Thompson - Persuading Aristotle (1998) PDF

PERSUADING
ARISTOTLE
PERSUADING
ARISTOTLE
The timeless art of persuasion in business,
negotiation and the media
PETER THOMPSON
ALLEN & UNWIN

Copyright  Peter Thompson 1998
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted

in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including
photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system,
without prior permission in writing from the publisher.
First published in 1998 by

Allen & Unwin
9 Atchison Street
St Leonards NSW 1590
Australia
Phone: (61 2) 8425 0100
Fax: (61 2) 9906 2218
E-mail: frontdesk @ allen-unwin.com.au
Web: http://www.allen-unwin.com.au
National Library of Australia

Cataloguing-in-Publication entry:
Thompson, Peter, 1952 –

Persuading Aristotle.
Bibliography.
Includes index.
ISBN 186448 739.9.
1. Persuasion (Psychology). 2. Persuasion (Rhetoric).

3. Interpersonal communication. I. Title.
153.852
Digital processing by The Electric Book Company

20 Cambridge Drive, London SE12 8AJ, UK; www.elecbook.com
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
CONTENTS
1 HOW PERSUASION WORKS: WHAT ARISTOTLE TAUGHT 1

2 THINKING AND ORGANISING 14
3 PERSUASIVE LANGUAGE 38
4 HOW TO PERSUADE DIFFERENT PERSONALITIES 60
5 STEP - BY - STEP BUSINESS PRESENTATIONS 87
6 THE ASTUTE NEGOTIATOR 131
7 DEALING WITH THE MEDIA 166
FURTHER READING 212
INDEX 213
For Lissa − My love
CHAPTER 1
HOW PERSUASION WORKS:
WHAT ARISTOTLE TAUGHT
1. Background 3. Àrtistic' persuasion

2. What Aristotle taught 4. John Bell
The fool tells me his reasons. The wise man persuades me

with my own.
Aristotle
Contra negantem principia non est disputandum.
You cannot argue with someone who denies the first principles.
Anon.
EVERYTHING WE KNOW about the art of persuasion today in

our mass marketing era is a legacy of thinkers who lived 2400
years ago. They knew it all! The way we think and persuade today
owes everything to the insights of Aristotle and his contemporar-
ies. We are under the influence of Aristotle each time we turn on
the television. Advertisers organise the text of their 30-second
commercials on the basis of the structures taught at Aristotle's
Lyceum. Directors and film writers structure their plots in the
same way. Film actors spend years learning the same art of
`delivery' that Aristotle taught as a central element of persuasion.
In television news, politicians and other leaders seek to
2 PERSUADING ARISTOTLE
influence public opinion. Those who understand the power of

what Aristotle called `style' and metaphor do best. Television and
radio interviews are conducted in the basic interactive framework
adopted by both Socrates and modern interviewers to discover
the truth.
In business, the corporate doctors known as management
consultants borrow directly from Aristotle's teaching about the
ìnvention', which is the process of getting to the core question
in the diagnosis of the ills of the company they are studying.
They report to their clients using Aristotle's àrrangement' for
structuring their arguments.
At school and university, teachers and professors transfer the

fundamental learning strategies of Greek logic and thought. Per-
haps they teach in the Socratic style. In the social sciences, the
dialectical system of Aristotle is the basis for testing the different
interpretations of reality. Our courts model themselves on Greek
dialectical methods as evidence is presented to prove a case. The
evidence is tested by Socratic cross-examination.
So, in many different areas of contemporary life, we are still

putting on Aristotle's thinking cap.
Background
Aristotle, Socrates and Plato were the three greatest minds in

ancient Greece. Socrates (c. 469-399BC) left no writings but we
know about him through the dialogues of Plato. His legacy is the
Socratic method of reaching an answer through a dialogue of
questioning or cross-examination, and arriving at the truth by
discerning the differences between opposite points of view. It is,
for example, the prosecution and defence method of our justice
and court system, and the foundation of the method of learning
HOW PERSUASION WORKS 3
pioneered at the Harvard Law and Business Schools and taught

widely in Australian universities.
Plato (c. 429-347BC) was Socrates' great disciple. In the Phaedo,
he described Socrates as `the wisest and justest and best of all
men I have ever known'. At some time in the 380s, Plato set up
a school of learning and philosophy, known as the Academy. His
most renowned student was Aristotle, who joined him at the age
of seventeen and remained until Plato's death. Then Aristotle left
Athens to become tutor to a 13-year-old Macedonian prince, later
known as Alexander the Great.
Aristotle returned to Athens in 338BC and founded his own

school in the gymnasium of the Lyceum in 335BC. There, for
twelve years, he taught under a covered walk, known as a peripatos,
his students becoming known as peripatetics. In the afternoons,
he would teach rhetoric – which he called the art of persuasion,
àn ability in each case to see the available means of persuasion'.
The Greek word rhetor meant public speaker and the origins of
the word rhetorike date back to Socrates' era.
Plato was greatly disturbed by techniques which had the

effect of making the weaker argument the stronger. He was
convinced these means were used to build an unjust case against
Socrates.
He rejected the injustice which flows from verbal trickery,

blaming deceptions on the `wise men' known as sophists, the most
famous of whom, Protagoras, believed that there were no universal
truths. `Man is the measure of all things' was the belief of
Protagoras, òf things that are in so far as they are and of things
that are not in so far as they are not'. If nothing is known for
sure, therefore, the art of rhetoric becomes decisive in swaying
the populace to arrive at conclusions and make judgments. Soph-
ists specialised in teaching the methods of argument.
Socrates was plunged into this dubious moral context to defend

his life at a trial which took place in a politically unstable interval

following the conclusion of war with Sparta. Accused of blas-
phemy and corrupting the morals of youth through heretical
teachings, Socrates became something of a scapegoat for the
declining power of Athens. At his trial, arguments honed by the
sophists prevailed and Socrates was condemned to death. He
declined an opportunity to escape and committed suicide by
drinking hemlock. In the Apology, Plato confronts the evil use of
oratory as he records Socrates' address to the judges who have
condemned him:
Perhaps you think, O Athenians, that I have been con-

victed through the want of arguments, by which I might
have persuaded you, had I thought it right to do
and say anything so that I might escape punishment. Far
otherwise: I have been convicted through want indeed,
yet not of arguments, but of audacity and impudence,
and of the inclination to say such things to you as
would have been most agreeable for you to hear, had I
lamented and bewailed and done and said many other
things unworthy of me, as I affirm, but such as you are
accustomed to hear from others . . . But I should much
rather choose to die having so defended myself than to live
in that way.
(Translation from Lewis Copeland and Lawrence W. Lamm (eds),

The World's Greatest Speeches,
New York: Dover Publications, 1973.)
The miscarriage of justice at the trial of Socrates carried profound

lessons about the use of language and emotion for purposes of
evil, as well as good.
What Aristotle Taught
In Athens, learning the art of persuasion had great practical

purpose. The institutions of the city functioned on rhetoric and
persuasion. In the Greek courts, unlike those of Rome, the accused
had to defend themselves. Robust debate was also a feature of the
people's assembly, or ecclesia, which was open to all free-born
Athenian men. It was in this context that Aristotle composed The
Art of Rhetoric, or On Rhetoric which appeared around 335BC.
Classical rhetoric was divided into five principles or parts. Four
of those principles, the elements identified by Aristotle in On
Rhetoric, remain the foundations of modern persuasion. Another
principle, which required memorisation of the text, is no longer
fashionable.
The Five Principles
1 Invention
Ìnvention' is about identifying the central question which lies at

the heart of the issue being addressed and marshalling the most
persuasive arguments to answer it. The answer comes in the form
of direct evidence such as witnesses and contracts, and through
àrtistic' devices by which the speaker builds an argument based
on ethos or character, logos or reasoning, and pathos or passion.
2 Arrangement
Àrrangement' is about how to structure and order an argument.

What is the strongest point? What should come first, second,
third and so on in the way a case is made? Àrrangement' is the
thinking and organising framework for presenting a case. It is the
key to the coherence and the flow of an argument. Knowing
which framework to apply is the most valuable shortcut in the

preparation of any formal communication.
3 Style
`Style' involves choosing the most persuasive and evocative

language to make your case. It is not just what you have to
say which is important but what words you use to express
your thoughts. Style is making choices about words (diction)
and putting the words into sentences (composition). Grand,
middle and plain styles were identified. Aristotle called meta-
phor – that is, expressing something in terms of something
else – `the most important thing by far'. Nevertheless, ìt will still
be lacking in impact unless it is seasoned with the salt of wit'.
Today we know that tapping into the imaginative power of the
right side of our brain is the best way to create style through the
use of metaphor.
4 Memory
`Memory' refers to the Greek-Roman habit of memorising

speeches. I don't recommend memorising text beyond a few key
sentences such as your opening and closing lines. When you
memorise, you get too fixated with recalling what you have to
say rather than putting the focus on getting your message across.
5 Delivery
`Delivery' is about aligning your voice and body language with

your message. It is not just what you say and how you express
yourself that count, but also how you express yourself non-
verbally. Aristotle divided delivery into control of voice and
gestures.
Non-verbal communication reveals your real emotional state.

It is hard to trick an audience. If your words say one thing and
your body and voice are saying something else, no one will be
convinced by your words. People believe what your body and
voice are saying. The great actor Jimmy Stewart recalled how, in
his first feature film, The Murder Man, in 1935, Ì was all hands and
feet, and didn't know what to do with either'. Actors train to make
their act fluent. So should speakers.
Without doubt, we share one thing in common with those

who lived in Aristotle's day. Speaking under performance pressure
gives people the collywobbles! Speaking in the Athenian ecclesia
must have been the same nerve-wracking experience that speaking
in a presentation, to the media or in a negotiation is today. The
good news is that there are techniques to help address these
anxieties. They will be discussed in Chapter 5, on business
presentations.
Aristotle's principles, with the exception of memory, remain

the core issues in persuasive communication today. They make
up much of the subject matter of this book and have equal bearing
on how we make business presentations, communicate in the
media and negotiate.
Artistic Persuasion
Aristotle said that you can persuade someone through direct

evidence such as producing witnesses and documents, or through
the use of ethos, logos and pathos – the so-called àrtistic' persuasion.
An audience can be persuaded by a speaker's character (ethos), by
the reasoning of their argument (logos) and by the speaker's passion
(pathos). Like a triangle, they form a unity (see Figure 1.1). You
can't succeed by applying one and not the other two principles
Ethos
(Character)
Logos Pathos
(Logic, language) (Passion)
Figure 1.1 Aristotle's Rhetoric
Being persuasive is really about speaking from your heart, your

head and your soul.
Ethos or Character
Greek thinking about persuasion began with ethos, meaning

character, but what is character? My father used to call it repu-
tation. Your reputation, he said, means everything in your
business. Any audience confronted by a speaker automatically
wonders: Who are you? What are your values and beliefs? Why
should I trust you? What qualifies you to speak on this subject?
What special experience and understanding gives you `standing'
to authoritatively discuss this subject? How willing are you to
share your own sometimes painful experiences in order to give
authenticity to what you are saying? What àdded value' do you
bring to the table or the public platform?
Ethos can build a bridge of trust and confidence with another
person.
Logos or Reasoning
In Greek, logos means reasoning or argument. Homo sapiens, the wise

and rational human, chooses the optimal outcome based on logical
argument. Logos is the work of the head. The reasoning process
is centred in the left side of the brain.
The framework of rules for building a logical, rational, persua-
sive and defensible argument is at the heart of Western science,
knowledge and institutions. Law is supposed to be rational and
logical. Bureaucracy was invented as the rational science of
administration. Management consultants apply rational principles
to the organisations they study. Western systems of education
place overwhelming stress on developing the rational/logical fac-
ulties of students. And, in this era of globalisation, even the
economy is supposedly managed on the rational principle of the
`level playing field'. Chapter 2, on thinking and organising,
devotes itself to logos and its practical application in persuasive
argument.
Pathos or Passion
Pathos is the feeling or passion you have for your subject. If you
don't feel committed to what you say and do, you can't expect
others to be committed. Pathos has made the transition from Greek
to modern usage in English. It means to demonstrate feeling and
sympathy or suffering. Passion will do. You don't need to
demonstrate suffering for your work, but you do need to show
feeling. Passion is the work of the heart. The emotional processing
which takes place in the right-hand side of the brain balances the
rational processing of the left-hand side.
Australia's dominant Anglo-Celtic culture distrusts passion,
almost with a passion. The traditional upbringing for boys, in
particular, has stressed the need for the ways of the head to
dominate the unpredictable wiles of the heart. The experience of

European history in this century led observers such as Freud to
believe that civilisation depended for its existence on the repres-
sion of basic urges and passions.
Yet a life which lacks the yeast of emotion is dull beyond

endurance. It is true that emotion starts wars, but emotion is also
at the heart of the great refinements of art and culture. Where is
music without emotion? Or art? And what about poetry or human
communication?
Passion changes the world and it is the people with

unshakeable beliefs who make change happen. As the American
essayist Emerson remarked, one person with a belief is worth
99 who have only interests. The force of their personality
and convictions can influence the emotions and passions of
others.
You can't fake passion – people know straight away if you try
to. Genuine passion grows out of a deep-seated belief. I am
sometimes asked in seminars how someone can express passion
when they really don't feel it. Some public servants, for instance,
tell me they feel anything but passionate about presenting a
routine report. Well, maybe there is no way to be passionate
about a routine report. Nevertheless, people can genuinely feel
passionate about doing the best job possible on everything they
attempt. They can feel a passionate belief in the value of the
system in which they are writing their routine report (if they truly
believe in it).
I believe that life is too short for confining your passions
to home or to your activities outside work. Work takes up
too much time for that. If people feel no passion for their work
then they can never express passion about it. Maybe they
should think about doing something else. That's what John Bell
did.
John Bell
My friend, the businessman John Bell (1949-93), embodied real

ethos, logos and pathos in his life and the way he communicated.
John Bell was the Australian managing director of the Esprit
clothing company. He once told me that no one needed to buy
another T-shirt, but as a businessman he wanted to weld together
his fundamental need to sell more T-shirts with doing good on a
wider stage. He wanted to make a difference to the lives of
vulnerable young people: unemployed kids, drug-addicted kids,
abandoned kids. To do so, he began bringing his heart and soul
to work as well as his head.
Late in his short life, John Bell decided that success in business
should be measured by more than just profits. He began exploring
how he could put more into the community than just fashion
items. Those who knew him over many years say his character,
wellbeing and peace of mind were transformed by the experience.
In the last year of his life, I worked with John Bell as his
communication adviser. I became a sounding board for his ideas
on social and environmental issues and how to communicate
them. In reality, the relationship went beyond that. Not only were
we good friends, but we also became joint mentors for each other.
We had met when I spoke at a business function to launch the

Victorian office of a group of non-profit lawyers called the
Environmental Defenders. Some time later, he called me and asked
whether I would help him to communicate better. He wanted to
take his message out into the community. We spent many days
working on sharpening his skills. He was hungry for the knowl-
edge. We discussed how to influence different personality styles.
What was just the right way to get through to one person or
another? How could a person speak with ethos or character? What
were the most persuasive ways, logos, to put together an argument?
What were the best ways to deliver it? What is powerful body
language and how do you read the body language of the people
who are listening? How could he lead his team of people to feel
the same passion, pathos, about this mission?
At Esprit, John Bell decided to pursue a strategy of making his

company stand for more than just selling clothes. It would be a
business with a social conscience. His company would have two
bottom lines. Neither the financial bottom line nor the social
bottom line would be allowed to over-ride the other.
The Esprit Cares Trust Fund was formed to siphon off a small
percentage of the turnover of the company to support community
and environmental concerns. The trust gave support to homeless
kids, funded the employment of young people beyond the needs
of the company, and ran a farm at Taggerty in Victoria as a
self-help project for children at risk. Esprit staff could take time
off from work each month for voluntary community work.
John Bell was full of plans. He wanted to set up a clothing label

of, by and for street kids. He was inspired by the success of the
Cross Colours label in Los Angeles where kids from opposing gangs
appeared to be working harmoniously on a project to produce a street
label. He was confident that Australian street kids also had the
potential to set up a street wear line with wide market appeal.
To get his message out, John began arranging a heavy schedule

of talks and media appearances, especially on the theme of youth
unemployment. He would talk to business breakfasts, lunches and
dinners, to community groups and youth groups, to large groups
and small. His audiences were often sceptical. They would not
be swayed by emotional appeals based on pathos alone. Bell worked
hard to deliver his message in a framework of solid reasoning or
logos, arguing his case step by step to its logical conclusion. The
frameworks which John Bell and I worked on to organise his
thinking are contained in this book.
“As soon as you move one step up

from the bottom, your effectiveness
depends on your ability to reach others
through the spoken and written word.”
Peter Drucker
He built an evidence bank. A diary/scrapbook was his constant

companion. He would paste clippings from newspapers or mag-
azines that interested him or write out a quote he had heard which
he thought might be useful some time in the future. He was always
turning over in his mind how to say something more effectively
or how he might enthuse other business leaders to take up social
concerns.
I am often asked the question: Are great communicators born

or made? My answer is that, like John Bell, they make themselves
through sheer hard work. Some people have natural gifts such as
easiness in company and a facility for dealing with others. But
that is not enough to make someone effective in the difficult
situations of communicating in a business environment in present-
ing or negotiating with others or in speaking on the media. A
friend of mine at the Australian Graduate School of Management,
James Carlopio, is fond of saying that communicating with the
living is only a little easier than communicating with the dead.
He's right.
The purpose of this book is to make communicating with the
living a little easier still. Aristotle had it all worked out. Come
join me in putting on his thinking cap.
CHAPTER 2
THINKING AND ORGANISING
1 Persuasion in Greece 6 Which structure is

and Rome better?
2 Five-point plan of 7 Deductive and
persuasion inductive arguments
3 Prototype 8 Cross-cultural
advertisement using communication
five-point plan of 9 The key point
persuasion 10 Constructing an
4 Using the five-point argument: Avoid
plan upside-down thinking
5 A four-part story: A 11 Answering questions
variation on the 12 Question and
five-point plan answer format for
presentations
Before they start, they do not know what they are going to
say; when they are speaking, they do not know what they
are saying; and when they have finished, neither they nor
their audience know what they have said.
Winston Churchill, 1912
THINKING AND ORGANISING 15
AT HIS LYCEUM in Athens 2340 years ago, Aristotle taught

that the power of logical argument, logos, was the most important
tool of persuasion, above nobility of sentiment (ethos) and polish
in style (pathos). At the heart of logical argument is the notion of
proposition and proof.
To this day, leading-edge business communicators rely on the
compelling logical system developed by Aristotle. Whether your
communication needs are making a business presentation, writing
a letter of proposal, or answering questions in a negotiation or to
the media, you need a framework to sharpen your message.
We live in a world where there is too much information and

data and too little time to make sense of it. Time has become the
scarcest resource as people try to grapple with the uncertainties
involved in decision-making. There is rarely enough time to coolly
analyse all the information which could have a bearing on the
decisions we make. That is why we need excellent systems for
organising, analysing and thinking about information.
There is no more important task for executives than being able

to condense a mass of information into its essential elements and
then create a coherent and persuasive argument to underpin the
judgments they make. The structures invented by Aristotle serve
this purpose. They impose a framework, or way of thinking about
information.
Logical structures are time-saving because they allow you to

organise your material quickly into a persuasive argument. It is
like learning the shortcuts in a strange city. With this knowledge
in your head, you get to your destination in the quickest possible
time, with only half the stress.
For example, the former head of a national law firm once told
me that, in order to persuade his lawyer colleagues about the
merits of something, it was essential to present the idea in a tightly
argued logical framework. Lawyers, being the rational creatures
that they are, wanted to see the framework before they would
buy the contents of the idea inside. He assured me that the same
idea, presented without a persuasive conceptual framework, would
be rejected out of hand.
Creating a persuasive conceptual framework is also at the heart

of what management consultants do. It is no surprise that the
McKinsey firm was founded by a group of accountants and
lawyers who wanted to apply the analytical and conceptual skills
of their disciplines to problem-solving in management. Elite con-
sulting firms bring a number of conceptual models as baggage
when they enter a business seeking to solve its problems, but none
is more important than the clear-thinking model for logically
setting out the framework of the problem and its possible solu-
tions. This chapter reveals the formula which McKinsey and other
management consultants use to structure their arguments and
present their findings to clients.
Persuasion in Greece and Rome
McKinsey's structure for presenting an argument, shown in detail

below, owes a great debt to the thinking taught at Aristotle's
Lyceum. Aristotle called the logical structuring of a presentation
the àrrangement'.
The arrangement of an argument would depend on its purpose.
Aristotle divided rhetoric into categories dealing with whether or
not the audience had to make some judgment. Judicial rhetoric
was for persuading a court of law about past events; deliberative
rhetoric was persuading an audience about some future action;
and demonstrative rhetoric was speeches used on some public
occasion to praise or blame. This last category aims to influence
or play on the values and beliefs of the audience. A persuasive
logical argument doesn't try to change the belief system of the

audience, but rather builds on people's existing values.
Contemporary consultants are in the business of deliberative

rhetoric – that is, persuading their clients to take some future
action – and Aristotle's system for putting a well-organised delib-
erative case remains the fundamental framework of a persuasive
argument. This system has four parts, the most important of which
are the proposition and proof:
1 Exordium
Introduction. Creating goodwill, putting the audience in a recep-
tive frame of mind. See `bait' (p. 18).
2 Narratio
The factual background. Clear, brief and persuasive. This is often
deleted in deliberative presentations. See `problem' (p. 18).
3 Confirmatio or Probatio
Proof. Usually begins with a proposition. The proof of the case
using all available means of persuasion, such as:
(a) showing the benefits that will result;

