In an attention-deficient, entertain-me-now, wait-while-I-post-that-on-my-Facebook-page kind of world, the typical business presentation is lame. Professional speaker, trainer, coach, tweeter and blogger Kelly Vandever works with organizations who want to take their strategic business presentations from Lame to Fame! An award winning speaker herself, Kelly helps organizations crank up their content to connect and interact with their audiences using old school and hi-tech techniques all the while annihilating bullet points and making this world a better place for business audiences everywhere. You can contact Kelly at her Speaking Practically site or @KellyVandever.
In this conversation, Kelly discusses visible changes in the world of presentations, and the use of Twitter as a means to interact with their audience.
Geetesh: In the last 5 years, what has been the most visible change in the world of presentations, and what are things that never change?
Kelly: The most visible change in the world of presentations comes from technology. Smart phones give audiences access to any piece of information a presenter shares -- or doesn't share. My first day teaching public speaking at a local university, one of my students piped up in the middle of my review of the syllabus to ask "are you the Kelly Vandever who's a stand up comedian?" He'd Googled my name and found a YouTube video of my performance at the Punch Line Comedy club in Atlanta. Audiences don't have to take a speaker's word for it. They've got their phones handy and aren't afraid to use them!
Another change is the phenomenon of people tweeting while speakers are talking. When I first heard about the Sarah Lacey – Mark Zuckerberg interview at SXSW in 2007, where a frustrated audience started tweeting about how badly the interview was going, my stomach sank. People tweeting while speakers are speaking?! No good could possibly come from this! I've since changed my mind, but a tweeting audience can still be a threat to speakers who aren't prepared.
I think overall the fact that today's audiences can verify, publicize or criticize anything a speaker says actually elevates what's expected of speakers and is in the best interest of audiences. Speakers need good content, they need to be prepared and they need to connect with their audiences authentically. You asked what hasn't changed. Those things haven't changed. Aristotle first said it more than 300 years BC -- We trust speakers and their message based on a combination of ethos – the character of the presenter, pathos – the emotional appeal of the message, and logos – the logical reasoning of the information presented. Technology allows audiences to hold the speaker accountable for their message and their integrity.
The other most impactful change I've seen has to do with presentation slides. When presentation software first came out, the software taught us, through the default settings, that we should use presentation slides like a document outline. In the past few years, we see more and more presenters stepping away from the bullet points and going toward images with just a few words on the screen. In my experience, audiences prefer this approach. And the cool thing is, that it also works better. Research from Richard Mayer at University of California in Santa Barbara and others demonstrates that having the words on the screen as they're being spoken by the presenter is actually less effective for retention and transfer of the information than using pictures and two or three words. I certainly hope this trend will continue as more presenters experience the results from their happier audiences.
Other technological impacts include the ease with which we can add videos to presentations and use video to record and watch practice sessions. Tools like Prezi can add movement and a "gee whiz" effect to a presentation – though for me the jury is still out as to whether or not the "gee whiz" effect actually improves or detracts from the message. Sales forces can load presentations on their tablets and use them on sales calls. It's fascinating to see how technology is morphing presentation techniques. But we should never forget that some things never change - presentations will always be about our audiences and the connections we make between us, our audience and our message.
Geetesh: You use and help others use Twitter as a means to interact with their audience and improve their presentations – can you explain this in more detail?
Kelly: Audiences love interaction because they want to be engaged. For a speaker who speaks to audiences that have a tendency to tweet, Twitter is a great way to interact with larger audiences before, during, and after a presentation.
Before a presentation, Twitter gives the speaker another way to research their audience by following the conference hashtag and seeing out what's important in their world. Using the conference hashtag, the speaker can also ask questions of the audience and adjust their presentation accordingly.
During a presentation, speakers can encourage their shy audience members to tweet questions, then build in "Twitter breaks" to check for questions. I recommend using a Twitter moderator who monitors the hashtag for the presenter, then poses the questions to the speaker during the Twitter breaks. I do not recommend posting the Twitter stream behind the presenter as it distracts from the presentation. If audience members want to follow the stream, they can do it on their phones. If the stream is broadcast behind a speaker, the audience don't have any options -– the distraction is there whether they're able to tune it out or not.
Twitter can be used to do informal polling with an audience. To publicize links mentioned during the presentation and more. Let's face it, the speaker is probably not going to have time to answer all questions during the time allotted. Having the audience ask questions on Twitter gives the speaker a way to follow up later and answer those questions which ordinarily might have gone unanswered.
I recommend using the conference hashtag and, at large conferences, a session hashtag too. Using the conference hashtag is important so those that are following the conference from the Twitter can see what's being said and can pop in with their comments and questions too. Using a session specific hashtag makes it easier to find the questions and comments specific to the session so you can respond while in the session or when following up.
After the presentation, as mentioned above the speaker can answer unanswered questions. But I think the real benefit for the speaker is being able to see what the audience is thinking while the speaker is speaking. What resonated with the audience? What comments did they tweet and retweet? Is there anything unexpected, like a point you thought was minor but is getting a lot of buzz on Twitter? How is the message going over? What do you need to do to improve your presentation?
Yes, Twitter can add a little more complexity and yes, you give up some control with your audience. But come on, control is an illusion. Audiences are using their phones anyway. The benefits when using Twitter right far outweigh the negatives. I hope more speakers start taking advantage!
Categories: interviews, powerpoint, presentation_skills, twitter
April 2003 | May 2003 | December 2003 | January 2004 | February 2004 | March 2004 | April 2004 | May 2004 | June 2004 | July 2004 | August 2004 | September 2004 | October 2004 | November 2004 | December 2004 | January 2005 | February 2005 | March 2005 | April 2005 | May 2005 | June 2005 | July 2005 | August 2005 | September 2005 | October 2005 | November 2005 | December 2005 | January 2006 | February 2006 | March 2006 | April 2006 | May 2006 | June 2006 | July 2006 | August 2006 | September 2006 | October 2006 | November 2006 | December 2006 | January 2007 | February 2007 | March 2007 | April 2007 | May 2007 | June 2007 | July 2007 | August 2007 | September 2007 | October 2007 | November 2007 | December 2007 | January 2008 | February 2008 | March 2008 | April 2008 | May 2008 | June 2008 | July 2008 | August 2008 | September 2008 | October 2008 | November 2008 | December 2008 | January 2009 | February 2009 | March 2009 | April 2009 | May 2009 | June 2009 | July 2009 | August 2009 | September 2009 | October 2009 | November 2009 | December 2009 | January 2010 | February 2010 | March 2010 | April 2010 | May 2010 | June 2010 | July 2010 | August 2010 | September 2010 | October 2010 | November 2010 | December 2010 | January 2011 | February 2011 | March 2011 | April 2011 | May 2011 | June 2011 | July 2011 | August 2011 | September 2011 | October 2011 | November 2011 | December 2011 | January 2012 | February 2012 | March 2012 | April 2012 | May 2012 | June 2012 | July 2012 | August 2012 | September 2012 | October 2012 | November 2012 | December 2012 | January 2013 | February 2013 | March 2013 | April 2013 | May 2013 | June 2013 | July 2013 | August 2013 | September 2013 | October 2013 | November 2013 | December 2013 | January 2014 | February 2014 | March 2014 | April 2014 | May 2014 | June 2014 | July 2014 | August 2014 | September 2014 | October 2014 | November 2014 | December 2014 | January 2015 | February 2015 | March 2015 | April 2015 | May 2015 | June 2015 | July 2015 |
Microsoft and the Office logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and/or other countries.