Sabotage Themselves

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

Christine Clapp is president of Spoken with Authority, providing one-on-one coaching, small-group classes and workshops that develop the voice of experts who want to broaden their impact. She also is a lecturer in the Department of Communication at The George Washington University.

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.

Positive word of mouth spread over the years, and the event now draws a beyond capacity crowd with people sitting uncomfortably on steps and the floor to listen to Winston. You can learn from the master teacher from the comfort of your web browser by viewing the lecture video.

In the 45-minute lecture, Winston delivers dozens of practical tips for speaking effectively, particularly when teaching. This article highlights seven of the best.

Seven Speaking Tips from Patrick Winston

1. Use Stories and Analogies

Winston explicitly advises his audience to use stories, and he does so himself.

One example is in the introduction. Winston skis better than gymnast Mary Lou Retton not because he is more athletic, but because he has some knowledge and he practices. This story reinforces his key message: knowledge and practice are critical to speaking success.

2. Open Your Speech Strong

Winston advises against a humorous opening, and instead recommends making a promise (stating your core message) and providing a speech outline.

He does this himself in his introduction. In addition, he opens with a great analogy between the military and educational institutions. His first words — “The uniform code of military justice states…” — grab the attention of his academic audience.

3. Use Rhetorical Devices

Winston doesn’t explicitly advise using rhetorical devices (aside from rhetorical questions), but he provides several memorable examples.

For example, here is a memorable triad which invokes the Rule of Three:

Your careers will be determined largely by how well you speak, by how well you write, and by the quality of your ideas… in that order.

Another memorable line uses contrast to achieve its effect:

What I hope to accomplish is to transmit to you [...] something that will make the difference between a career-busting tragedy and a career-launching triumph.

4. Find Your Style

Winston reveals the big four around which he crafts his lectures: cycle, verbal punctuation, near miss, and rhetorical questions. More importantly, he emphasizes that these are his big four, but every speaker needs to find their own public speaking structure.

5. Use the Blackboard to Pace Your Delivery

Winston gives several reasons to use the blackboard (or whiteboard or flip chart), but the most compelling reason is to pace your delivery. The act of writing or drawing introduces delays which allow your audience to catch up and absorb the information.

6. Salute the Audience Rather than Thanking Them

Many speakers I respect take a very strong position in the debate over whether you should thank or not thank your audience. Winston takes the position that you should not thank the audience, because doing so conveys a lack of confidence that you have just delivered something valuable. Instead, he suggests that you should salute the audience.

7. Handle the Q&A Skillfully

Winston delivers several nuggets of advice for question and answer sessions. Be prepared to ask yourself the first question. Repeat the question so that the rest of the audience can hear it. Aim for a conversation, not a lecture. Stay in control. This advice agrees with a previous Six Minutes article: Leading the Perfect Q&A.

More Resources on How to Speak…

Cal Newport provides a detailed play-by-play of the 2008 Winston talk which he attended.

Similar Articles You May Like... Speech Critique: Dan Pink (TED 2009) 5 Presentation Lessons from Randy Pausch in The Last Lecture Video Critique: J.A. Gamache (Toastmasters, 2007) Speech Critique: Steve Jobs (Stanford, 2005) How can you inspire your audience? Ask 10-year-old Dalton Sherman. Toastmasters Speech 2: Organize Your Speech

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.

Hans Rosling uses six simple techniques for presenting data which transform a run-of-the-mill presentation into a must-see presentation.

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.

Six Techniques for Presenting Data

Rosling employs GapMinder to display his statistics. This is a wonderful software tool for displaying data, but the real magic of this presentation lies in the techniques demonstrated by Rosling. These techniques are easy to do, but I’ve rarely (if ever) seen them all demonstrated so well in a single talk. The techniques are:

1. Explain the data axes
2. Highlight subsets of data
3. Dig deeper to unwrap data
4. Place labels close to data points
5. Answer the “Why?” questions
6. Complement data with energetic delivery

Let’s examine each one and compare this presentation to common approaches.

Technique #1: Explain the Data Axes

Common approach. Graphs are displayed with either no explanation of the axes, or a quick, obligatory “Here we see variableX versus variableY“.