(b) appealing to the listener's self-interest.
Refutes likely objections. Rebuts the case of adversaries. See

`solution' (p. 18).
4 Peroratio
The speaker reserves his or her strongest appeal for the climax,
such as an appeal to self-interest on a higher plane. Aristotle
believed there were four elements to this stage:
(a) Your own material should be amplified.

(b) The case of an adversary is diminished.
(c) A summary or recapitulation may also be appropriate at
this stage.
(d) The speech may end by inspiring emotion.
In this century, Winston Churchill, Adolf Hitler, Martin Luther

King and others stuck by this creed by ending their speeches on
a high emotional pitch. Aristotle suggested a conclusion along the
lines of: Ì have spoken, you have heard, you have the facts, judge'.
Five-point Plan of Persuasion
More than 2000 years later, no one has really improved on the
principles set out by the Greek teachers of rhetoric. Today, many
sophisticated sales pitches made in television advertising follow
basically the same framework that was set down by Aristotle and
his friends. The following is a classic five-point plan for making
a business presentation aimed at persuading an audience. This
framework is suitable if you are alerting your audience to a
problem or issue on which you want their response. You may be
presenting a strategic plan for a business or organisation with a
call for specific action. You may be selling ideas or products or
services ending with a direct pitch.
1 Bait (exordium): A story or statement which arouses audience

interest.
2 Problem or question (narratio): You pose a problem or question
that has to be solved or answered.
3 Solution or answer (confirmatio/probatio): You resolve the issues
which have been raised.
4 Pay-off or benefit (peroratio): You state specific advantages to

each member of the audience of adopting the course of action
recommended in the solution or answer.
5 Call to action (peroratio): You state the concrete actions which
should follow your presentation.
Watch television for a night or two and you will notice this
five-point plan being used as the structure for some advertising.
As I am a coffee addict, I will make up an advertisement for a
hypothetical Moccafe brand to illustrate how the five-point plan
can be used.
Prototype Advertisement Using Five-point Plan of

Persuasion
Coffee Advertisement
1 Bait: Sexy-looking people wouldn't start their day without

coffee. (You identify with this because you see yourself as sexy
too and you can't do without coffee in the morning. So your
interest is aroused.)
2 Problem: The problem or question is: What brand of coffee
would sexy people – that is, people who are serious about their
coffee – want to be seen with in their kitchen?
3 Solution: Moccafe is sexiest for one or two or three reasons:
(a) Taste. It has a special roasting technique.
(b) Reputation. Discerning people buy it.
(c) Price. People know you pay a premium.
4 Pay-off: You will be made even sexier by sharing Moccafe or
drinking it alone.
5 Call to action: Buy Moccafe coffee, of course.
The five-point plan is just as evident in real, and successful,

advertisements:
Shell: Air That I Breathe Advertisement
1 Bait: Attractive visuals of young people pumping gas. Hollies

song on audio track.
2 Problem: Over 80 per cent of the lead in the air of our cities
comes from car exhaust fumes.
3 Solution: So if every car that could only use leaded petrol used
Shell Half Lead, our air quality would improve dramatically.
Use Shell Half Lead.
4 Pay-off: Just as good for your car. Better for the air we all
breathe.
5 Call to action: Go well. Go Shell.
Evangelists like Billy Graham use the five-point structure in

their quest for saving souls at revivalist rallies:
Prototype Billy Graham Presentation Using Five-point Plan
1 Bait: I have sinned.

2 Problem: We are all sinners.
3 Solution: Turn to God.
4 Pay-off: You will be saved.
5 Call to action: Get down with me and pray.
Using the Five-point Plan
Your business presentations can use the powerful logical arrange-

ment of the five-point plan to be as persuasive as these ads.
The architecture of the five-point plan looks like a kite. It is

narrow and sharp at its apex (you talk one-on-one), then widens
to addressing the general issues raised by the topic before nar-
rowing again to addressing your audience one-on-one. So it shifts
from the specific to the general back to the specific.
Begin your presentation with a bait: get people to be curious
and interested in what is to follow. Once this step is achieved,
link your bait to a statement of the problem or question which
your bait raises. By now the purpose of the presentation should
be absolutely clear to the audience. This leads to the detailed
resolution of the issue contained in the solution or answer. The
pay-off or benefit is a statement of personal advantages to be
derived by resolving the issue in the manner suggested. It con-
cludes with a call to action in specific terms.
An aid to helping the audience follow this logical progression
is to use the terms contained in the structure as part of the talk:
`The problem is . . .'

`What is the solution?'
`What is the pay-off from adopting this solution?'
`What I am asking you to do is . . .'
Using these terms makes it clear to the audience what stage

the talk has reached. Remember that an audience cannot replay
your talk to pull the threads of an argument together. They have
to be understood on a first hearing or people will switch off.
To avoid confusing your audience, it is important not to revisit

an earlier stage of the talk once it has passed. If you are already
talking through the solution, avoid saying, Ànother problem is . . .'
In fact, if the solution needs qualifying in some way, don't use the
term `problem' again at all, because it will only make the audience
think you are returning to an earlier part of the presentation.
This five-point plan is ideal for an impromptu talk as well as

a much longer presentation. The art of mastering the impromptu
speech is to make your topic manageable by confining your talk
to only one aspect of the topic. For example, if the topic is `rain',
reduce the issue to talking about the last time it rained or some
other narrowly defined interpretation. It is extremely hard to talk
globally about an issue without a lot of thought. Using the
five-point plan, however, you can talk about one aspect of an
issue with virtually no preparation at all.
To prepare your five-point plan, whether the talk is for one

minute or one hour, the first stages are to define the problem or
question, and your call to action. The call to action is most
powerful when it contains concrete actions or tasks which you
want the audience to perform. Write down the problem or
question and call to action in a few lines. This simple process will
help clarify your mind about the task ahead. Of course, in
impromptu talks, you may not even enjoy the simple luxury of
writing time.
Once you have isolated the problem and your call to action,
the next stage of preparation is to work out a solution to your
problem. The solution or answer should be no more than three
points. How you approach the solution (or `proof' in Aristotle's
logic) will vary according to the problem and the situation in
which you are presenting, as we'll find out in the next section.
You will then be able to identify the pay-off, or benefit – the
individual or personal gain to the audience which will come from
adopting your solution. But keep the pay-off quite separate in
your presentation structure.
The final stage of preparation is creating a bait. This is prepared

last but presented first. It is the stage of preparation which people
attending my seminars on communication have most trouble
grappling with. What makes a good bait? As the term implies,
like the angler hooking the fish, you want to hook your audience
with the bait. The most important element of the bait is that it
is connected to the problem or question which is to follow.
The best baits are stories from personal experience which

illustrate a microcosm of the problem. Personal stories and anec-
dotes work well because they are usually strongly felt by the
speaker and are relatively easy to remember in the telling. Personal
anecdotes help the audience to identify with the speaker and get
to know their character. These stories also have the advantage of
helping to relax the speaker in the difficult opening stage of the
presentation. Metaphors make excellent baits. (A whole section
of the book on the creation of metaphors follows in Chapter 3.)
A powerful or shocking statistic can be a successful bait. But
whatever the bait is, its object is to make the audience listen with
avid curiosity to what follows.
The following example shows the five-point plan being used

in a short presentation. The topic is, `Should Australia become a
republic?' See if you can follow the `kite' of the five-point plan,
moving from the specific to the general argument to the specific
call to action.
Prototype Five-point Plan Speech on an Australian Republic
1 Bait
Symbols are important. People still choose to marry today because

it is a symbolic as well as a legal recognition of their relationship.
That is why I married. Many families have special affectionate
names for their children as symbols of the bonds which exist in
a family. That is why we have a special family name for our
daughter. As Australians, you and I also value the symbols which
tie us together and identify our democracy. The flag and anthem
are two such symbols.
Note: Personal references in the bait reveal something of the
speaker's character or ethos. The symbols are individual and
family-specific first, moving to general and national in scope at
the end.
2 Problem or question
The problem is that one of our key national symbols – the

position of our head of state – is no longer appropriate to the sort
of mature nation that we now are. The head of state is the
symbolic personification of our nationhood. Did you know there
is no mention of the prime minister or cabinet in our constitution?
The only person mentioned in our constitution is the Queen's
representative, the governor-general. It is quite absurd to look to
Buckingham Palace as the centre of Australian identity as we
approach the second century of our nationhood.
Note: The bait is linked to the problem directly through the
discussion of symbols in both.
3 Solution or answer
The move to a republic has both rational and emotional appeal.

Note: The solution contains opportunities for detailed argu-
ments.
There are three reasons for this. First, Australia's democracy is

secure and does not need ties to Britain to safeguard it. Second,
Australia's national identity now reflects the multicultural origins
of our population. Our links to British heritage have declined as
the ethnic makeup of the country has changed. Third, Australia
and Britain are now enmeshed in their own regions, Australia in
Asia and the Pacific and Britain in Europe through its membership
of the EU.
Note: The discussion of the solution allows for spelling out the
key arguments in detail.
4 Pay-off
The benefit to all of us from changing the constitution is that we

will feel proud that our national symbols are in line with modern
reality. All of us want to live in a truly contemporary society, not
one where we are forced to cringe when explaining our national
institutions to others. Imagine the embarrassment of having to
explain to your foreign friends why the British monarch opened
the Sydney Olympic Games. You will be saved such embarrass-
ment only if Australia moves quickly to change its constitution.
Note: Shift from the general in the solution to the specific in
the pay-off. Also note final linking sentence to the call for action
which follows.
5 Call to action
Support Australia becoming a republic so that the Olympic Games

in 2000 is opened by an Australian head of state. You can
contribute to the momentum for change by joining the Australian
Republican Movement.
Note: Call to action always contains concrete steps.
A Four-part Story: A Variation on the

Five-point Plan
A variation of the five-point plan is contained in the structure

favoured by management consultants McKinsey and Co. Helen
Nugent, a long-serving partner at McKinsey before joining Westpac

as head of strategy, told me that learning to apply this corporate
structure was the most important thing that she had learned at
McKinsey. The structure is particularly effective in presentations
where the main purpose is identifying a problem and then solving
it. It follows the oldest story-telling routine in history.
The Structure of a Four-part Story
1 Situation
Briefly tell the audience things they already know which sum up
the state of the business, the market, or whatever issue is the focus
of the presentation. The situation is designed to be a brief synopsis
or overview of conditions which are well known to the audience.
Do not create disagreement at this stage.
2 Complication
Identify a complication or problem which threatens the viability

of the status quo outlined in the situation. This may take the form
of changing market conditions, a slowdown in growth or the entry
of new competitors, technological change or issues in industrial
relations.
The complication may answer one of the following questions:
What's changed? What's happened? What's new? What's different
now? What's upset the way things were? What's gone wrong?
3 Question
The problem identified in the complication leads to the formation

of a question. For example: What can be done? What choices do
we have? How can we succeed? How do we proceed?
4 Answer
The answer or hypothesis takes up the great bulk of the presen-

tation and is a detailed response to the issue raised by the
question.
This classic story-telling formula is commonly used by authors
and creators writing books and making movies. Consider an
example from ABC Television's great success story for children,
Bananas in Pyjamas.
Bananas in Pyjamas Four-part Story Line
1 Situation
The bananas, B1 and B2, are having a birthday. They are planning
a party for themselves but don't intend to tell their neighbourhood
friends, the teddies, until the last minute.
2 Complication
The teddies, unaware of the bananas' plans, are organising their

own surprise birthday party for the bananas.
3 Question
What will happen as the two parties are planned secretly?
4 Answer
A great deal of confusion results, but all ends happily with the
bananas and teddies sharing the goodies they each purchased for
their respective parties.
Using the Four-part Story in Letters of Proposal
A house rule at McKinsey and Co is that all letters of proposal

sent from the organisation must be set out using the four-part
story. The great strength of using this structure for such letters is
that it places issues in the mind of the client in the first three
paragraphs of the letter. Take the following example:
Letter to potential client from a law firm.
1 Situation
You may be happily married now.
2 Complication
But the sad fact is that one-third of marriages end in divorce. You
should not ignore reality and the odds you face.
3 Question
What prudent and proactive steps should you take to be well

prepared in case the worst happens?
4 Answer
Begin saving.
Note: The answer should set out a number of steps to be taken.
Which Structure is Better?
The five-point plan is an excellent structure for making a sales

presentation where you are asking the audience to buy a product
Five-point plan Four-part story
1 Bait
1 Situation
2 Problem
2 Complication
3 Solution
3 Question
4 Pay-off
4 Answer
5 Call to action
Figure 2.1 Structures
or service. The bait is designed to hook the audience's interest

and create a high level of involvement. The call to action is a
specific request to buy. The simplicity and logic of this structure
also makes it easy to design a speedy presentation, such as in an
impromptu situation.
The four-part story, on the other hand, is ideal for a spoken or
written report to a client. It assumes that not much effort is required
to gain the interest of the audience in the subject. It is very focused
on the key question – answer nexus. McKinsey and Co advise their
consultants to get to the answer stage within one minute. They
assume that their high-level audiences will be impatient to get to
the point. Delay beyond one minute risks presenting to an audience
which is no longer giving its full attention.
There is no absolute rule about which structure will suit

individual purposes. The best advice is to think through each
situation and decide which is appropriate for the occasion. You
can also massage the structures. Try changing the order to see if
your case becomes more forceful. For instance, in a sales presen-

tation, it is worth considering whether the benefit or pay-off
should go first. After all, a sales prospect may be very tempted
by an opening line which promises a specific benefit.
Deductive and Inductive Arguments
There is a difference between deductive and inductive arguments.

If you want to get to the point quickly, you need to use an
inductive rather than a deductive argument. These terms were
invented by Aristotle.
Deductive Argument
Deductive arguments are a step-by-step process of building a con-

clusion based on laying out all the premises. The classic example
used of a deductive argument is Àll men are mortal. Socrates is a
man. Therefore Socrates is mortal.' The argument begins with a major
premise. It is followed by a minor premise which is linked to the
first. By deduction, you then draw a conclusion. The test of a
deductive argument is whether the conclusion is true or false. If your
audience needs the assurance of a slowly paced argument which
cautiously builds agreement about all the steps before leaping to a
conclusion, then a deductive argument is best. However, such an
argument can run off the rails before you get to the conclusion if
there is disagreement with one of your premises.
Inductive Argument
An inductive argument works the other way. It usually flows away

from your conclusion. An inductive argument is a generalisation
which is assumed to apply to and support the propositions which
flow from it. The test of an inductive argument is whether the

evidence supporting the conclusion is strong or weak. The prop-
ositions which flow from an inductive argument are sometimes
called the legs. Take the following inductive argument. `Taxation
reform will strengthen Australia's competitiveness.' The legs of the
argument which flow from this proposition are:
1 Reform will reduce the costs of doing business.

2 Reform will shift the burden from direct to indirect tax and is
an incentive to work.
3 Reform will attract foreign investment in some sectors.
The test of the argument that `tax reform will strengthen Australia's
competitiveness' therefore lies in the strength or weakness of the
three legs which support the case. These legs are always put after
the generalisation.
Inductive arguments are more creative and powerful than deduc-
tive ones because they move beyond established facts. Their proofs
are looser and their conclusions can be more speculative and
dynamic. We must use our own judgment to decide whether the
evidence strongly supports the conclusion. On the other hand,
deductive arguments are conservative. The true/false test mostly
means a deductive conclusion is locked into things we know for
sure. Most of the things that are worthwhile and interesting to
think about – like the best organisational structure for your busi-
ness – lie beyond the banalities of what we know for sure! Although
we might accept that Socrates is mortal, where does that conclusion
take us? Not very far, because it is so plainly obvious! When you
are analysing your business or even your love life, it is far more
dynamic to take a look beyond what is known for certain.
If your audience is ready to be fast tracked to hear your general

conclusion and then listen to the supporting evidence, go for an
inductive argument. If you are presenting in a business climate

where time is short and there is agreement about the basic issues,
always argue inductively.
Cross-cultural Communication
As Western business becomes increasingly enmeshed in the Asia-

Pacific region, recognition needs to be given to the cultural
differences of other societies.
Professors at some Australian universities complain that their
Asian students are reluctant to make a central point in their essays,
project reports and oral presentations. These Asian students are
merely conforming, however, to their own cultural style in which,
in some situations, the audience is left to draw its own conclusions
about the message of a presentation.
Business is done differently in Asia. It operates by different

norms. Choosing a business partner is rarely based on a compet-
itive pitch or presentation alone, but involves a long process of
relationship-building. The relationship between the parties may
be developed at first through personal contacts and over time is
nurtured through social engagements, even a game of golf.
In some Asian societies, making a skilful business presentation

requires mastering the indirect approach. Speakers can talk around
the point, reaching what the Japanese call a ketsu, or non-
conclusion, rather than talking to the point. It illustrates the
different place of business presentations in Asian societies.
The concept of `face' is also an important element in the

developing relationship. It is embarrassing in many Asian societies
to say `no'. A traditional Western-style presentation usually
demands a `yes' or `no' answer by the client. Creating such a
clear-cut choice, while perfectly acceptable at `home', can seem

insensitive in an Asian context.
Understanding the authority structure of an Asian business is

another prerequisite to marketing success. In a Western business
setting, presenters usually start with the gung-ho assumption that
their task is to persuade the audience. In the traditional Asian
business setting, however, formal authority tends to rest on one
pair of shoulders only. The head of the group is deferred to with
great respect by other members of the organisation. In this envi-
ronment, a presenter doesn't so much need to `win' the argument
with the group, but gain the respect of its most senior member.
The Key Point
Being able to pick the key point in your case is central to

persuasive speaking and writing in the law, business and politics.
Leading QC Tom Hughes shed light on the art of persuasive-
ness when he said in a portrait article in the Weekend Australian that
he believed being successful in the modern law requires a difficult
combination of being brief but thorough at the same time. The
essence of winning in court is to pick the real point of the case
and not flog the ones which have no legs.
James Carville, Bill Clinton's presidential campaign director in
1992, hung a poster in the Little Rock headquarters which said
`The Economy, Stupid', a play on the old saying, `Keep it simple,
stupid'. It was a sharp daily reminder that the focus of the year-
long campaign should not drift away from one message. The
opinion polls were showing that Clinton's strongest point was
the weak economic state of the United States under George Bush.
Years later, an article on James Carville in Vanity Fair remarked
that it required no act of genius to pick Bush's weak point.
Carville's genius was to impose the discipline of sticking to one

point when there were virtually daily opportunities for distractions
into second-order issues.
Just as picking the point of the case is vital, it is also crucial not
to have too many points. Most people who find themselves
speaking as experts on a subject really know what they are talking
about. It becomes a constant temptation for them to present too
many points of detail. The problem is that the detail is usually lost
on the audience. As Voltaire said, the easiest way to bore someone
to death is to tell them everything you know about a subject.
Constructing an Argument: Avoid Upside-down

Thinking
Many people make the mistake of presenting their argument from

the wrong end. They argue upside down. It's what they were
taught at school and university. An upside-down argument begins
by laying out all the premises of the case and then reaching a
conclusion. The problem with arguing upside-down is that you
tempt your audience to turn off before you reach your main points
and conclusion. This sort of method requires real patience on the
part of the listener. Certainly, you finally reach your conclusion,
but will the audience stay the course of the argument with you?
Upside-down presentations look like an inverted triangle,
where the base becomes the apex. Your argument flows down-
wards towards a conclusion.
Right-side-up presentations begin with the conclusion or the
key idea of the argument. The supporting case is the detail which
occupies the space beneath. The great virtue of right-side-up
presenting is that you get to the point right away. Your audience
can then see the relationship between the conclusion and the parts
of your argument as you develop them. At McKinsey they call

this right-side-up thinking the pyramid principle. The point always
comes first, at the apex of the pyramid.
Answering Questions
It is not enough to make an effective presentation if you then fall

down on answering questions. After all, persuasive presentations
identify and address the underlying or key questions in the minds of
the audience. The most effective method of dealing with questions
asked at the end of your presentation is to anticipate them. Naturally,
the same rules apply in answering questions from a journalist in a
media interview. I'll give more consideration to this in Chapter 7.
As part of your business preparation, write out the most likely
questions you will be asked and the answers you would give. In
particular, give attention to the questions you would least like to
be asked.
Format for Effective Answering
You can follow a simple format for giving effective answers to

questions.
1 Point
This is the one point or statement you want to make in reply to

the question.
2 Reason
This is the one supporting argument for the point. After stating
your point, you can begin Part 2 by saying, `That's because . . .'
or `The reason is. . .'
3 Example
This is the example or brief story which illustrates the point you
have made.
In reality, it is not easy to think of this structure as you
spontaneously respond to questions. However, if you develop the
habit of mind of thinking about answering questions in this way
before you face a live audience, you will create the discipline of
sticking closely enough to this structure.
Illustration of Point, Reason, Example Answering Structure
Question: How do you effectively answer questions?

Answer: Stick to the structure—point, reason,
example [point]. That's because it is
spare and logical [reason]. For example,
too many people never come to the
point when answering questions.
You know Harry. He is lost in the
wilderness when he answers a question.
If you are trying to follow him, you get
lost too [example].
Question and Answer Format for Presentations
As an alternative to the five-point plan and four-part story, the

question and answer format is a powerful presentation structure.
Its strength is that it addresses the questions that are in the mind
of the audience.
Making this format work means anticipating the real questions
in the minds of your audience.
Example: Question and Answer Format in Presentation
I believe the five key questions which you as decision-makers must

answer in your own minds are the following:
1 What are your key needs in purchasing a new system?

2 Which proposal most closely fits your needs?
3 Does your preferred provider fit your budgetary parameters?
4 How would the new system be installed?
5 What continuing service would be provided to support the
new system?
In today's presentation, I will try to answer the questions in your

mind and explain how our system meets your needs.
The example identifies five questions in the mind of the client.
The presentation will then be devoted to answering those ques-
tions. Blending this question and answer format with the five-point
plan, you may set out your presentation as follows:
Bait
Question 1. Answer. Benefit.
Call to action
CHAPTER 3
PERSUASIVE LANGUAGE
1 Switching on the 6 Sources of metaphor

whole brain 7 Seven steps for
2 How the brain creating metaphors
processes information and images
3 The senses: Visual, 8 Humour
auditory, kinesthetic 9 Storytelling
4 Creating word pictures 10 Being wholly
5 Metaphor and Aristotle persuasive
I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and

I understand.
Attributed to Confucius
In truth, the ideas and images in men's minds are the

invisible powers that constantly govern them.
John Locke
SOME PEOPLE HAVE a way with words. They make lan-

guage come alive. Their words spit and boil or caress you like
a sea breeze. Word pictures come naturally to them. Other
people bore you with their words. They use thousands of words
when a few would do. They talk in jargon or arid bureaucratese.
PERSUASIVE LANGUAGE 39
Their images are clichéd or non-existent. Sadly, most people in

business talk in a dull way rather than with bright, animated
language.
One person inspires and persuades you; another sends you to
sleep. One makes you effortlessly remember what they say; another
just makes you want to forget. When one person speaks, you don't
notice the time passing. When the other speaks, you keep looking
at your watch and daydream about more pleasant things.
Developing persuasive language powers is one technique which

can make you a powerful communicator. There are just a few
principles involved. In this section, the focus is on how you can
say something in such a way as to make your audience actually
want to remember it. Aristotle called this the `style' of rhetoric –
the language of persuasion.
People quickly forget nearly everything that is said to
them. This is hardly surprising given the constant demands
on their attention. They are bombarded by thousands of mes-
sages every day. So if you want your message to be remembered
in this world of information overload and forgetfulness, you haven't
many options. One is to repeat yourself endlessly, which can
become tiresome both for the speaker and the audience. Another
is to use words which act like a stamp on people's memories. Once
there, the words stick like a spider's prey in a web. They become
memory hooks. But before we get to that point, it is useful to know
more about how people think and process information.
Switching on the Whole Brain
To find the key to how people think it is necessary to get inside

their heads. More than half a century ago, Rudyard Kipling wrote
a poem `The Two-sided Man'.
I would go without shirt or shoe,

Friend, tobacco or bread,
Sooner than lose for a minute the two
Separate sides of my head!
Dr Roger Sperry began conducting research into the operation

of the brain in the 1950s and 1960s. Sperry, later awarded the
Nobel Prize for his work, found that our brains have two separate
modes of thinking – verbal and non-verbal. (The notion that there
are two parts to our brains – and to our natures – the opposing
while complementary forces of yin and yang, has in fact been
around for thousands of years.) He carried out `split-brain studies',
as they have become known, on patients suffering severe epilepsy.
The communication pathways between the left and right hemi-
spheres of the brain were severed in an attempt to control seizures
and the surgery had the desired result for the patients. The fits
were controlled while their physical coordination was unaffected.
In further studies, Sperry and his team found that the two halves
of the brain continued to function independently after the con-
necting cable was severed. That cable, made up of millions of
fibres, acted only to integrate the two modes of thinking.
The left hemisphere of the brain is analytical. The right

hemisphere of the brain is creative. This division is sometimes
reversed for left-handers. Maths, numbers, logic, sequence, judg-
ment and speech are features which are at home in the left brain.
Painting, art, music, imagination, creativity and daydreaming are
at home in the right brain.
To communicate an idea effectively, you must use both the

left and right sides of your brain in order to connect with both
sides of the listener's brain. Not many of us do this. As a result,
few people really reach their persuasive potential when commu-
nicating with others. As I once read, `while half a brain is better
Left brain Right brain
Analytical Creative
Language Visualisation
Literal Metaphoric
Sequential Holistic
Logical Feeling
Figure 3.1 How the brain processes information
than none, a whole brain would be better'. The right brain isn't
a spare tyre; it has the same level of importance as the left brain.
Think about a motorbike – if you leave one tyre flat, you won't
make the same progress as with both tyres working.
Too many speakers, media performers and negotiators use

language entirely sourced and manufactured in their left brain. It
is the dry language of logic and analysis. On the other hand,
persuasive communicators speak with both the logical/analytical
powers of the left brain and the creative, visual and metaphoric
powers sourced in the right brain.
The Senses: Visual, Auditory, Kinesthetic
Understanding how our senses influence the way we perceive the

world is a second crucial tool in mastering the communication
process. The minds of highly visual people like painters and
graphic artists, film-makers, architects and interior designers con-
stantly create and respond to images. Confucius was in this
category: Ì see and I remember.' We are gratifying our own visual
appetites when we watch television or a sporting match or go to
an art gallery.
Other people are auditory. They are verbal and articulate like
smart lawyers and teachers. They are usually very comfortable
talking and doing business on the telephone. They are attuned to
the nuances of meaning in the voices of the people with whom
they are holding a conversation. Some are gifted with a musical
ear. They can recall and create sequences of music. Many of these
people prefer to hear something than read it. By his own admis-
sion, Confucius was not too auditory: Ì hear and I forget.'
Still other people are kinesthetically or movement- and feel-

ing-oriented. They are `hands on' people who are most
comfortable learning through doing. They are carpenters and
builders and mechanics, or maybe dancers and athletes. Many
kinesthetics are also skilled at observing the emotional states of
other people. Others, like wine-tasters and food experts, are finely
attuned to smell (olfactory) and taste (gustatory) sense too.
(Writer Patrick Suskind brings the much neglected sence of smell
alive in the fine novel Perfume, set in the `sweaty, fetid eighteenth
century' in which the main character has the finest nose in Paris
and no personal odour.)
Neurolinguistic programming (NLP) is the study of how the
various sensory channels of communication influence the percep-
tion and learning process. It looks at the relationship between
thinking, language and behaviour. Experts in NLP and accelerated

learning make use of the link between each of the five senses or
channels of communication and the learning process. Visually
oriented people will learn faster and more effectively through
seeing rather than hearing or doing. Auditory learners respond
best to spoken stimulus. Kinesthetic people are hands-on learners
who will benefit most from practical exercises. Maybe Confucius
was mostly kinesthetic: Ì do and I understand.'
Ì see what you mean,' says someone who may be visually

channelled. Ì like what I hear,' says the auditorily channelled. Ìt
feels right,' says the kinesthetically oriented person.
Studies by the originators of NLP, the linguist John Grinder

and computer programmer Richard Bandler, show that the popu-
lation is divided into visual, auditory and kinesthetic in the ratio
of visual 40 per cent, auditory 40 per cent, kinesthetic 20 per cent.
A Playful and Suggestive List of Sensory Stimuli
These stimuli show that we can easily switch in to all sensory

channels. The mere sight of the words and a moment's reflection
can bring the image or sound or touch or smell or taste alive.
Visual Auditory/Sound
Sunrise and sunset Beethoven's Fifth Symphony

Saddam Hussein (opening)
Madonna Fingernails down a
A patchwork of fields from blackboard
an aircraft Sirens
Children at Christmas Rain on a tin roof
Uluru (Ayers Rock) A yacht at its mooring
The sound of gravel beneath Olfactory/Smell

a car wheel
The nose of a Coonawarra
red wine
Kinesthetic/Touch Freshly cut grass
Tarred roads after rain on a
Oppressive heat/ hot summer's day
humidity Dampness in a cupboard
Feet on hot sand Suntan oil
Sweaty palms A bakery
Walking on a log
Pins and needles
Gustatory/Taste
Seaweed when swimming
at a beach A kiss
Butterflies in your stomach Freshly brewed coffee
Exciting the sensory imagination of a listener is a key to placing

ideas in the long-term memory. Ideas expressed in sensory lan-
guage, a right-brain activity, become embedded in the listener's
memory and can be more easily retrieved than facts. I express this
concept in the formula:
Image + Feeling = Memory
Where the term image means any idea or story expressed in

sensory language and feeling is the emotion which the story
evokes.
Creating Word Pictures
So what does a persuasive communicator do with this knowledge

about how people respond to the different sensory channels? Use
it!
Educators design their programs to accommodate the different
learning styles of each type. In creating a seminar, I give careful
consideration to how to program according to the three key
sensory channels – visual, auditory and kinesthetic. I plan to
include in each session a range of stimuli including visual and
video, sound and hands-on practical work.
When preparing a written presentation, I deliberately seek to

include references to the five sensory channels. For example, the
following is an excerpt from a speech I made at the tenth
anniversary dinner held to mark the High Court's decision to
protect Tasmania's Franklin River from hydro-electric develop-
ment.
Tonight the Franklin runs free. The Franklin is free.

Tonight the stars stretch across the heavens above a cold,
wild river. (visual) If we dipped our hands into that wild
river, we would shiver with its cold. (kinesthetic)
Tonight perhaps a frost is clinging to the Huon pines as
they lean over the splashing rapids of the upper river . . .
and the long stretches of the low, broad river. (visual)
Tonight there is thunder – like there is every night – as the
river is channelled through the Churn and the Cauldron.
(auditory)
Tonight the tea-coloured river is sluicing through Thun-
der Rush. (visual and auditory) Tonight the moon may be
casting its deep shadow across the mighty precipice of the
Great Ravine. (visual) Tonight the river is rising and fall-

ing – as it has done for millions of years. (visual)
Tonight we can smell its freedom. (olfactory) We can taste
its freedom too. (gustatory)
I was confident that each of these sentences would provoke a

sensory stimulus (I call it an ìmage' for short) and an emotion in
the audience. The passage was carefully engineered to touch on
each of the five sensory channels. Try using this technique
yourself, not just at an after-dinner occasion, but each time you
want to provoke an emotional response in a business setting.
Metaphor and Aristotle
Of all the devices used to enrich language, metaphor is the most

powerful. Aristotle said: `The most important thing by far is to
have a command of metaphor. For this is the only one that cannot
be learned from anyone else, and is a sign of natural genius, as
to be good at metaphor is to perceive resemblances . . . It gives
clearness, charm and distinction to style.' Aristotle understood that
powerful metaphors come from sensory language. In On Rhetoric,
he observed that `metaphor is judged not only by its fit to the
thing signified, but also by its sound or by the appeal it makes
to the eye or some other sense'.
Metaphor means the process of transferring or carrying over.
When you create a metaphor, you carry meaning across from one
thing to another, and the power to do this exists in the right side
of the brain, the seat of the imagination. Creating metaphors turns
language into art by enabling people to see things in new ways,
by pointing to an unexpected resemblance or relationship between
things. When we create a metaphor, we are using language for
its real purpose: to express meaning. We are entering the realm

of the imagination.
Few of us have the eye and drafting skills to paint or the ear to
write music, but we all have the building blocks in our heads to
create metaphoric meaning. As the social anthropologist Claude
Levi-Strauss said: `Metaphor, far from being a decoration that is
added to language, purifies it and restores it to its original meaning.'
Metaphors make meaning. If you create a metaphor, you are

showing people how to see things in a fresh way. The metaphoric
stories of mythology shaped and terrified the ancient world.
Metaphoric religious texts remain a dominant influence thousands
of years after they were written. Last century, economist Adam
Smith invented the ìnvisible hand' to assure us that there was
redemption in the free market system as it directed the selfish
acts of individuals, as if by an ìnvisible hand', into socially
responsible paths. In postwar Europe, Winston Churchill lamented
that àn iron curtain has descended across the continent'.
As a young schoolboy, I was impressed by the `domino theory',
which implied that if one country fell to communism, adjoining
countries would topple in a domino effect.
In this ecological era, we are all aboard `spaceship earth'. We
can connect with each other through the ìnformation superhigh-
way'. We live in a society where women hit their heads against
`the glass ceiling' as they are prevented from achieving success by
invisible barriers.
Metaphors burn imprints into the mind. They narrow the focus
of a listener's attention to what the speaker wants them to see.
Take an example cited by Catherine Lumby in the Sydney Morning
Herald. Under the headline `Good girls do get raped', she wrote:
A young Sydney barrister, discussing the recent Victorian

case – the Hakopian case – in which a man received a lighter
sentence for raping a prostitute, offered the following anal-

ogy: raping a prostitute, he said, was like stealing a car left
in the middle of George Street with its doors unlocked and
the key in the ignition.
Half an hour after our conversation, I had forgotten the
legal subtleties he urged upon me. His analogy, on the other
hand, was bright in my mind. It told me more, after all,
about attitudes women face in our criminal justice system
than hours of jurisprudential debate.
Although Lumby disagreed with it, the analogy was bright in her
mind. That is what metaphor does. It both evokes imagery and
feeling which are the keys to storing information in the long-term
memory.
Biblical Metaphor
The greatest texts in our literature are rich in metaphor. The Old
Testament of the Bible contains such expressions as àn eye for
an eye, a tooth for a tooth', at once literal and metaphoric in
meaning. Some Christians treat the Bible as a literal text, while
for others it is an extended metaphor, but whatever beliefs people
hold, the Bible is a phenomenal source of metaphor in modern
language.
But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou

shalt not eat it.
Genesis 2:17
But his wife looked back from behind him and she became
a pillar of salt.
Genesis 19:26
A land flowing with milk and honey.

Exodus 3:8
Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men.