As Hans demonstrates, don’t assume that your audience intuitively “gets it,” particularly when presenting statistical data.

Starting around 2:43, he devotes approximately ninety seconds to:

• Explain what quantities are on each of the two axes (e.g. fertility rates versus life expectancy at birth);
• Provide the background story as to why he chose these two quantities (“We vs Them = Western World vs Third World“);
• Share his students’ prediction as to what the data will show.

Because of this careful preparation, the audience understands the context thoroughly. A very energetic description of the data follows while the time advances the “movie” for about 45 seconds.

The “instant reply” is a nice touch which fills the otherwise empty time during audience applause, although I suspect this was added in the post-production by the good folks at TED.

Technique #2: Highlight subsets of data

Common approach: Presenters attempt to explain complex data which they have studied for days, weeks, or months in just a few minutes. The audience grasps little.

Rosling recognizes the impossibility of explaining all of the data in detail. Instead, he carefully selects and explains subsets of the data.

• Example #1: 1964-2003 United States and Vietnam [5:15 to 6:06] This is a clever choice as his (mostly American) audience will easily connect the early part of this period with that of the Vietnam War.
• Example #2: 1960-2003. South Korea, Brazil, Uganda, United Arab Emirates [12:22 to 13:40]

Technique #3: Dig deeper to unwrap data

Common approach: Presenters restrict themselves to one level of data inspection. Deeper analysis is often only present in scientific journals.

Several times, Rosling displays first a high-level data view (e.g. one point for a country) and then digs deeper to lower-level view of the data (e.g. country quintiles).

• Example #1: Income versus population
  Compare the global curve [7:26] to the one broken down by geographic region [7:54]
• Example #2: GDP per capita versus Child survival rate
  Compare the Sub-Saharan Africa bubble [9:48] to the individual country bubbles [9:54]
• Example #3: GDP per capita versus Child survival rate
  Compare Uganda bubble [14:12] to quintile data points for Uganda [14:18]

Technique #4: Place labels close to data points

Common approach: Data legends and labels are often absent. The presenter assumes that the audience will follow their verbal cues. Or, when legends and labels are present, they are often presented far away from associated data points. This forces the audience to visually scan back and forth.

Throughout Rosling’s talk, data labels are presented right next to the data points. An example is shown here for the OECD data point [9:28].

Additionally, the appearance of these labels is synchronized well with the verbal component of his speech. In this way, the visual labels complement the audio.

Related to this, there are several instances where GapMinder shows a bubble “about to burst” a second or two before the data is expanded. This is a subtle touch, but an effective measure to draw the eye to the right spot on the screen. The Sub-Saharan Africa example shown is from 9:48. Others are at 10:33 and 10:40.

Technique #5: Answer the “Why?”questions

Common approach: Large data sets are presented, and the presenter often explains only the dominant trend or the one measure of most interest. The audience is left to wonder things like “Why is that data point there?” or “What caused that point to be low/high/odd?”

Obviously, no presenter can answer every question the audience might be thinking, but Rosling does a good job of anticipating these questions. He anticipated several “Why?” questions, and answered them on the spot.

For example:

• Q: Why does the progress in Vietnam accelerate in the 1990′s? [5:43]
  A: They give up communist planning and go for a market economy.
• Q: Why is Mauritius so different from most of Sub-Saharan Africa? [9:54]
  A: Mauritius was the first country to get rid of trade barriers. They could sell their sugar. They could sell their textiles.
• Q: Why is China moving up and then to the right (when most countries are moving diagonally)? [11:52]
  A: Mao Zedong bought health to China (up) and then he died. Deng Xiaoping then brought money to China (right).

Anticipating and answering the why questions achieves two goals:

1. It allows you to satisfy the audience’s curiosity while also maintaining an energetic pace (rather than being interrupted by questions).
2. It demonstrates your credibility and solid grasp of the subject.

Technique #6: Complement data with energetic delivery

Common approach: Statistical data is often presented in a dry, clinical manner. Perhaps the theory is that the audience should naturally be excited about data?