Matthew 4:19
It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle,

than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.
Matthew 19:24
Metaphoric Shakespeare
Next to the Bible, the great bard's work is the richest source of
metaphor in our literature.
This royal throne of kings, this sceptred isle,

This earth of majesty, this seat of Mars,
This other Eden, demi-paradise,
This fortress built by nature for herself
Against infection and the hand of war,
This happy breed of men, this little world,
This precious stone set in the silver sea,
Which serves it in the office of a wall,
Or as a moat defensive to a house,
Against the envy of less happier lands,
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England.
Richard II
How sharper than a serpent's tooth it is

To have a thankless child.
King Lear
But soft! What light through yonder window breaks?

It is the East, and Juliet is the sun!
Arise, fair sun, and kill the envious moon,
Who is already sick and pale with grief.
Romeo and Juliet
The winter of our discontent.

Richard III
Metaphor in Politics: The Banana Republic
In May 1986, Paul Keating, then Treasurer of Australia, was taking

part in a talkback radio program. In the course of a lengthy
conversation, he said:
We must let Australians know truthfully, honestly, earn-

estly, just what sort of international hole Australia is in. If
this government cannot get the adjustment, get manufactur-
ing going again and keep moderate wage outcomes and a
sensible economic policy, then Australia is basically done
for. We will just end up being a third rate economy . . .
a banana republic.
The banana republic image was soon flashed on the dealing

screens of the foreign exchange jockeys. In the course of the next
24 hours, the Australian dollar traded through a four-cent range,
falling four cents before recovering three cents. The banana
republic comment had seismic political consequences. As Paul
Kelly wrote in his book, The End of Certainty, `Keating's remark was
inadvertent but it became a psychological pivot'. It was quite an
achievement for a chance remark. It contained neither facts nor
figures. It was simply an image – a metaphor. It demonstrated, in
the terms of the old cliché, that a picture is worth a thousand

words. Or, in the words of the rock song, Èvery picture tells a
story, don't it.'
Years later, the Liberals finally scored off Keating with the
invention of the highly effective image, `five minutes of economic
sunshine'. This phrase hurt Labor badly.
The hapless Treasurer, Ralph Willis, responded that there had

been a record period of positive economic growth, as measured
by quarterly figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics. But
the economic sunshine metaphor worked because it connected
with what people were really feeling. The official figures may
have told one story, but it was not what large sections of the
community actually felt in the gut. Labor made things worse for
itself by becoming obsessed with trying to defeat an image with
the weight of numbers.
Metaphor in Business and Economics
As the Tokyo stockmarket fell precipitously in 1995, Cathy

Mitsui, a market analyst with Goldman Sachs, said: Ìt seems
everybody is afraid to catch a falling knife.' Imagery and metaphor
play a powerful role in explaining business and economic con-
cepts. In fact, the more abstruse the subject, the greater the role
metaphors can have in clarifying ideas.
The 1980s was the era of swashbuckling corporate takeovers
and the business language and metaphors of the time reflected
the mood. Testosterone-soaked young masters of the universe
sought to make their millions from wheeling and dealing. Vulner-
able companies would send `poison pills' to `predatory
shareholders' or buy them off with `greenmail'. `White knights'
would charge to the rescue of ailing companies to fend off the
`corporate raiders'. `Golden parachutes' would be strapped on by

dumped executives who sought a `soft landing'.
When corporations engage in cut-throat competition for sur-

vival or market share, doing business is akin to war. Battle and
military strategy as metaphor have a long history. The current
popularity in the business literature of the 2000-year-old writings
of the Chinese military philosopher and strategist Sun Tsu is a
testament to the enduring power of a good war metaphor. Sun
Tsu is deeply Taoist in his philosophy, with dictums like `To win
without fighting is best'. He was a warrior philosopher charged
with preparing and conducting wars, but his insights are meta-
phors for managing human relations, psychology, conflict
resolution and business strategy.
Sources of Metaphor
Effective metaphors do not emerge just because you want one.

Where do the best images and metaphor come from? They can
come from anywhere, but some patterns emerge in the choices
people make. Research by John Clancy in his book The Invisible
Powers: The Language of Business found that the six most commonly
used metaphors are a journey, machine, organism, war, game and
society.
Journeys have been the most enduring source of imagery,
particularly sea voyages. For example, Lee Iacocca spoke of himself
`jumping ship' to Chrysler, being in ùncharted waters' and sailing
on a `sinking ship'. Children are also connected at a young age
to the metaphors of travel. In past years, fables such as The
Canterbury Tales, Pilgrim's Progress and Gulliver's Travels provided the
connection, but in our times The Wizard of Oz and science fiction
have gone a long way towards replacing these old stories with
new metaphors.
Economic change bears on the sorts of images which gain

currency. For instance, the industrial age spawned the metaphoric
use of machinery in literature and speech. About 1770, Josiah
Wedgwood (the creator of the porcelain tradition which bears his
name), who was a crusader for improving the working conditions
of his employees, compared society with a machine.
The ruling ideas of an era also become a source of metaphor.
A century later, social Darwinism imagery was in its heyday of
use by business. It fitted the robber baron era of laissez faire and
survival of the fittest. In the cybernetic age of systems theory,
game metaphors were the rage. Now, in this ecological age,
business as an organism is one of the most frequently cited images.
Animal behaviour is a regular source of imagery. Many people

affectionately call their cherished loved ones possum or pussycat.
War heroes are tigers and lions. Economist John Maynard Keynes
wrote of the ànimal spirits' unleashed by the marketplace. Animals
were also a favourite source of imagery for Winston Churchill.
Speaking of appeasement policies by European nations towards
Hitler's Germany, he said: Èach one hopes that if he feeds the
crocodile enough, that the crocodile will eat him last. All hope
that the storm will pass before their turn comes to be devoured.'
Churchill once summed up his Labour successor Clement Attlee
as à sheep in sheep's clothing'.
Like war, sport embodies a contest, see-sawing fortunes, win-

ners and losers, the will to win, courage and heroism, grace under
pressure, drama, tenacity and defiance against odds.
Metaphors can be drawn from nature to illustrate growth, the

life cycle, wonder and mystery, beauty and awe, vastness and
microscopic detail, simplicity and complexity, power and mas-
tery over human forces, purpose or randomness, chaos, survival
of the fittest, interdependence and the relationships between

things.
Our bodies offer themselves as rich pickings for metaphoric

meaning. The brain, eyes, ears, nose, heart, arms, hands, fingers,
legs, feet, lungs, liver, kidneys and so on all suggest images we
can use.
Seven Steps for Creating Metaphor and Images
1 Put yourself in a receptive frame of mind – try going for a

peaceful walk or playing music.
2 Brainstorm images – stories from journeys, sport, nature, the
human body, machines and animals are among the best sources
of metaphor.
3 Choose a simple image to which people can relate.
4 Write down the reasons why your image explains the message
you want to send.
5 Develop your image by focusing on a few details of the picture.
6 Avoid clichés and ponder whether your image is fresh enough
to have an effect.
7 Rehearse the metaphor aloud.
Humour
Humour, like metaphor, makes us see the world differently.

Aristotle advised that arguments were made more persuasive when
seasoned by the salt of wit. Cicero of Rome (106-43 BC) was
regarded as the greatest orator of his era and 58 of his major
speeches have survived. He wrote about the role of humour in

his work On the Orator:
It secures good will by whom it is aroused, or because all

admire the sharpness inherent often in a single word, espe-
cially in replying to criticism and sometimes in attacking;
and most of all because it softens and relaxes seriousness
and tension and by laughter often dissolves troublesome
matters which could not easily be disposed of by arguments.
Humour connects speaker and audience. It creates real communi-

cation because the audience actively responds to the speaker
through laughter. Humour transforms the emotional state of the
audience.
When do you use humour? Pretty much any time. It is a
renowned ice-breaker or bait to begin the most serious of talks.
The British prime minister, Tony Blair, routinely begins his public
speeches with amusing stories. Many of these work well because
they take the `mickey', indicating that he doesn't view himself too
seriously. In his early days as prime minister he would remark:
Ì'm still at the stage that, when I hear the prime minister is here,
I start looking around.'
On some occasions, such as speaking after dinner or at a

celebration, being humorous is the speaker's main task. In these
situations, everyone wants to be amused. The business environ-
ment is not always so funny. However, don't be discouraged.
Audiences all appreciate humour if it does not take too much time
or distract from the main business at hand. Ironically, it is at times
when humour is least expected, such as at sorrowful occasions like
a funeral, that it can bring greatest release.
Everyone can be humorous, but not everyone can tell jokes.

There is an important difference between the two and if you are
not good at joke telling, don't try to do it. Jokers need to be

raconteurs, people skilled at recounting amusing stories and anec-
dotes. The joke usually lies in the hidden or unexpected meaning
or twist of plot. Often the joker's success depends on their timing
in revealing the story's punch-line. Sometimes the joke works for
the audience. Sometimes it doesn't. Comedians expect a percent-
age of jokes to fall flat and they bring with them such a repertoire
of jokes that they can move from one to the next with ease.
Sooner or later the audience starts to respond. Some professional
speakers use the technique of delivering their rehearsed jokes or
humorous lines from one spot in the room. Before long, if the
strategy works, the audience begins to laugh as soon as the speaker
moves in the direction of that spot.
To me, spontaneous humour is the real wit because it illustrates

the power of intelligence, perception, observation and under-
standing. It is a response which grows out of the conversational
flow. It is usually expressed in just a few words, obeying Shakes-
peare's dictum in Hamlet that `brevity is the soul of wit'. It often
involves re-framing the literal meaning of what is said. Take this
exchange, attributed to pope John XXIII:
Question: How many people work in the Vatican?
Answer: About half.
In just two words, the pope had shown his wit and verve.
Storytelling
Stories and examples are vital tools in persuading every type of

personality to your point of view. The words `for example' are
two very persuasive words, not in themselves, but for what comes
after them. You prove your case through the power of your
examples or stories.
Jesus and every other memorable philosopher and teacher
spoke in examples or stories and parables. Jesus' stories were
remembered for decades before they were written down by his
disciples, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. In cultures with an oral
rather than a written tradition, the stories and lore have been
handed down for millennia. They became the richest possession
of the tribal elders whose solemn duty it was to pass them to
future generations. The dreamtime stories of the Australian Abo-
rigines are among the richest of such oral traditions.
Stories make abstract things concrete. Take, for example, the
manager who tells his staff that èveryone must work smarter'. The
staff may nod reassuringly because they know it sounds right. But
they can't really know what the manager specifically means. What
makes the abstraction come alive is the example: `For instance,
George spends half his day getting formal approval for spending
on office purchases. It is not a very productive use of his time.'
So now they know. As Mark Twain remarked: `Few things are
harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example.'
Television journalist and personality Ray Martin was once

asked by the Australian newspaper who were the best people he
had interviewed. He replied by naming Peter Ustinov, David
Suzuki and a few others. `They're anecdote machines,' he said.
Being an anecdote machine is being a storyteller. It is explaining
your points through examples. It helps people to understand and
remember.
My friend John Bell was always turning over in his mind ways
to say something more effectively or to enthuse other business
leaders to take up social concerns. When he was asked to write
a short biography of himself it became a wellspring of stories he
could take with him whenever he spoke.
In working with John, I advised him to keep returning to this

original source, to the stories which shaped him. It was inevitable
that, when he connected these early stories to the issues on his
current agenda, two things would happen. First, he would speak
his own authentic story. It belonged to no one else. Second, like
everyone else, he knew his own story so well that he had little
trouble recalling it and speaking lucidly. His stutter, a trace of
which was to remain with him for life, would mostly disappear
when he connected to these stories. This was his ethos and pathos
speaking.
Stories work persuasively when they have a point. A point

gives a story focus. Without a point, a story just remains inter-
esting at best or a diversion and annoying irrelevance at worst.
Persuasive stories often have the structure of:
1 incident
2 point
3 benefit/pay-off
The incident is the story itself. The point may be expressed as:
`What I learned from this was . . .' The benefit or pay-off may
be expressed as: `What it means for us all is . . .'
Being Wholly Persuasive
You are not ready to be persuasive until you have prepared crisp
stories, sharp examples and metaphors with which to illustrate
what you are trying to say. For each point you wish to make, you
need to ask yourself how you can make it clearer to the audience.
As you prepare a business presentation, a media appearance or a
negotiation, work hard to think of just the right combination of

imagery, metaphors and examples.
Talking expressively needs to become a habit of mind. It should
not just be reserved for those occasions when you speak formally
or try to speak persuasively. Make it a goal to express yourself
more anecdotally and metaphorically in day-to-day conversation.
By practising in this way, you will find it much easier to express
yourself persuasively on stage.
Practise talking in a more sensory way too. Try describing what

is around you in visual, auditory, kinesthetic, olfactory and gus-
tatory language. Sit by water and describe out loud what you
hear. Watch a sunset and put it into words. Put the nose of an
Italian restaurant to speech. Do it often so it too becomes a habit
of mind.
CHAPTER 4
HOW TO PERSUADE
DIFFERENT PERSONALITIES
1 Persuading all comers 5 How do you see

2 Why knowing about yourself?
personality styles is 6 How do others see
a must for persuasion you?
3 Communication style 7 People you need to
profiles influence
4 Capacity for playing 8 Conclusion
opposites is powerful
communication
All the world's a stage,

and all the men and women merely players;
They have their exits and their entrances;
And one man in his time plays many parts;
His acts being seven ages.
William Shakespeare, As You Like It
Persuading All Comers
Tom Peters made his name as coauthor of In Search of Excellence,

the world's largest selling business book. The book got him into
HOW TO PERSUADE DIFFERENT PERSONALITIES 61
the speaking business, but it certainly didn't guarantee his success

on stage, where he is a master of persuasion.
Have you ever been to a Tom Peters seminar? Peters is paid
$100 000 a day to speak. He argues, cajoles, gets passionate, gets
into details and is full of examples to illustrate his points. At his
recent seminars I cast my eyes around to check the responses of
the audience. They were enthralled. Mostly higher level execu-
tives, they were paying $900 a seat. The fascinating thing is that
the book of this seminar, titled unambiguously The Tom Peters
Seminar, which even includes the overheads he uses, sells for less
than $20. Why do executives pay an $880 premium above the
book price to see him in person? Well, it's like paying to see a
rock concert or a sporting event, rather than watching the same
event on television. People are buying the experience.
Any `live' presentation is a show, and Peters is a great showman.

But the real secret to his success is that he is a first-class psychol-
ogist. He understands how much pizazz, how much substance,
how many points he needs to make, how much detail and how
much empathy he needs to create to sustain the attention of his
diverse audience for a whole day. So what is his winning formula?
How much pizazz, substance, detail and empathy are needed?
Tom Peters intuitively understands how to satisfy audiences. He

knows that his audiences are made up of individuals – individuals
with very different psychological needs and learning styles. Over
a session lasting some hours, Tom's success depends on his ability
to address and satisfy those individual needs. Some need to know
where the day's agenda will lead, others don't. Some want a few
points, others want enough points to feel they are getting their
money's worth. Some need summaries of the main points, others
don't. Some will be persuaded by particular examples, others won't.
Some will be fascinated by detail, others will be bored by it.
To capture each individual, Peters is dynamic with his content,

his body language and his voice, working them together like
instruments in an orchestra. They are all serenading the different
personality types found in any audience, not just those who share
his own way of seeing things.
But there are so many personalities, and they must all be offered
something! If we are going to persuade them, we're going to need
to understand them. Fortunately, there has been any amount of
research into personality types, and what those types respond to.
Sir Francis Galton, a cousin of Charles Darwin, has been
credited as the first person to use statistics and correlations to
measure personality differences between people. However, like
the study of persuasion itself, thinking about personality types
goes back to ancient Greece. Curiously, though not altogether
inaccurately, the ancient Greeks were convinced that personality
was linked to body fluids. Khole was the Greek word for bile. Black
bile produced a black or bleak mood. Yellow bile produced anger.
Mucous phlegm in the body was considered a cooling influence.
Happy, optimistic people had plenty of blood flow.
Naturally, the Greeks understood that people did not fit boxes
and they imagined personalities fitting on two sorts of behavioural
continuum, from sanguine – optimistic, in modern-day terms – to
melancholic (pessimistic) and from choleric (angry) to phlegmatic
(calm). Every personality-testing device today, with the notable
exceptions of the coin-operated ones in amusement arcades or the
quizzes for sex appeal in magazines like Cleo, still hinge on
behaviour continuums where people are placed somewhere along
a line between opposite types.
In our own century, Carl Gustav Jung's book, Personality Types,

published in 1923, has had a defining influence on thinking about
personalities. Jung, too, was fascinated by personality opposites
and devoted his mind to analysing them. He invented the àttitude'
category of extrovert/introvert. Extroverts are outgoing and
directed towards the outer world. Introverts are inwardly focused.

Jung also adopted earlier ideas on certain `functions' – for example,
the split between thinking and feeling. Thinkers make decisions
on the basis of logic and analysis. Feelers decide by values and
individual worth. Other functional categories relate to how we
experience the world. Intuitive types are driven by unconscious
experience and perceptions. Sensate types are pretty down to
earth and rely on concrete experience to form their judgments.
Ultimately, Jungian ideas underpinned the development of the

personality-testing business and are central to the categories devel-
oped by the mother and daughter team Myers-Briggs. The
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator divided the world into personality
types along the three dimensions identified by Jung. They also
added another dimension, judgers/perceivers. Judgers are people
with a high need for closure and order. Perceivers are willing to
go with the flow and see what happens.
Why Knowing About Personality Styles is a

Must for Persuasion
Knowing about personality styles is essential for two reasons. It

permits you to take a more objective look at yourself and gives
you clues about how you come across to others. And it gives you
vital information about how to persuade opposite personality
types. Ultimately, it gives you the key to developing the content
and style to maximise your potential to persuade everyone.
So, to have any hope of persuading someone else, you must
understand their personality. But before getting to that base, you
must understand your own personality. Some speakers get trapped
in their own personality `ghetto'. They present their arguments in
a style and with the content which might persuade people just
like themselves but which overlook what presses the hot buttons
of others. If you can recognise the personality style within which
you naturally fit, you can learn how to adapt your style to make
a greater impression on your audience.
Naturally, the descriptions in this chapter are simplifications.

There are any number of personality types. Individuals don't fit
boxes. People frequently fit more than one of these types in some
combination of personality traits. Different situations bring out
different aspects of people's character. If you are unsure where
you fit, a good question to ask yourself is: to which type would
you retreat if you were in a stressful situation?
People who are flexible in adapting from one style to another

have a decisive advantage in communicating with all the different
types of people they need to persuade. Matching personality styles
is akin to matching body language. Have you noticed how often
you mirror the body language of the person you are talking to?
This usually unconscious behaviour makes both parties in a con-
versation comfortable with each other. The same applies to
personality styles. The people we talk to usually send us lots of
signals about their personality. If we roughly match these signals
with our own behaviour, it is an important part of building
rapport. In other words, we get on to their wave length. If you
get on to another person's wavelength, you are halfway to per-
suading them.
Communication Style Profiles
The industry of personality profiling, pioneered by Carl Jung, is

a burgeoning one. Recruitment companies subject applicants to
psychological testing for about half of all senior executive jobs in
Australia. It will probably happen to you when you next change
jobs if it hasn't already. The testing instruments used by head

hunters measure people along all sorts of dimensions, with each
company claiming the accuracy of their own approach – always
very hard to test!
For the purposes of creating a manageable model for thinking
about persuasion, I will confine my profile to just two of the
dimensions identified by Jung, extrovert-introvert and thinking-
feeling. This gives us a simple matrix of four personality types.
The Four Personality Types
Thinker
Auditor Shaker
Introvert
Extrovert
Sharer Communicator
Feeler
The following two stories bring the personality types to life,

and remind us how personality types do affect outcomes, more
times than we'd care to admit!
Communicators
Communicators are extrovert feelers. If you are a communicator,

you tend to be lively, carefree, intuitive, easy going, responsive,
talkative, sociable and outgoing. You have the gift of the gab –
you're outgoing and happy to talk on subjects ranging from those

you know a lot about to those you know only a little about.
Caught red-handed at a robbery, you could talk your way out.
You are passionate, energetic, enthusiastic, humorous, inspiring
and possibly charismatic. You are a natural salesperson.
The problem is that some other people think you lack sub-
stance or sufficient depth in your knowledge to be persuaded by
you. You come across to them as too glib. You do not seem to
listen enough to others. You often seem to dominate conversa-
tions. Too often, you tend to think out loud before formulating
your thoughts. People react cautiously to this and are not sure
they trust you.
In summary, you seem passionate and inspire an enthusiastic

following but to your critics you may seem flaky, egotistical,
narcissist, even dangerously impulsive.
The term `communicator' does not imply that these people are
necessarily good communicators, for communication is a two-way
process. Most of this type talk too much and listen too little.
Many qualify as communicators merely for the amount of air time
they occupy. Communicators love to perform and draw attention
to themselves. The natural occupational interests of communica-
tors are marketing, sales, retailing, advertising, public relations,
politics, entertainment, training, journalism and broadcasting.
Examples of communicators include Richard Branson of the

Virgin group who is quite happy to be photographed on a camel
wearing Arab head-dress or in a bridal dress; Bill Gates of
Microsoft (somewhat nerdy but a natural salesman); and Australian
adventurer Dick Smith. It is the natural style of Tom Peters. Anita
Roddick of The Body Shop shines with enthusiasm and flair and
is a notable communicator. Some retailers who aggressively pro-
mote their own products on television fit this type too – Geoff
Harvey of Harvey Norman, the Mintell man, and Crazy Eddy in
the United States. Advertising leaders like John Singleton and

fashion guru Simon Lock are notable communicators. So are many
successful politicians such as Ronald Reagan, John F. Kennedy,
Newt Gingrich, Gough Whitlam, Bob Hawke, Joh Bjelke-Petersen
and Jeff Kennett.
Typifying the communicator type, Jeff Kennett once explained
his impulsive style by saying: Ì'm not a committee person. Make
a decision; get on with it.' The infectious enthusiasm of politician
Barry Jones, broadcaster/writer Phillip Adams, and author Bryce
Courtney make these primarily intellectually driven men also
obvious communicators. The African-American evangelist tradi-
tion, spearheaded in the 1960s by Martin Luther King and in the
1990s by Lewis Farrahkan, is notably extrovert feeler in orienta-
tion.
How to Persuade a Communicator
Communicators respond to pathos. Communicators need to get

excited about what they're hearing. They love stories and meta-
phors, anything to get some imagery flowing. They will respond
more to your body language than to your argument. A logical
argument requires concentration and detail – they'll be bored by
the time you're finished! Make the point you want them to take
on board, then reinforce it by using your inductive reasoning
skills – plenty of colourful examples and pictured benefits of the
action you're proposing. Keep up your enthusiasm.
If they like something, they're passionate about it, and will
assume you to be as well. Allow them to get involved in your
pitch to them – you won't be able to stop them! Bounce back
their ideas as a catchy phrase or with a slash of humour – it will
make them feel on board more than any delayed and considered
agreement.
Whatever you do, make sure you are open with them. Com-
municators are ego-centred, which will often make them
insensitive to your signals. Now is not the time for subtlety!
If You're a Communicator . . .
Play to your strengths. Spend time considering images and met-

aphors which will focus your message. In a business presentation
made by a team, your natural role would be in making the opening
or closing statements which require your flair for communicating
passionately and with energy. Leave the detailed arguments to
others. If you are presenting solo, make suure you work hard on
the detail to persuade opposite personality types such as auditors.
Be patient. Really listen to others. Don't get stuck in the commu-
nicator groove. Seek to win over shakers by being focused,
auditors by reference to detail and sharers by building rapport.
Communicators
Character: Extrovert, feeler, emotional, impulsive,
talkers.
Need: Excitement and sense of mission to be
energised themselves.
Persuaded by: Passion and enthusiasm for the big
picture.
Body language: Distracts.
Voice: Many colours.
Dress: Individualistic, considered, sometimes
flamboy-ant.
Philosophy: All the world's a stage—for them.
Shakers
Shakers are extrovert thinkers. If you are a shaker, you tend to

be active, optimistic, impulsive, changeable, excitable, assertive,
restless and touchy. You know what you want and how to express
it. You are transparently ambitious for yourself, your business and
maybe your country. You are decisive and forceful. You are good
at getting your message across. Like communicators, you are an
extrovert. However, while communicators are happy-go-lucky in
their style, you are intense and focused. While communicators
tend to make decisions emotionally, you are more rational. You
come to the point and have a crash-through or crash approach
to problems. You are persuaded by an argument which picks the
main point in the case. You are willing to make tough decisions
and stick by them. You are intellectually quick, and impatient
with those people who can't keep up with your pace. That means
you listen only selectively. You are egotistical but do not need
to be loved or applauded in the same way as the more performer-
oriented communicator types. You are prepared to throw your
weight around to get things done.
The best of these qualities are enough to make you stand out
as a natural leader. The problem is, some people think you lack
compassion. They are not sure they trust you. You are sometimes
too aloof and can get out of touch with the way average people
think and feel. You are too cold and remote. In summary, you
seem decisive but to your critics you may be arrogant. `Shakers'
are the self-styled `masters of the universe' – for all the good and
the bad that term implies.
In business, shakers are often at the top of the heap. They are
not many in number but frequently hold down visible posts in
the executive ranks of big business and some commercially ori-
ented public enterprises. They are the generals and warlords.
Merchant bankers, sports coaches, bouncers, the more aggressive
lawyers and barristers often fit the mould. They are the entrepre-
neurial types in whatever occupation they choose.
Al `Chainsaw' Dunlap is the archetypal shaker. He once man-

aged the businesses of Kerry Packer, who himself is no wimp.
The Dunlap philosophy of life is that if you need a friend in

business, you should get a dog. He has two dogs. Dunlap wrote
Mean Business: How I Save Bad Companies and Make Good Companies
Great.
Tom Peters calls him òne of the biggest jerks I have ever met in
my life'.
The media have been dominated by the shaker press barons

for decades. Rupert Murdoch is a shaker. You can see it in his
work habits. His ability to hold together and manage such a large
publishing empire is assisted by his habit of dealing with things
on his desk only once. Canadian publisher Conrad Black also
projects the shaker style. Ita Buttrose fits the mould. David Hill,
former managing director of the ABC, is another. David Hill's
mentor, Neville Wran, is a shaker too. He would demand that
memos to him be written on no more than one page.
Former beer boss, aspirant prime minister and Carlton Football

Club president John Elliott cultivates a tough man shaker image
of himself. In politics, iron lady Margaret Thatcher is a prime
example. Paul Keating's political style was shaker and so is that
of Liberal politician Peter Costello. Lee Kuan Yew ran Singapore
for decades in the sort of quasi-benevolent dictator style preferred
by shakers. By now you know the type. If you cross a shaker, you
will have a bloody battle on your hands.
The high-testosterone style of the shaker inevitably means that

more men than women fit the category. However, Margaret
Thatcher – known among some people as Tina for, `There is no
alternative' – is not alone as a notable exception to the rule.
Hillary Rodham Clinton projects the comfort with power that
goes with the territory. Another female shaker, the chancellor of
the University of Sydney, Dame Leonie Kramer, once stirred the
ranks of feminists when she stated that women `wimp out' when
the going gets tough. Shakers feel at home only when the going
is tough.
There is usually a restless, hyperactive side to the way shakers

behave. They fit what George Bernard Shaw described as the
ùnreasonable man':
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world. The unrea-

sonable man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself.
Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
How to Persuade a Shaker
Shakers respond to logos. You persuade a shaker by presenting a

tightly argued case. What they want most of all from you is a
focus on the main game or the bottom-line issue. Consequently,
you need to be extremely well prepared. Brevity is critical. They
will be impatient to turn their attention elsewhere. So get in, then
get out.
If You're a Shaker . . .
Your greatest asset is to pick the real point in any argument.

However, don't allow your natural impatience to get in the way
of realising you must carry other people with you. Know when
to go easy with your bulldozing approach. Don't get stuck in the
shaker groove. Seek to win over auditors by reference to detail,
sharers by building rapport and communicators by energy and
passion.
Shakers
Character: Extrovert, outcome oriented, quick witted,
doers.
Need: The point of the argument to be concise
and transparent.
Persuaded by: One clear, reasoned, decisive message and

plan of action.
Body language: Blames.
Voice: Downward inflections at end of sentences;
sometimes harsh tone indicating
forcefulness.
Dress: Powerful, classic and restrained.
Philosophy: Self-styled master of the universe.
Auditors
Auditors are introvert thinkers. If you are an auditor, you tend to

be moody, anxious, inflexible, rational, cynical, reserved, unso-
ciable and quiet. You usually know what you are talking about.
In fact, you are probably an expert in your field. You pride
yourself on your analytical and problem-solving skills. It's likely
that you have studied your subject area for years. You prefer to
think before you talk. You are rational rather than emotional in
your decision-making. You are persuaded by cool, logical and
complex argument. You are prepared, therefore, to listen long and
thoughtfully. You are steady and predictable. You disdain flourish
and flair as distractions. You are exacting. You demand order and
thoroughness in yourself and others.
The problem is, you know so much you are not really sure
where to start when relating your expertise to others. Or where
to finish. The detail of your subject often fascinates you more
than it does your audience, particularly if they are not your peers.
Too often you are so absorbed by your subject that you do not
notice people switching off. You don't seem to appreciate people's
limits for listening to such detail. In summary, you seem thorough
but you sometimes bore your critics.
In my work advising professionals on business presentations, I

meet far more auditors than any other type. They usually know
their subject area inside out but often find that expressing their
knowledge in simple enough terms to be readily understood by
their audience is painfully difficult.
Auditors are commonly found among experts in technical

occupations requiring a great deal of detailed knowledge. Profes-
sional qualifications are the norm. Bankers, economists, lawyers,
accountants, engineers and academics are typical auditors. So are
pilots, architects and drafters, management consultants, adminis-
trators, computer programmers, actuaries and auditors. General
practitioners and specialist doctors use auditor techniques in
asking questions to check for symptoms. Where difficult choices
are involved for the patient, they use careful auditor-type detail
to describe the options and alternatives.
Auditor types are often the quiet achievers of business. It is a

mark of their preferred operating style and retiring nature that
their names are often unknown in wider public circles. A 1996
survey, reported by the Wall Street Journal, found that 70 per cent
of chief executives are introverts. Their need for social interaction
is 15 per cent lower than for the general population, with most
of them relying on their own counsel. Says Richard Hagberg of
Hagberg Consulting in California: `People treat them more as a
symbol than a human being . . . forceful, dominant, socially
skilled. They can obviously turn it on when they need to.'
Former Reserve Bank governor Bernie Fraser is the archetypal

auditor type. It is not just his carefully measured and cautious
content but his flat delivery which marks him as a prime
auditor. Other bank bosses typically fit the mould too – for
instance, David Murray of the Commonwealth and Bob Joss of
Westpac.
Judges often make an interesting variation on the auditor type.
Retired High Court chief Sir Anthony Mason and another former
High Court judge now Governor General, Sir William Deane,
not only display their acutely analytical turn of mind when they
talk, but it also shows in their clipped, precise manner of speaking.
The senior Canberra bureaucrat or mandarin is typically an

auditor, by training if not by disposition. Nigel Hawthorn played
the type perfectly as Sir Humphrey Appleby in the TV series Yes
Minister. John Howard is a typical auditor. In this modern era of
more `managerial' state premiers, several (Jeff Kennett excepted)
belong to the same list – Bob Carr and Richard Court of Western
Australia, for instance. Nick Greiner, former premier of New
South Wales, tended to treat public administration with the same
analytical style suited to cracking a Harvard MBA case study.
How to Persuade an Auditor
Auditors respond to logos. They are persuaded by detail and

analysis. They will want the i's dotted and the t's crossed as well
as the basic facts. You need to supply auditors with supplementary
papers and reports. Don't hurry auditors, because they will need
time to digest your material. They do not respond well to pressure
and deadlines. Be ready to answer the questions of auditors as
they seek understanding and clarification.
If You're an Auditor . . .
In a team presentation, you should handle the detailed arguments,

especially at the problem/solution stage. Allow others to fly with
the bells and whistles. However, if you are presenting solo, think
through and communicate with images and examples. Audit your
voice and body language to see if you are lively enough. Don't
get stuck in the auditor groove. Seek to win over communicators
by showing energy and passion, shakers by being focused and
sharers by building rapport.
Auditors
Character: Introvert, thinker, detached, cautious,
worriers.
Need: Substance and detail.
Persuaded by: Step-by-step logic, with both positives
and negatives canvassed, supported by
written documentation.
Body language: Computes.
Voice: Monochrome, monotonal; sometimes
precise diction.
Dress: Corporate-looking, clubbish, correct,
subdued.
Philosophy: God is in the detail.
Sharers
Sharers are introvert feelers. If you are a sharer, you tend to be

calm, peaceful, reliable, controlled, even-tempered, thoughtful,
careful and passive. You are a caring and nurturing person. You
are deeply idealistic. People love, like and respect you. In turn,
their affection and support are the wellspring of your energy. Like
the good parental type that you are, you do not think about your
own needs first. You have empathy for people and this influences
how you listen to others, seeking the real meaning of what they
have to say. This makes you a good listener. These qualities mean
you stand out as a team player. Your sensitivity means you readily
spot when other people feel left out. You like a consensus style
of decision-making where everyone feels part of the action. You
are slow to make decisions because you want to ensure that the
feelings of everyone are fully taken into account. Intellectually,
you are deeply uncomfortable with efficiency-driven philosophies
such as economic rationalism because they put people second to
profit.
You are an introvert, preferring and allowing others to
dominate the talking. Your emotional and nurturing sides domi-

nate your rational side when you make decisions. If everyone felt
like you, the world would be a better place.
To your critics, there is a yawning gap between your idealistic

view of how the world should be and reality. People trust you
but sometimes doubt your effectiveness because your sensitivity
means you lack toughness. In summary, you seem caring but your
critics may regard you as not tough enough and therefore inef-
fective.
Occupational types that fit the mould are the caring professions
such as social and community workers, nurses, therapists, coun-
sellors, child care workers, and ministers of religion. Other
examples are school teachers, union officials and community
activists. In a better managed world, police would fit the category
but often they do not. Diplomats are sharers by training, if not
always by personal disposition.
Sharers are not widely represented at the top of big business.

Janet Holmes à Court is an exception but she achieved her job
in exceptional circumstances. Paul Simon, formerly of Wool-
worths, positions himself as a sharer. The Fletcher Jones company,
which pioneered employee ownership in Australia, became a
corporate sharer. James Strong, chief executive of Qantas, who
like a chameleon shifts from type to type as the situation requires,
is a sharer when he commits himself to talking to every person
inside his organisation to explain the company strategy and how
there is a role for every person within the big picture. Union
bosses like Jennie George and Bill Kelty are interesting examples
of people who can combine being both sharers and shakers.
Sharers can be attractive figures in politics. Bob Hawke was a

combination sharer/communicator. So was Ronald Reagan. Kim
Beazley, John Button, Bill Hayden, John Gorton, Tim Fischer,
Alexander Downer, John Fahey, Cheryl Kernot and Senator Bob
Brown are other examples of sharer politicians. Broadcasters Ger-

aldine Doogue of Radio National's Lifematters and Caroline Jones,
known for her long-running series, The Search for Meaning, are
sharers.
On the world stage, Nelson Mandela is a notable sharer.