The most memorable technique displayed by Rosling is his energetic delivery. Examples are numerous, and include:

• Highly energetic sequence as he narrates 1962-2003 fertility rates versus life expectancy [4:15 to 5:03]. This is the highlight of the presentation for me. The audience seems to agree, rewarding Rosling with 13 seconds of applause.
• Spider-web shape with his hands to demonstrate how the bubbles burst [9:55]
• Ghost-like acting to accompany “overlooking the United States, almost like a ghost” [18:11]
• Approaching the screen numerous times to align his arms and body with the data

The thoughtful presentation of data makes this an understandable talk. Rosling’s energetic delivery makes it memorable.

Other Opinions from the Public Speaking Blogosphere

• Lisa Braithwaite: Best Presentation Ever?

Your Thoughts?

Did you enjoy this speech? What did you like most? How could this presentation be enhanced?

Similar Articles You May Like... Video Critique: Majora Carter – Greening the Ghetto (TED 2006) Video Critique: Al Gore (TED, 2006) Speech Critique: Dan Pink (TED 2009) Speech Critique: Elizabeth Gilbert @ TED (Author of Eat, Pray, Love) 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.

This video critique analyzes many noteworthy elements of the presentation, including:

• a memorable speech opening and closing which feature the same prop;
• the callback technique for repetitive humor;
• emotionally charged writing; and
• a series of wonderfully choreographed gestures.

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.

Effective Prop for Strong Opening

J.A. opens his speech by blowing a train whistle and yelling “All aboard!” [0:30] This may be the greatest impact in the opening four seconds of a speech I’ve ever seen. It is simple and quick, but it transports the audience out of their chairs in a ballroom and onto a train.

Also note how J.A. expertly conceals the prop before its use (in his left hand, so that he could shake hands with his right), and then immediately pockets it afterwards. This is a good lesson: display the prop only when you are specifically using it. You don’t want the audience’s attention on the prop anymore, so don’t hold onto it, fidget with it, or leave it anywhere in view.

(Effective Prop for) Strong Closing

J.A. closes the speech exactly as he opened it: blowing the train whistle and yelling “All aboard!” This is wonderfully circular, and symbolically tells the audience not only that the speech is complete, but that we have neatly returned back to where we started.

Immediately preceding the whistle, J.A. says: “In the train of life, the world needs more Mr. and Mrs. G’s like you.” This is a well-crafted call to action for several reasons:

• metaphor (“train of life“)
• simile (“like“)
• personalized for audience (“you”)

“Mr. G.” – A Contemporary Hero

When first used in the speech title, “Mr. G.” creates mystery in the minds of the audience. Who is Mr. G.? The use of “mister” implies that it is someone J.A. respects (i.e. Mr. G. rather than simply G.), but that is a subtle clue.

Later, after the true identity is revealed, J.A. continues to use “Mr. G.” I think this gives the hero a more contemporary quality. This makes Gandhi seem more like a next-door neighbour than a great man who (to the audience) lived around the world in a faraway land sixty years ago. The word choice is an effective way to bridge the distance – in time, geography, culture, context – between the life of the hero and the lives of the audience members.

Repetition of Key Phrases

“Awww. How sweeeeet.”

• Three repetitions. J.A. first uses this phrase following the story of Gandhi and the two sandals [1:51]. He repeats it during the stories of giving shoes to a homeless person [2:33] and dancing with the hearing impaired crowd [5:00].
• J.A. uses virtually the same vocal variety and gesture every time.
• He gets a little laughter on the first use, and much more laughter on subsequent uses. This is not accidental. The callback technique creates a psychological connection between each use. Essentially, G.A. created a lightweight conditioned response for the audience to laugh whenever he used that phrase and that gesture.

“Dare to care.”

• Five repetitions. First used with “Gandhi dared to care.” [2:08] Used again at 2:43, 2:48, 5:05, and in the conclusion at 7:28.
• In all cases, this phrase is followed by a longer-than-average pause to indicate its importance.
• This is the signature phrase of the speech. “Dare to care” would have been a suitable title for the speech, although I prefer the title J.A. used for the mystery it created.