Mahatma Gandhi was. Mother Teresa was the ultimate sharer
type. So is the Tibetan leader in exile, the Dalai Lama, who is
renowned for his warmth and humanity in responding to even
the most difficult political questions.
How to Persuade a Sharer
Sharers respond to ethos. Build rapport with sharers. Relate to them

so that they will relate to you. Be patient in building a relationship
of trust. Be straight with them. Sharers, like auditors, do not
respond well to pressure and deadlines.
If You're a Sharer . . .
Your ability to build rapport means that you are an excellent

choice for first speaker in team presentations. If you are presenting
solo, work hard on developing the factual case to persuade
auditors and shakers. Do not be deterred if auditors and shakers
do not respond with the same warmth with which you commu-
nicate because that is their style. Don't go overboard with
gooiness. Work on examples and images to win over the com-
municators. Don't get stuck in the sharer groove. Seek to win
over auditors by reference to detail, shakers by being focused and
communicators by energy and passion.
Sharers
Character: Introvert, emotional, consensus-seeker,
carers.
Need: Inclusion, recognition.
Persuaded by: Connection and empathy shown by the

speaker for the individual and social
consequences of proposed actions.
They want to see how the parts fit in
with the big picture.
Body language: Placates.
Voice: Warm, upward inflections at end of
sentences.
Dress: Floral, paisley, practical.
Philosophy: People do not care how much you know until
they know how much you care.
Capacity for Playing Opposites is Powerful

Communication
To some extent, the role we play depends on the stage upon

which we find ourselves. Ronald Reagan illustrated this point
when the former actor was asked by a journalist soon after being
elected governor of California: `Mr Reagan, what sort of governor
are you going to be?' He replied, Ì don't know. I haven't played
that role yet.'
As we mature, we play more roles in life. Shakespeare expressed
it by writing of the seven ages of man. In our early years, we
need to play only the role of a child. Young children learn about
other roles through their play acting. As time progresses, we play
the student, sports participant, lover, maybe soldier, hus-
band/wife/partner, parent or carer. We make the transition from
youthful worker with little responsibility to senior worker with
numerous and complex responsibilities, then retiree. We often
hear the expression that people grow into roles. This means, of
course, that people learn the appropriate personality responses to
the challenge of a new role.
Persuading someone else requires you to key in to the way

they like to process information. Don't talk just `big picture' to an

auditor, leaving out the detail. Don't just talk detail to a commu-
nicator, leaving out the `big picture'. The following stories are
examples of personality types in action.
Story 1
Helen is one of the nicest people you're likely to meet. Her closest
female friends tell her that she is too nice for her own good. She
lets some people, especially her teenage children, get away with
blue murder. When pushed and pushed, even Helen sometimes
gets to breaking point, feeling that people use her. Helen works
as executive assistant in the busy office of a multinational company
which markets a diverse range of consumer products like soap and
detergent. She feels that she has a good working relationship with
her boss, George. Certainly, George tells her that her work is
outstanding and he wouldn't know what to do without her.
Helen hasn't had a pay rise in two and a half years. She and
her husband, Bill, think it's time to confront her boss. Helen feels
resentful about the fact that two of her workmates have received
pay rises in the past few months but nothing has been said to
her even hinting at the possibility. Bill is concerned about how
tight the family budget has become since the extensions were
added to create a separate bedroom for each of the boys.
It is three o'clock on a Thursday afternoon. George's office

door is closed, which is not so unusual. He prefers to work quietly.
Tentatively, Helen knocks. Before she gets a word in edgeways,
George is telling her excitedly about plans for a product launch.
When he finishes talking, he sends her a look which indicates
that the conversation is over. George is very conscious about how
he spends his time. Helen gets the message and leaves. That night
when Bill asks Helen how she went asking for a rise, Helen
skilfully changes the subject by raising Bill's favourite topic, what

he wants for dinner. Deep down, Helen feels resentful about how
people in her life manage to so freely manipulate her.
Helen is a `sharer'. She lacks the assertive skills necessary to

get her own way as much as more pushy people do. People like
her boss, George, are `shakers'. George is very task-focused and
often forgets about the human goodwill which goes with the hard
work necessary to notch up all the achievements of which he feels
so proud. In a reflective moment, George thinks people like Helen
are life's losers. Although they work as hard as anyone, they will
never get ahead in quite the same way. George is prepared to
bully to get things done. Helen would never go past pleading for
cooperation.
Story 2
George is just back from an international sales conference held

in San Francisco. These days he loathes long plane trips but there
is something about the mists and moods of San Francisco which
more than makes up for the tedium of the travel. The company
knows how to put on a show. These international sales confer-
ences are known for their good venues and their food, wine and
entertainment. To most of the one thousand participants from all
over the United States and the world, the formal part of proceed-
ings, the speeches and reports, are the price that is grudgingly
paid to enjoy the rest.
The company had recently appointed a new chief executive,
Larry Fernes Jnr. No one knew much about Larry because his
previous work had been outside the industry. On the first day of
the conference, Larry was scheduled to speak after the morning
coffee break.
Larry began by talking about values. His values. For a man, it

went well below the surface to reveal what seemed like feminine
vulnerability. He spoke about the illness suffered by his first wife
and the impact it had on him in sorting out what was important
in life. As George cast a glance around the audience of mostly
men, he noticed that the majority were genuinely moved by what
Larry was saying.
George, though, was getting a little impatient. He wanted Larry

to get on with it. Where was he going to take the company? What
was the bottom line? A few minutes later, George had his answers.
Larry crisply segued to talking about the company's strategic
objectives in the next one, three and five years. As Larry spoke in
detail about each target, George found his mind spinning back and
forth on the key messages, analysing them in his own way.
It was only later that he found out some of the detail from
one of his fellow Australian managers, Sharon Schultz from
Melbourne. Apparently Larry had spoken in enough particulars to
really impress Sharon, who was renowned in the business for her
nitty gritty attention to detail. Sharon is an àuditor' type. She
sometimes seems obsessed with detail to the point where she loses
track of the big picture. But, if there was ever a flaw in the way
a proposal had been put together, Sharon would smell it out.
As Larry signed off from the podium, he searched the eyes of

the audience looking steadily back at him. He knew he had won.
He knew it halfway through his speech. There was energy in the
room. He let the energy take hold of him. In the last minute of
his presentation, he gave way to the emotions he was feeling
about the challenges which lay ahead to keep the company on
top. As they clapped Larry off the stage, there was a feeling of
excitement. For a moment, he felt he had captured some of the
gospel-like buzz of those southern black preachers he had seen
on television. He had always envied these natural `communicator'
types.
Thinker
Auditor Shaker
• Precise • Brief
• Logical & structured • Bold
• Analytical • Candid
• Detailed • To the point
• Objective • Positive
Introvert
Extrovert
Sharer Communicator
• Empathic • 'Big Picture'
• Vulnerable • Energetic
• People focused • Interactive
• A team player • Passuibate & witty
• A consensus seeker • Anecdotal
Feeler
Figure 4.1 Persuading different personality types
People liked what they heard. Larry had managed to impress

even the cynics who know what these corporate rituals always
produce. But Larry had got the mix right. There was enough
empathy (sharer), enough substance (shaker), enough detail (audi-
tor), enough excitement (communicator). Something for
everyone.
Persuasive communicators are good psychologists. Whether they

were conscious of it or not, the players in the two situations
described above were acting out personality roles in a complex
psychological game of persuasion. The object of their game was
to get other people to freely say `yes' to what they wanted.
Whether we are trading in products or services or ideas,
persuasion is a lot like a sales transaction in which one person is
Thinker
Computer Blames
Analysis Point
Auditor Shaker
Extrovert
Introvert
Sharer Communicator
Connection Excitement
Placates Distracts
Feeler
Figure 4.2 Communication style profiles
selling and another person is buying. The seller must always

convince the buyer that they really need what's on offer.
As we know, people buy for different reasons. Some people

buy emotionally and some buy rationally. Some people shop
around extensively and others buy impulsively. The good sales-
person copes with all types of buying psychology. The persuasive
communicator copes with all sorts of psychological needs and
behaviours in the audience they are trying to win over.
How Do You See Yourself?
Complete the communication style profile by shading the quad-

rants in Figure 4.2 which you think most represent your own
dominant personality type(s). If you are unsure of where to place

yourself, think of how you would react under pressure. Which
type(s) most represent your personality when stressed?
I mostly see myself as a ___________
How Do Others See You?
Just as a doctor should not diagnose their own symptoms or a

lawyer represent themselves in court, you should not be the
judge of your own personality. Get feedback from a few signifi-
cant others in your life about whether you are a communicator,
shaker, auditor or sharer by getting them to shade the quadrants
in Figure 4.2. You may be surprised at how you come across to
them.
How ______________ sees me.
People You Need to Influence
Think of two people you need to influence. Make sure that one
of those you choose presents some difficulties for you in your
relationship with them. Use the quadrants in Figure 4.2 to map
where these people fit.
Person 1: _____________________
Their relationship to you_______
Person 2: _____________________
Their relationship to you_______
Do you find that the person who presents some difficulties in

your relationship with them occupies a very different part of the
communication style quadrant than you? Such an outcome is

likely, although not necessarily certain. An ego clash over territory
is common enough among people who are alike. What strategies
might you employ to improve your relationship with the difficult
person? Try writing down a specific plan for positively influencing
the other person, including target dates for completing it. The
plan may contain simple ideas such as calling by for a weekly
chat on work projects or making an effort to attend more social
occasions at which the other person will be present.
Conclusion
If you are a communicator, you excite others and can see the big
picture. If you are a shaker, you get to the point and are decisive.
If you are an auditor, you have substance and are strong on
reasoning. If you are a sharer, you are the sort of person I would
like to know because you care about others.
But, whatever you are, stop and think. Three out of four people
are basically different personality types to you. To be persuasive,
you must gain the confidence of the other types too. How are
you going to press the buttons which will get other people to
agree with you? Bear in mind that they will not be the same
buttons as yours. Look again at the information contained about
each type and what they need to know and feel before they `buy'
what you have to `sell'.
A persuasive communicator is a person who has the flexibility
to meet the other person on their own terms. If they are persuaded
by detail, then you can anticipate their need and supply them
with detail. If passion is what they need to be won over to your
cause, then you give them passion. It was this very flexibility
which made Larry Fernes Jnr's convention speech work for his
audience. He addressed the needs of the different personality

types who each wanted a message in terms to which they could
relate.
Does this make the persuasive communicator anything more

than a chameleon, that breed of African lizard known for their
ability to change the colour of their skin to reflect their surround-
ings? Many politicians and other salespeople are famous for their
ability to tell others want they want to hear. This reduces
communication to a form of manipulation in which the message
itself is changed in order to win the favour of whoever is listening.
My own aspiration is to use the knowledge of personality types
to help communicate the core of my message in a way in which
others will understand on their own terms. To my mind, this is
the ethical limit of the persuasive process. Being persuasive is not
achieving agreement at all costs. The object is to create under-
standing and shared meaning between two people in the
knowledge that the other person remains free to reject what I
have to say. What does it mean to you?
CHAPTER 5
STEP - BY - STEP BUSINESS
PRESENTATIONS
1 The Aristotelian 5 Step 4: Charts and

secrets of persuasive speaker aids –
business presentations delivery, logos and
2 Step 1: Wearing your technology
client's shoes – 6 Step 5: Non-verbal
invention communication –
3 Step 2: Time to think delivery and pathos
and organise – 7 Persuasive body
arrangement and logos language
4 Step 3: Persuasive 8 Performance anxiety
language – style and and warming up
pathos 9 Summary: Persuasive
business presentations
CLARE JONES IS a brilliant young lawyer and communications

graduate who works for Ambrose, a national consulting firm. The
partnership, which has international connections, hired Clare to
strengthen their arm at the increasingly competitive `beauty
parades' for winning new work. How business has changed. Gone
are the days when firms would establish cosy client relationships
which would last for a lifetime. Now the heads of consulting firms
have to stand toe-to-toe against their opposition and persuade

potential clients that they have the best credentials.
Beauty parades have become standard in many service indus-
tries. Advertising agencies have always been hired on the basis of
making the right pitch to a selection committee of the client.
Maybe half a dozen firms would be short-listed to pitch for the
business. At separate meetings which would last for about an hour,
the agencies would strut their stuff. There would be much talk
about demographics and target audiences and positioning of the
product and the sort of concept which would win the hearts and
minds of consumers. It was a delicate balancing act because the
agencies would not want to give away too much of their original
thinking in case they lost the pitch.
Now beauty parades extend to other industries. Lawyers make

pitches. Financial service groups make pitches. Consultants make
pitches. In fact, Clare was hired because the partners at Ambrose
were getting feedback that they were losing opportunities because
their pitches were falling flat. Ambrose had done plenty of spade
work to till the ground for winning new work, but they were
falling down when presenting to the selection committees of
potential clients.
At 10.30 on a Monday morning, Clare received a call from

Fred Prosser, a senior partner in the firm. In two weeks, he said,
Ambrose would need to pitch for work which would potentially
involve one million dollars in fees. Clare's role was to organise
the presentation and make it sing.
Clare immediately set about creating a time line on her office wall
of everything that would need to be done. She was concerned about
how little time was available. A preliminary meeting was set for
noon on Monday involving the half-dozen consultants in the firm
who might be involved in the project. The meeting was chaired
by Fred but, trusting Clare's expertise, he deferred a lot to her.
STEP BY STEP BUSINESS PRESENTATIONS 89
After preliminary comments from Fred about the nature of the

potential client and the project, Clare said the first priority must
be to work out the purpose and message of the presentation. Some
discussion followed about how the pitch fitted into the bigger
sales effort. Fred remarked that, based on meetings he had already
held with the client, he felt there was a 60 per cent chance of
winning the job. He identified two people in particular who he
felt would be critical in the client's ultimate decision.
Clare insisted that the discussion not move to other topics until
a profile had been sketched of every likely member of the
audience. Fred estimated that about six people would represent
the client at the meeting. It seemed a little strange at first, but
Clare asked Fred to tell the meeting about the non-professional
interests of the people he had met. It emerged that one of the
client's key decision-makers, George Smith, was a golfing fanatic.
As it happened, the meeting was scheduled for the day after the
US Masters would end. Clare kept a note of it, thinking it might
make a good ice-breaker.
Clare said the next step was the most vital in the whole
preparation. Deep thought needed to be given to defining the
most critical questions in the client's mind. What did they want
to know? What did they want to be assured of? What was
important to them? Ìf you were in their shoes,' Clare said to her
colleagues, `what questions would you want answered by the
presentation?' It was funny, but when people devoted their minds
to this, no one came up with the idea that the client wanted to
know much about Ambrose. Fred offered the view that the client
was probably far more absorbed by its own affairs and problems
to care too much about Ambrose. Of course, Ambrose's capability
was an issue, but it wasn't the dominant one.
After meeting for one hour, the group had agreed on a list of
five questions which should be answered in the presentation. Clare
was happy, but she warned that much more work lay ahead in
identifying the key question. Clare said that every presentation
should be organised around answering that one fundamental key
question. Every other question would follow logically from it. As
the meeting broke up, Fred nominated a committee of three
headed by himself and Clare to take the work to the next stage.
The third person on the committee was Joan Arthurson, highly
respected as a finance whiz but with no direct connection to the
project. Fred was keen to get an independent view of the presen-
tation from the start.
When Clare got back to her office, she rang Gloria Mendez
at the graphics support department and put them on standby to
help with charts for the presentation. She asked them to attend
the next meeting, scheduled for a few days' time. She also rang
the potential client and asked for details about the planned room
layout for the meeting. What technology was available? Was there
a lectern? What sort of table was in the room? Would everyone
be sitting around a table? Could a plan of the room layout be
faxed to Ambrose?
By the time of the second meeting on Wednesday, Clare and

Fred had roughed out a preliminary draft of the presentation based
on the questions identified on Monday. Joan had made some
comments and changes were added. Clare had convinced Fred
that the best thinking and organising structure for the pitch was
the four-part story, the one favoured by McKinsey and Co.
At the second meeting, Clare suggested that a major agenda

item should be the selection of the presentation team. Fred was
in. After all, he was the key client contact. Fred was good at
making people comfortable. He also had the necessary gravitas.
Clare thought Fred was the perfect `sharer'. Alan was in. He was
the chief number cruncher. He was a little dry, but he would
bring substance to his part of the presentation and respond well
to any unexpected questions on detail. Clare had her àuditor'.

The managing partner of the firm, Henry Barcoota, who had an
established public image as the former chair of a high-profile
government inquiry, would come along to briefly open and sum
up the presentation. Everyone felt sure that his presence would
signal how high a priority was being given to the project. That
took care of the need for a `shaker'.
There was plenty of argument about whether a fourth team

member should be added. Clare was adamant. She reminded
everyone that the client's selection committee had three men and
three women. `There must be a woman,' she said in her `don't
argue with me' voice. Opposition dissolved.
On Clare's advice, Julie McNamara was selected. Clare wanted

to add a bit of pizazz to the show, `communicator' style. Julie
wasn't yet a partner of the firm, but would probably make it in
the next few years. The case for Julie hinged on her track record
as a presenter. She really had a way with words. She could talk
in images. She sometimes even made bored audiences feel excited
about an idea. Besides, Julie would be personally involved in the
project. Fred thought it was a necessity to give the client a chance
to assess the real people who would be doing the work, not just
the heavies making the pitch.
Other things needed decisions. What charts? What technology

for showing them? Clare thought the choice was simple.
Computer-projected images were right for this client. They gave
the high-tech feel. But a Clare trademark was how she convinced
her colleagues to also use a flip chart. Going to a flip chart with
a thick strong pen in hand gave the presentations a workshop-style
spontaneity which clients seemed to like. There was one other
thing: Fred always used charts as a crutch. Clare made her usual
speech about the need to speak without charts 80 per cent of the
time. Everyone in the room knew her standard line from memory:
`They have come to meet you, not your flippin' charts,' she would
sigh. The following Monday, seven days before the deadline, was
set for the next meeting.
The new week brought real progress. The draft of the presen-
tation had been completed. Each of the four presenters had been
responsible for drafting their part of the pitch. The whole thing
had been hammered out on the word processor. Each presenter
tentatively worked through their material. Gloria Mendez set up
a multimedia projector so that the team could look at the charts.
They were too wordy. Clare set Wednesday for the first rehearsal.
Come Wednesday, the presentation was beginning to look

better. Content was one thing. But something had to be done about
the presenters' lifeless body language and flat delivery. They looked
as though they were attending a funeral. Even Julie was dull. Clare
read the riot act. She set the final rehearsal for Friday. It would be
a full dress rehearsal at which everyone would come in the same
gear they would wear at the real presentation. Clare was a stickler
on dress. She had once been impressed at reading a remark by
Margaret Thatcher that, at important events, she would wear
clothes in which she felt lucky. There was no corporate tie or any
such uniform at Ambrose. But Clare had ordered the making of a
simple lapel pin which everyone wore at formal events. It seemed
to say `team', but was subtle enough not to be embarrassing.
The whole show needed more work, but Clare was also
concerned that the presentation should not be over-cooked. Being
under-prepared is fatal, but there is also a danger in being
over-rehearsed. Presentations need freshness to fire. It started to
come together well on Friday. Monday was D-day.
The team arrived at the venue together. Their timing was just
right. Enough time to be relaxed. Not too much time to get edgy.
Fred was superb. In two minutes flat he had relaxed the audience
and created some chemistry. Julie stole the show. The clients
actually laughed. Alan got the tricky questions right. And Henry
demonstrated why he was such a consummate politician, making
the whole thing appear unified and committed. Ambrose won the
work. At the debrief they drank the best champagne. Clare had
one more idea. She contacted the new client to get feedback on
why they had won.
Wouldn't it be great to have Clare on your team? She has a

knowledgeable grasp of all the steps needed to prepare and deliver
a great business presentation. This chapter is a step-by-step guide
to preparing your next presentation, pulling together the same
techniques employed by Clare.
The Aristotelian Secrets of Persuasive Business

Presentations
The persuasive principles we use today in business presentations

owe a great debt to the thinking of Aristotle's On Rhetoric. Remem-
ber that his rhetoric was divided into five principles or parts:
1 Ìnvention': identifying the key question

2 Àrrangement': structuring an argument
3 `Style': choosing persuasive language
4 `Memory': the Graeco-Roman habit of memorising speeches
5 `Delivery': the use of voice and body language.
Today the use of charts and speaker aids takes the place of
memorisation. Otherwise, Aristotle's principles can be applied step
by step to the preparation of a presentation, as can his principles
of ethos, logos and pathos. The following pages show how.
Step 1: Wearing Your Client's Shoes – Invention
What Aristotle called ìnvention', the identification of the central

question which lies at the heart of the issue being addressed,
remains the most important key to effective persuasion. I liken it
to wearing your client's shoes.
Too many presentations look from the inside out, rather than
the outside in. In other words, presenters remain standing in their
own shoes. They prepare a presentation showing themselves off
rather than looking from the client's, or outsider's, perspective and
needs. Typically, they talk too much about the strengths of their
own firm and how they are `the best' in their industry. To the
client's ears, the presentation may sound interesting, but it does
not really get to the heart of their particular interests. The client's
own agenda is what matters to them. After all, the client is there
because they want you to do something to satisfy their needs.
The client wants a solution to problems or an answer to questions.
They probably don't expect an answer or solution right away, but
their criteria for judging a presentation will usually be about the
understanding shown for their needs.
The best way to get into your client's shoes is to ask yourself
good questions. As Voltaire observed, `judge a man by his ques-
tions, not by his answers'. Just as scientists search for the truth
by asking themselves the right questions, effective presenters
always start their preparation by asking themselves questions
about the issue on which they are preparing to talk. Some
questions will apply to every presentation. The real power of
persuasion lies in identifying and addressing the underlying or key
question in the minds of the audience. The right questions give
the presentation focus.
Like Ambrose's Clare Jones, begin by writing a brief description

of the topic of your business or professional presentation. The

first question to ask yourself is: what is the purpose of the
presentation? What are you trying to persuade your audience of?
It is useful to think of some nouns and verbs which illustrate the
purpose of your presentation. For example, nouns may include
words like team, price, decision, future and relationship. Verbs
might include words like choose, decide, create, win and negoti-
ate.
Key Questions
• What are the key questions in the mind of your client?

• What is the question that your presentation is trying to answer?
• What are the three key arguments which support that answer?
• What are the specific benefits to the audience which flow from
your answer?
• What action do you want your audience to take as a result of
your presentation?
• Are there any message(s) you want your audience to hear which
are not already covered in what you have written so far?
But Who Are You? Why Should Anyone Listen to You? – Ethos
`Know thyself' was the inscription on the Temple of Apollo at

Delphi; Plato said it came from the seven wise men.
I have stressed the need to wear your client's shoes, but you
also need to allow your audience to build confidence in who you
are. You need to state your credentials without arrogance. This
is what Aristotle called ethos or character. At the heart of your
character are your values and beliefs. Your values and beliefs are
told most authentically through relevant and concise personal
stories.
Let me give you an example from my work in the media.

Listening to people talk on radio and television has taught me
that what really works as communication is speaking plainly from
the heart. When someone talks abstractly about a topic – for
example, Ì believe the government should . . .' – it may be inter-
esting, but the audience has been given no compelling reason to
listen. But when someone talks from the heart, such as about
the loss of someone they love – say, from heroin – and then says
what the government should do, the audience listens to every
word with a completely different intensity and urgency. The
speaker has given personal authenticity to their message through
making themselves vulnerable by talking from their own personal
experience.
Who are you? What are your values and beliefs? What qualifies
you to speak on this subject? What special experience and under-
standing gives you `standing' to authoritatively discuss this subject?
How willing are you to share your own sometimes painful expe-
riences to give authenticity to your text? All of these questions
relate to the `value-added' quality you bring to what you are
saying. The issue is not who you are in general, but what you are
in relation to what you need to say. So, to the list of critical
questions above, you should add: What `value added' do you bring
to what you are saying?
Going to the trouble of writing down your organisational and
personal values will make it much easier to express them. Your
values are a set of specific guiding principles. If they are to have
any real meaning, they need to be priorities for what you do,
particularly in difficult circumstances.
A statement of your values will have more meaning for your

client if it is supported by evidence or examples. You may, for
instance, say that one of your key values is òn time' delivery of
your work. Of itself, this can sound like a woolly motherhood
statement. It's the sort of thing everyone would say, isn't it?
However, if you support this statement by giving an example of
how your team worked around the clock to honour a particular
recent contract, you have given real substance to your principle.
Don't be too afraid to make yourself vulnerable by sharing with

your client. For example, disclosing what you have learned from
past mistakes gives authenticity to what you are saying and brings
to the relationship the candour and sincerity that will be missing
in a slick sales pitch.
What really works in communication is being sincere, not

being slick.
Can You Picture Your Audience?
To really get into your client's shoes, you need to think about to
whom you are speaking. Your audience will be made up of people
with different personality styles. An effective presentation will
satisfy the needs of the whole audience, not just those who are
like you. Imagine who would be in your hypothetical audience.
You may like to consider:
• their personality types: communicator, shaker, auditor, sharer;

• their age;
• gender distribution;
• their knowledge of your topic;
• their comfort with the English language;
• their seniority and power relationships with each other;
• their patience and willingness to listen;
• their need for detail;
• their need to be motivated;
• the extent to which they are already converted to your cause
or argument or need persuasion.
Write a composite picture of one or two people in your

audience. Remember that, in the Ambrose case study, Clare
wanted a profile of each member of the audience. One key person
in the client group, George Smith, was a golfing fanatic – not at
all irrelevant when the presentation would be on the day following
the US Masters. Here is a simple example of a composite picture
of George, the golfer.
George Smith is 37 and a family man with three teenage

kids. He is financial director of the client and has been with
them for seven years. He is a member of the Hills Golf
Club where he plays off a handicap of 10. He holds an
MBA from Macquarie University. His wife, Anne, works as
a part-time solicitor with a city firm. His body language is
usually inquisitive but a little judging. He habitually sits
stroking his chin. A conservative dresser, George definitely
fits the auditor mould.
Recall Clare's concern about building a team that could reach

every personality type in the client group. As the most senior
member of the team, Henry, the managing partner, a shaker, would
briefly open the presentation. Fred was a sharer. He connected
well with his clients. He was the ideal choice to follow the
opening. His mission was to build further rapport and establish a
logical framework for the pitch. Julie, a communicator, and Alan, an
auditor, had two tasks. Julie injected compelling example after
example. She is an anecdote machine. Just as you can lead by
example, you can persuade by example too. It was Julie's task to
find just the right examples to fit the case. Clare knew that if the
stories were appropriate, the audience would respond with nods
of agreement. Alan provided substance and nitty gritty. The idea
was to build a presentation in which there was something for

everyone.
If you are presenting solo, you must learn the versatile art of
satisfying the needs of all the personality types in your audience
by yourself. The best presenters aren't stuck in their own style.
They create their presentation to meet the expectations of each
personality in the audience. This pathway to presentation inti-
macy is described in Chapter 4. You must meet each personality
on its own terms.
Step 2: Time to Think and Organise –

Arrangement and Logos
Aristotle said you've got to have logos, or reasoning, to be persua-

sive. At the Lyceum in Athens, the thinking and organising
structure for a presentation was called the arrangement. The
arrangement is like a coat hanger. Just as a hanger gives shape to
your clothes, you need to give shape to your content. Presenta-
tions without a logical flow look like a mess of clothes lying
crumpled on the floor.
The arrangements best suited to your presentation will of
course depend on your situation – in particular, the personality
types of your audience and the nature of the key questions that
interest them.
If you need to convince your audience of your understanding

of their problem, the four-part story may be the best structure.
That way, your treatment of their `situation' and `complication'
will convince them that you've placed yourself well and truly
in their shoes. But if there's no doubt what the problem is, then
a lively five-point plan would be the answer. Here you can
concentrate on your proposed solution, showing it off in all

its glory.
In either case, however, you will have to fit in a pinch of

Aristotle's ethos – enough about yourself to convince your audience
of your sincerity and abilities, but only enough!
Tell a brief story to which your audience can relate. Knowing

that there are only `six degrees of separation' between ourselves
and anyone else on the planet, research your connections to your
client's people and business and talk about it. If you relate to
them, they will relate to you.
The five-point plan, four-part story and question and answer

format, outlined in Chapter 2 are methods for arranging or
structuring your way to a powerful presentation. Carefully choose
the most appropriate format for your presentation after analysing
the choices outlined in Chapter 2.
You should select the most suitable structure early in your

preparation. It will save time. Once you have chosen your pre-
ferred format, take a page and divide it according to the organising
plan. For example, if you choose the five-point plan, set out your
page with the following headings, allowing space to make your
planning notes:
1 Bait
2 Problem/question
3 Solution/answer
4 Pay-off
5 Call to action
Now, draw from your answers to the list of key points above to
make a first draft of your presentation. Leave the bait blank for
now as you can decide on it later.
Step 3: Persuasive Language – Style and

Pathos
Aristotle called the language used to persuade the audience `style'.

Once you have sorted out what you want to say, the next step
is to choose the style with which to say it. Get the right side of
your brain operating. What stories, images or metaphors will help
glue your ideas into the memories of your audience? Your meta-
phor will give your presentation a focus. You need to choose
metaphors carefully because they will stick in the minds of your
audience long after you have finished speaking. How will they
interpret them? Are you sure your image really sends the appro-
priate message? For example, if you are going to talk about the
company's employees being as loyal as the Queen's corgis, you
might get ready to be bitten on the ankle.
Clare was often told by the consultants at Ambrose that the
sort of content they were dealing with didn't lend itself to
metaphors. In reply, she was fond of quoting Albert Einstein, who
said: Ìmagination is more important than knowledge.' Clare
explained that they should try talking about competition in terms
of a grand final, or leadership in terms of an orchestra working
with a conductor, or teamwork in terms of the flow of a river.
She stopped a meeting stone dead one day when she asked people
to name an animal to represent their firm. Someone said a lion
because it was sometimes hungry, sometimes lazy. Another person
saw a donkey because it was too stubborn to adopt change. Clare
announced that thinking about a subject in this way is what
metaphor is all about. You are not ready to begin talking until
you have developed ways of explaining your content in terms of
something else. Chapter 3 suggests the almost limitless sources of
metaphor.
In addition to choosing appropriate metaphors, you must think

through what stories or anecdotes and examples will give lively

support to your points. This is your proof for the points you
make, enough for your audience to think that what you say
must bear the truth. For example, if you say Òur staff always
work as a team', no one will be convinced. If you add an example
of how your staff works as a team, you have given real meaning
to what you say. Òur staff always works as a team. After the
recent fire on a Friday night, everyone in the organisation came
to work on Saturday to help clear up the mess with brooms and
mops. We were back working on Monday at 9 o'clock.' Now that
is something. You need to develop such examples as proof for
every point you make. The persuasion is in the stories. Note that
your examples do not need to be long-winded stories. The
anecdote about the fire took two sentences, or about ten seconds,
to deliver.
It is your choice of illustrative stories that will give feeling to

your subject, as well as contribute evidence for what you say. It
is that feeling which Aristotle called pathos or passion, the third
element of the art of persuasion. An audience is usually persuaded
by a combination of logical argument and emotion. Stressing the
merits of teamwork is logically desirable, but is an emotionally
neutral concept. However, a team of people working together to
repair the damage caused by a fire forge an emotional bond
between themselves. Talking about this example to an audience
gives the logic of teamwork an emotional dimension. It shows
that people are passionate about teamwork. As a speaker, it would
be hard to deliver this example without being passionate yourself.
Consider each of the three main contributors to pathos in our

speech – metaphor, stories and humour – and decide how you can
work them into your presentation. The more extroverted your
audience (the greater the proportion of communicators and shak-
ers), the more you will need them.
Step 4: Charts and Speaker Aids – Delivery,

Logos and Technology
Aristotle's era long pre-dated the invention of the computer and

the overhead projector, so you have a head start on him. Visual
aids come into their own when you are condensing information.
They are great at cutting detailed information down to a few
phrases or images which can represent the detailed message
without boring or overloading the audience. Charts can display
an immense amount of information in a few seconds if sufficient
thought is put into creating them. But without proper planning
of their content and use, they can be a major distraction from
your message.
The most important thing to remember is that visual support
aids are there to support you, not supplant you. You are the
speaker. Your audience has come to meet you, not your support-
ing aids.
Ask yourself the following questions whenever you prepare to

give a presentation. Why has this meeting been called? Why have
I been asked to speak? Invariably the answer to these questions
is that people want to meet you. They want to have the chance
to assess you, interact with you and ask questions of you. If they
do not know you, they want to learn about your ethos or character.
You will rob your audience of the chance to do these things if
your presentation is dominated by your visual aids rather than by
you.
The 80/20 Rule
The most boring presentation in the world is given by the speaker

who stands up, and before even saying `Good morning', turns on
an overhead projector. The audience stares blankly at an overhead:
ÀBC Corporation presentation to XYZ'. The talk is then domi-

nated by a ceaseless stream of visual aids. These speakers ignore
the principle that when it comes to supporting aids, less is more.
Visual aids are intrusive. When you switch on a slide or
overhead projector, or boot up the latest software, you are asking
your audience to look at them, not you. The light is powerful.
The noise of slide and overhead projectors can sometimes make
it uncomfortable to listen to you. In some venues the lights are
dimmed and you, the speaker, disappear into the gloom. Your
visual support becomes the real focus of attention because that is
the signal you are sending. You are virtually saying to your
audience: `Look at them; don't worry about me.'
A small number of excellent visual aids will always have more

impact than a large number. Having fewer aids draws more
attention to them. Stick to an 80/20 rule. In most business
presentations, the speaker should do without visual aids for 80
per cent of the time. Following the 80/20 rule means the speaker
will dominate the presentation, rather than the visual aids.
One Chart, One Idea
There is a second measure you need to take to avoid splitting the

focus of your audience. Avoid information overload on any single
chart or overhead. Keep them simple! Gene Zelazny, in his book
Say it with Charts: The Executive's Guide to Successful Presentations in the
1990s, says:
a chart used in a business presentation must be at least twice

as simple and four times as bold as one used in a report. It's
the same as the distinction between a billboard that must be
read and understood in the time you drive past it and a
magazine advertisement that you can study in detail.
If the golden rule of using visual aids is not to use too many, then
the silver rule is surely one chart, one idea. To keep your audience
following your story, you must have them concentrate on one
idea at a time. So, if they're looking at a chart, it must only show
that one message.
Know Your Message
To avoid overloading your audience with information, you must

be absolutely clear about your message. It is a common mistake
for speakers to show people far more information than is necessary
to support the point they are making. Introduce a chart by stating
what conclusion can be drawn from it. That will guide the
audience to interpret the data in the way you want.
Each chart should be headed by a message line. The chart
should then have a label showing exactly what data it presents.
The message line of your chart plays the same role as a headline
above a newspaper story. Compare `January Sales Depressed' with
`Sales for January were depressed on the previous year's figures'.
The first example is all you need. You, or the data in the chart,
will explain that story.
Example
Message line: Stock X outperforms All Ords in every year

by a magnitude of 3:1.
Chart label: Stock X versus All Ordinaries Indes 1990-99
Once you are clear about your message, you can then choose the
best chart to represent it. Your message will influence your choice
of chart.
Trust
Albert Mehrabian, UCLA
Visual 55%
Vocal 38%
Percentage
Verbal 7%
Verbal 7% Vocal 38% Visual 55% Source: Silent Messages, Albert Mehrabian, UCLA
Pie Column
High
10
8
•x
UV Index
Return 6
(%) Average
•y 4
•z 2
Low High
0
Risk 10 2 4 6
Noon
Dot correction Line
Figure 5.1 Four ways to display information
The Basic Charts
The basic charts for showing data visually are the pie chart,
column or bar chart, line chart and dot chart. Each of these charts
has a distinctive role in presentations.
Pie Charts
Pie charts are ideal for measuring proportions of a whole. People

readily relate to these simple charts. They are not the way to go
if you are comparing proportions between more than one thing.

For example, two pie charts showing what proportion state and
federal governments spend on education, health and the environ-
ment would confuse an audience. This comparison would be
better illustrated by a bar chart.
In drawing pie charts, the largest proportion should start at
midnight and head clockwise. If there are more than about five
proportions, lump the smallest ones together using a term like
òther'.
Column or Bar Charts
A glance at a column or bar chart shows an instant ranking

between things. The vertical axis shows what items are being
ranked, the horizontal axis is a scale which illustrates the differ-
ence in magnitude and may be expressed as a whole number (e.g.
sales figures) or some sort of percentage.
Choosing how to format your chart vertically or horizontally
depends on which is easiest for your audience to read. The
horizontal axis suits longer labels and time series comparisons.
Line Charts
Line charts are standard means of showing trends and distribu-

tions. They are superior to column charts for plotting time series
data when the number of years being shown is large. For example,
it looks far more effective to show the All Ordinaries Index
performance since 1930 on a line chart than a column chart.
The line chart is suited to showing comparative trends. This
variation is sometimes called a grouped line chart. It is also suited
to showing distributions. It most commonly appears as a bell-
shaped curve.
Dot Chart for Correlation
A common business need is to know comparative performance

between two variables. For example, investors are interested in know-
ing the relationship between the risk of a portfolio and its return.
We would all like to be in a low-risk portfolio with a high return. We
all want to get out of a high-risk portfolio with a low return. These
comparisons or correlations are best illustrated by a dot chart. Dot
charts are commonly used by portfolio managers in their presenta-
tions to clients. They need careful explanation to an audience.
Other Diagrammatic Ways of Showing Relationships
While it makes sense to understand and use conventional methods

of showing information, it's a good idea to look at books which
have other interesting charts and learn from them. A few simple
options are:
The Interconnecting System
The system chart shows how things are connected to each other.
No one point is dominant. It fits with cybernetic and systems
approaches to problems.
Scales of Justice
Where arguments are being balanced, the scales of justice can

neatly summarise the main points for both cases.
Clock
The clock's obvious use is where there is a chronological order

to what has happened in the past or will happen in the future.
Your
Content
Speaker Persuasive
Aids Thinking
Agenda
Memory Non-verbal
Hooks Communication
Organisational Aristotle’s
Structure Rhetoric
Ethos
(Character)
Competitive
Cooperative
Logos Pathos
(Logic, language) (Passion)
Personality Styles Client’s Circle of Concern
Thinker
Auditor Shaker
Presentation A
Introvert
Extrovert
Pres. B
Presentation D
Target Zone
Sharer Communicator
Pres. C
Feeler
Figure 5.2 Give shape to your ideas

Concentric Circles
Concentric circles are suited for showing overlapping ideas. They

are particularly effective where a core idea or value is surrounded
by outer and connected ideas.
Intersecting Circles
This is the MasterCard or Olympic symbols look. It illustrates

where there is common ground between separate identities. They
are also called Venn charts.
Spiral
Start with a core idea and notice how it spreads outward and
upward. For example, the learning process can be represented by
a spiral. We start at the bottom of the spiral with a theory, then
learn further through practice and experience as we proceed up
the swirl of the spiral. We revisit the theory and the cycle begins
again, though at a higher level than before.
Triangle
The power of the triangle as a symbol in the human mind is

unsurpassed. Aristotle's notion that the elements of rhetoric are
ethos, logos and pathos can be represented effectively by a triangle.
Quadrant
Quadrants are also powerful as analytical frameworks. They are

appropriate where two variables are being measured against each
other, as in the Boston Consulting Group's portfolio matrix: high
and low market share being measured against high and low
growth rate. This, of course, is an extension of the dot chart for

correlation.
Star
Stars are suitable symbols where there are five parts to an argu-
ment or plan of action.
Cartoons
Australia has great satirical cartoonists. Using cartoons as a

method of communicating ideas introduces humour into what
might otherwise be dry content.
The Keep-It-Simple-Stupid Summary for Your

Charts
Content
• Do not allow your presentation to be dominated by any aid.

Keep to only a few lines of text on a screen or overhead
transparency.
• Remove all detail you do not need to be read by your
audience.
• Consider abbreviating sentences or phrases into a few words –
for example, `The message is clearer when it is summed up in
only a few words', can become: `Clear messages'.
• Each overhead should convey one idea only.
• Displaying spreadsheets has no place in business presentations
unless discussing the spreadsheet itself is the point of the
meeting.
Style Points
• Keep your aids looking consistent in typeface and colours.