Emotionally Powerful

“Dance with me.
And we danced.
At last we understood each other.
Not a word was spoken.
Yet we were not silent anymore.
Our joy roared louder than a thousand voices.
Some words erupted from my heart.
I couldn’t hold them anymore.
I yelled.” [4:22]

These words and the complementary gestures – the foot beating the stage and dancing around – combine to create the most emotional moment in the speech. J.A. is marvelous in this segment:

• His dance and gestures draw the audience in.
• The vocal variety creates building excitement.
• Note the short sentences in this segment: nine sentences with just 44 words (less than 5 words/sentence). The short, simple sentences complement the up-tempo rhythmic beat of his feet.

Rich Figures of Speech

There are many other examples of clever speechwriting as well:

• Double meaning. “Just chatting…[pause] So to speak.” [3:24]
  The latter phrase – So to speak – has a double meaning here:
  1. Its usual meaning – to draw attention to the understatement preceding it. (To say that hearing impaired people just chat is an understatement.)
  2. In this case, the understatement is about speaking. This double meaning is apt to be particularly appreciated in an audience of public speakers.
• Simile. “My brain started melting like ice cream in a heat wave.” [5:32]
• Vivid exaggeration. “Sweat … pooled in my shoes.” [5:34] Later, this is followed by “I slushed back to my seat.” [5:52]
• Repeated word.
  • “Confused… Confused…” [5:39]
  • “Thank you. Yes, you. You. You. All of you!” [6:58] Audiences like to be complimented, as long as you are sincere as J.A. is in this segment.
  • “You.” J.A. uses this word 38 times (including derivatives “your” and “yourself”). The entire speech has 718 words. Over 5% of the words in the speech are explicitly audience-focused. The concentration of “you” words is especially high in the opening and conclusion.
• Anaphora and the Rule of Three.
  “A sandal of hope when you reach out.
  A sandal of joy when you listen to your heart.
  A sandal of courage when you dare to care.” [7:13]
  The first two are accompanied by great gestures. The third gesture is interesting, though I’m not certain what it is meant to represent.

Expressive Gestures

J.A.’s use of body language in this speech was masterful. He demonstrates that gestures should not be random, or an afterthought. Gestures should be carefully crafted to complement and punctuate the words being spoken (or, occasionally, to express ideas in the absence of words). With gestures, he is able to express numerous emotions and ideas throughout his speech. In addition to those already mentioned, there are several more:

• Pride. “You are wearing a pair of sandals you proudly made yourself” complemented by glancing down at sandals with pride. [0:50]
• Motion. “The train starts to pull away” complemented by backwards walking (to the left). His movement makes it seem as though the stage is moving off to the right. [1:02]
• Displeasure. “I would have cursed my bad luck…” complemented by stomping around on stage and “sour puss” facial features. [1:09]
• Recalling a memory. “Big deal. It’s just a pair of sandals.” complemented by a gesture to the stage location where the sandals were removed earlier. [2:15]
• Bravery. “I jumped on the loudspeaker” complemented by a lateral jump to the left. [3:50]
• (Lack of) Physical fitness. “Well, actually, I climbed on the loudspeaker” complemented by cradling his stomach. [3:55]
• Yelling. Waving arms above his head. [4:00]
• Slow motion. Compare the waving of arms @ 4:15 to the earlier waving of arms @ 4:00. The latter gesture is much slower. This contrast shows that that latter waves were more deliberate, more heartfelt.
• Drum vibrations. Tapping of foot on stage to mimic the beating of a drum was masterful. [4:22]
• Sign language. “We love you too.” complemented by sign language. This is far more effective than simply saying “They signed back that they loved me too” without actions. [4:50]
• Nervous and confused. “Boy! Was I nervous! My heart was pounding…” complemented by various nervous gestures. [5:21]

Your Thoughts?

Did you enjoy this speech? What did you like most? How could this presentation be enhanced? Was the evaluation fair? Did I miss anything?

Similar Articles You May Like... 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) How can you inspire your audience? Ask 10-year-old Dalton Sherman. 5 Presentation Lessons from Randy Pausch in The Last Lecture

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.