• Use colour unless black and white is a deliberate style choice.
Colours mean different things in different societies. Do not
assume that your choice of colours is suitable if you are taking
your materials abroad.
• Contrasting colours look visually most effective. Reversing
colours out of your text can look sharp – for example, white
text on a blue background.
• Add your corporate logo.
• Use icons and other drawn figures with caution; they have
become clichés.
• Round out figures on your charts: 45.7 per cent should be 46
per cent; $171.2 million should be $171 million or maybe
$170 million. You may need to say in passing that you have
rounded out the figures.
Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics
• Be cautious if your presentation of data is too selective. You

will affect your credibility.
• Avoid including only the data which support your argument.
• If your chart shows time series data, select the first year fairly
rather than one which distorts the conclusion.
• Avoid using different scales on the same chart to artificially
boost the appearance of one variable.
Choosing the Right Technology and Supporting Aids
When next you present, what support should you take? When
and where are overhead projectors and computer-based presenta-
tions suitable? Is there a place for playing a video in your

presentation? What are the merits of flip charts?
Choosing the right technology and supporting aids will help
make your presentation a show.
The Case for Plugging in Your Laptop
Today there is no better speaker aid than your own laptop. A

simple connector plug means that you can plug your laptop into
a TV monitor or data projector. Staging companies have the
technology to project on to large screens in conference venues
and many conference and educational facilities now have the
projection technology permanently installed. Boot up your graph-
ics software like Powerpoint, Harvard Graphics, Presentations or
scores of others and you are ready to go. Changing screens, audio
and video clips is a cinch. Simply click.
That's the theory, anyway. The reality is not always so straight-
forward. At a national conference on technology and tourism
which I chaired, many of the techno-boffins who were relying on
their laptops as speaker aids found to their horror that their
systems crashed just at the wrong moment. It became downright
embarrassing, not to mention off-putting to their calm.
Laptop-driven speaker aids look high-tech and will give your
presentation a professional and contemporary appearance. This
will tempt you to over-use the technology and play second fiddle
to it. Remember to stick by the 80/20 rule.
The Case for Multimedia
Your laptop is also the gateway to multimedia presentations in

which you can mix moving and still images and sound, throw in
a CD-Rom and download from the Internet to give your audience
a total blast. But, unless you are a whiz at creating multimedia
yourself, the cost of getting professional help in creating multi-

media is high.
The down-side of multimedia is that it can overshadow the
speaker. Keep to the 80/20 rule unless there are very good reasons
not to.
The Case for Slides
There are strengths in using 35 mm slides, although they represent

rather old-fashioned technology which is being used less frequently
in business presentations. They provide excellent definition of the
projected image and can reproduce photographs with superb clarity.
Sometimes a combination of photographic image and text on the
same slide can look extremely sharp and effective.
Slides are most suitable for venues where there are large
numbers of people. The drawback with them is that they need a
darkened room to be seen to best effect and that can be unsuitable
in some situations. In the worst cases, speakers can disappear into
darkness if there is no spot lighting provided.
Be wary of the potential for slide projectors to break down or
jam at a crucial moment. This is particularly risky where the slide
projector is used by many different operators. Many businesses
and organisations do not conduct routine maintenance on their
slide projectors, which are used until they break down.
The Case for Overhead Transparencies
Overhead projectors revolutionised business speaking and teaching

aids. No lecture theatre would be complete without one. They are
flexible technology, allowing the speaker to switch the order of
transparencies at will. These standard-use business tools are most
suitable where meetings have relatively few participants. Compared
with slides, however, they project inferior image definition.
Overhead projectors are so easy to use that they sometimes

tempt speakers into making little effort at preparation. I have lost
count of the situations where speakers arrive at a meeting with a
bundle of ill-sorted and ill-conceived overheads. The worst
offenders are straight photocopies of other printed material. Pho-
tocopying documents or other written reports for use as speaker
aids often mixes incompatible media. Effective overheads need to
be stripped-down versions of material which is suitable for the
printed page. Just as much thought and professional care should
be directed towards preparing polished-looking overheads as for
any other medium.
Colour transparencies usually beat black and white ones hands
down in appearance.
Many overhead projectors are noisy and can be intrusive in

business meetings and a distraction for people sitting near them.
It is generally better to switch them off when you are not speaking
to a transparency, but constant switching on and off can be
annoying for the audience. Follow the 80/20 rule of speaking 80
per cent of the time and using speaker aids for only 20 per cent
so there will not be a problem.
Using blank overhead transparencies with suitable marker pens
will permit you to write up audience contributions.
Take along some methylated spirits to clean the glass of the

overhead projector before you start. The dust and dirt on the
glass will make your transparencies look grubby and ill-prepared.
However, even after cleaning, you will find that scratches on the
glass top of a projector will show through on your overhead.
The Case for Flip Charts
I work with at least two flip charts in nearly all my business

presentations and training sessions because they allow me to work
on twice the canvas. If I am breaking up the audience for group

work, I ask for as many flip charts as there will be groups.
The case for flip charts is that they provide the most visible
record of the work being done at the meeting. They can easily be
displayed on a wall for the duration of the session or conference.
The limitation of flip charts is that they cannot be seen by
large audiences. I would think twice before using flip charts in
front of more than about 60 people. They should not be used
where some members of the audience have to strain to see them.
I strongly urge you to buy your own very large pens for best
effect. Change them when they start running low on ink and not
when they dry out. Thick chalk can also look effective on flip
charts, particularly to create a shading look. Do not rely on pens
provided by the venue.
The Case for Video
Using video as a source for conveying ideas seems a natural extension

of the everyday use of television and video at home. In my commu-
nication training, I use video as part of a multimedia mix to show
excerpts from great speeches, examples of advertisements showing
the five-point plan and illustrations of body language.
It is also invaluable as a teaching tool in recording and playing
back people's performances. Evaluations of seminars consistently
show that people learn more from watching their own perfor-
mance than from anything else.
Give thought to how you can incorporate video into your

communication needs.
The Case Against Whiteboards
Whiteboards are not a suitable aid for business presentations.

Their place is at your own office meeting. They have a shiny
surface which makes them difficult to read from any distance and
whiteboard pens do not create enough contrast. Wheel them
away.
The Case for 3D Models
Take something three-dimensional along to your next presenta-

tion. I have a kitbag of such speaker aids.
If I am talking about the right and left hemispheres of the
brain, I display an anatomical model of the brain. If I am talking
about different personality styles, I display examples of what
necktie each type of person may wear (women do not have such
an equivalent sartorial giveaway of their personality style). If I am
talking about how we need to place our voice in the `mask' of the
face, there is no better way to make the point than to put on an
actor's mask.
Your Own Equipment
Consider taking your own equipment such as slide and overhead

projectors, software projection equipment, even TV sets and VHS
monitors to important meetings.
When Presenting
• Keep to the 80/20 rule. Talk without support from aids 80

per cent of the time.
• Do not turn your back to the audience while gazing at a screen
or obsessively look at your laptop.
• Do not allow yourself to be speaking in virtual darkness while
your speaker aids are illuminated.
• Rehearse the use of your aids in real time to test whether you
can explain them clearly and succinctly.
Vocal 38% Visual 55%
Verbal 7%
Source: Silent Messages, Albert Mehrabian, UCLA
Figure 5.3 What we believe
• Rehearse with equipment to ensure it is working.

• Begin preparation of speaker aids with a long lead time. They
take plenty of time to get right.
Step 5: Non-verbal Communication – Delivery

and Pathos
In his lectures on rhetoric at the Lyceum, Aristotle taught effective

delivery as a key dimension of the art of persuasion. It is not just
what you say, but how you say it that counts. Delivery was about
a speaker's non-verbal communication: voice and body language.
No matter how good your content is, if the message contained
in your voice and body language doesn't fit the words you are
saying, no one will be convinced. If you don't feel committed to
what you say, you can't expect others to. For example, the speaker
who delivers the opening line Ì am really happy to be here today',
but who looks like they would prefer to be anywhere else in the
world is certainly not sending the message in their words. When

there is a mis-match between the words and the body language
and voice, the audience disregards the words and believes the
non-verbal signals.
A famous study conducted by Albert Mehrabian at the Uni-
versity of California in Los Angeles, published in the book Silent
Messages, found that where there is incongruity between verbal
and non-verbal communication, the person receiving the message
puts far more trust in the non-verbal content of the message.
Incongruity means that there is a mixed or conflicting message

between the words that are being said and the tone of voice or
the visual cues which are being sent at the same time. In the case
of mixed messages, Mehrabian found that an audience puts only
7 per cent trust in the verbal content or words, 38 per cent trust
in the vocal content or tone of voice and 55 per cent trust in the
visual or what they see.
The power of body language is illustrated daily in the theatre

of a court room. How many Australians jumped to conclusions
about Lindy Chamberlain's guilt through reading the non-verbal
signals of her behaviour? Chamberlain seemed disassociated. She
was switched off. Millions wondered how a mother could fail to
show more emotion about the devastating loss of a child. On the
strength of this observation, many jumped to conclusions and
judged her guilty.
In his fine novel, Snow Falling on Cedars, David Guterson writes:
In his face, he knew was his fate, as Nels Gudmundsson

[defence lawyer] had asserted at the start of things: `There
are facts,' he said, ànd the jurors listen to them, but even
more, they watch you. They watch to see what happens to
your face, how it changes when witnesses speak. For them,
at bottom, the answer is how you appear in the courtroom,

what you look like, how you act.'
All of us know how to interpret the complex mosaic of non-verbal

communication. We become skilled at reading the tone of voice
and body language of our mothers from the earliest moments of
life. However, although we don't need instruction about body
language, we do need to be reminded about it. Some people
ignore or don't read the signals coming from others. They
wouldn't know if you kicked them under the table.
Persuasive Body Language
Many presenters are so focused on their content that they are

unaware of the messages being sent by their body language. Being
too focused on content and not focused enough on delivery is
usually the mark of an under-rehearsed presentation. The speaker
is spending all their mental effort sorting out what to say at the
expense of how to say it.
A presentation is a performance. Stage fright or performance
anxiety affects even seasoned pros. Laurence Olivier considered
giving up the stage in his sixties because of bouts of uncontrollable
nerves. As a presenter, you need to develop a positive and
persuasive repertoire of gestures to show confidence in yourself
and your message. You need to `free' yourself to be yourself!
Your Eyes
• Maintain eye contact throughout the presentation. Wherever

possible, seek out and make meaningful eye contact with
everyone in the audience.
• Focus for at least a few seconds on each person so that you

are meeting their gaze rather than looking through them or
past them.
• Identify `markers' in different parts of the audience to make
sure you are reaching the whole room with your eye contact.
Your markers should be friendly faces to which you return
regularly.
• Don't read more than a few lines of a speech. It leaves you
relating to the paper rather than to the audience.
Your Face
• Smile. This gesture will win more friends and warm up your
presentation more than anything you say.
• Animate your facial muscles so that you can feel them move.
Everything needs to be a bit bigger in performance than in
everyday life.
• Avoid frowning even though the matter you are discussing is
serious.
Your Hands and Arms
• Use your hands to paint pictures along with your words, to

help get your words and meaning out. Hand movements will
help animate your voice, face and body.
• Bold, sweeping gestures with your hands and arms expand your
personal space and presence.
• Open your palms to signal trust.
• Avoid too many `shaker' pushing down and `sharer' plaintive
gestures. The first can look too aggressive and the second too
weak.
• Don't cross your hands in front of your crotch or behind your
back.
Movement
• Move purposefully about the stage or even the audience. It

helps energise the room.
• Consider mapping the movements you will make in the room
as part of your preparation.
• Don't pace repetitively.
• Avoid getting stuck behind a lectern unless there is no alter-
native.
Practise
• Assess your performances. Get a trusted colleague to give you

specific feedback about your body language.
• You will benefit from off-stage practice as you seek to improve
the confidence of your on-stage body language. The bathroom
mirror and videotaping yourself are good places to start.
Non-verbal Messages and Personality
In her book, People Making, Virginia Satir identified four behav-

ioural modes, `distract', `blame', `compute' and `placate', which
help us understand the delivery dynamics of each communication
style:
• Communicators `distract'. Their performance is their message.

Their voice and gestures are colourful and robust. Desmond
Tutu is an example of a communicator. Think of his lively face
and exuberant, rhythmic voice. It excites. Can you?
• Shakers `blame'. Their style is authoritative and sometimes
bossy. Their sentences end with many downward inflections
and their hand gestures push downwards as though patting a
child on the head. Margaret Thatcher is an example of a shaker.
Is your persona assertive enough to use forceful body language

when the occasion requires?
• Auditors `compute'. Their style tends towards monotonal voice
delivery and little or no gesturing. A variation of this, displayed
by keen minds like judges, is a very precise and clipped delivery.
Former Reserve Bank chief Bernie Fraser is an example of an
auditor. Many people slip into auditor mode when they are very
content-focused. It is fine for a time. However, do not get too
stuck with a monotonous voice delivery and limited or no
gesturing.
• Sharers `placate'. Their style is meek and pleading. Their sen-
tences end with many upward inflections and their hand
gestures, often with open palms, lift upwards as though begging
for agreement or common sense. Broadcaster Caroline Jones is
an example of a sharer. Sharers connect. They win many hearts,
but a sharer who is too stuck in the one groove may appear
too timid. If you are a sharer, can you also shift to another
style at stages of a presentation?
What non-verbal signals do you send when you are communi-

cating? Your body language should match your message. For example,
there is no point trying to connect with the audience in sharer mode
if your body language is shaker. You won't sell your message well to
an auditor if you are distracting like a communicator.
Versatile communicators are not stuck in any one style, but

can access all of them during the course of a presentation. If you
are making a team presentation, you can balance the different
styles in your selection of who will speak.
Rehearsing
Clare Jones at Ambrose insisted on thorough rehearsal of the team

presentation. She was right to do so. There is a world of difference
between thinking about making a presentation and doing it. Every

idea we have is a mental concept. Often we find it very difficult
to know exactly what we mean in our heads, let alone express
the idea in words. It is only when we express it out loud that we
can test whether we really understand what we are saying. It is
in the rehearsal stage that we get a reality check about whether
we really know what we want to say.
Rehearsals also give a real-time check on whether we can make
our presentation in the allocated time. Clock your rehearsal to
see whether it fits the time allowed. Remember, it usually takes
someone longer than they expect to say something – often as
much as 50 per cent longer.
It is only when speakers are masters of their content that they

can focus, during the presentation, on delivery and the body
language cues coming from their audience. Under-rehearsed per-
formers spend too much time inside their own heads working out
what they are saying. Properly rehearsed presenters know their
stuff and can focus on what the audience is telling them non-
verbally.
Being a master of content doesn't mean being inflexibly locked

into its delivery. Remember that excellent presenters know where
they want to go but spend their time calibrating the audience
response and reacting flexibly to it. Through reading the audience
response or body language cues, it may be obvious to the
presenter that something needs further explanation or repetition
in order to be understood. A well-rehearsed, flexible speaker is
most alive to responding to the dynamic needs of the audience
during the presentation.
Although problems usually lie in presentations being under-

rather than over-rehearsed, there can be too much rehearsal. An
over-rehearsed presentation is dead and lacks spontaneity and
responsiveness to the audience's needs. This is most likely to occur
when the same presentation or a slight variation of it is delivered

many times to different audiences. Professional performers over-
come this hazard by thinking of the presentation as being brand
new each time. To create something different every time, select
a new story or example, change the bait, refer to something which
happened today. Never let what you say bore you.
Performance Anxiety and Warming Up
Nerves affect every performer, but without them your performance

would be too flat. However, there is a point where too much
nervous anxiety starts to affect your performance adversely. So
the trick is to find the happy medium.
Nerves work on your head and body and actions. Your mind
races. You struggle to remember what you are going to say. Your
body reacts. Your heart thumps. Your pores sweat. Your stomach
has butterflies. Your mouth becomes dry. Your voice quavers.
Your hands shake.
There is no complete cure for nerves, but there are several

things you can do to make sure these miserable sensations don't
overtake your presentation. What you must do is try several
strategies and see what works for you.
The best insurance against too much anxiety is thorough

preparation. Many people feel anxious because they are not
adequately prepared and rehearsed to make an effective presenta-
tion. If you know your stuff, the confidence that knowledge gives
you can overcome the worst of your presentation demons.
Visualising success works for some people. Spend time ahead

of your presentation visualising yourself feeling confident in
the performance. Imagine what it will be like to stand up ready
to speak, hear the applause, then watch yourself make the
presentation. This is the method used by sports psychologists to

help people handle the pressure of big-time performance.
I go for the body relaxation trip. On the day of a performance,

I try to find time for a swim or a good walk or even a massage.
If you get your body to relax, the mind usually follows. If you
know how to meditate, put aside a little time before an important
presentation to help you relax your body and mind.
Another strategy which works before a performance is to take

time to meet those people who will be in your audience. You will
begin to warm to people and they will start to get to know you
before your presentation. They will also be less inclined to `judge'
you on how you perform.
Consider integrating the audience into your presentation.

Select someone friendly looking and ask them a question. Wait
for their answer and use the information they have given you.
Get ideas from the audience and write them up on a flip chart.
This also has the benefit of creating an activity for yourself early
in the presentation.
Breathing and Voice Exercises
Breathing is particularly important as your moment to speak

approaches.
• Take some really long, deep breaths. Try to breathe in as far

as your toes.
• Hold some of these breaths and count to five, ten, fifteen. As
you exhale, visualise emptying out your tension.
• When you begin to speak, avoid long gasping breaths. Try
short breaths to support short thoughts. John Wayne was once
asked how he spoke a sentence of dialogue. He replied: `First
I say the first half of the sentence (pause) then I say the second
half of the sentence.' Even in a short sentence, Wayne had

found space for an extra short breath.
• Warm up your voice. Trying to speak without a voice workout
is like trying to run in a race without a body warm-up.
• Say the alphabet out loud, really stretching your mouth and
tongue: a-a-a-a; aa-aa-aa-aa; aaa-aaa-aaa-a. b-b-b-b; bb-bb-bb-
bb.
• Try some tongue-twisters:
Red leather, yellow leather, yellow leather, red leather.
Betty bounced a bright blue ball.
Cuthbert lisps isthmus thus.
Peter Piper picked a peck of pickled peppers. If Peter Piper
picked a peck of pickled peppers, where is the peck of
pickled
peppers Peter Piper picked?
• Sing your favourite song or learn and recite an expressive
poem.
• An unfailing technique to control nerves is slowing down. Talk
adagio – literally àt ease'. This is a particularly powerful tech-
nique if you have to read any part of your text and want to
eliminate fluffs.
Experienced performers usually have less trouble dealing with

nerves. Presenting over and over again gradually reduces nervous
anxiety for most people, or at least makes them get used to it.
However, your nerves will never go away completely. Nor do
you want them to.
Using Notes
The convention in ancient Greece and Rome was to rote

learn speeches. It is what Aristotle referred to as memory. These days,
fortunately, we don't need to bother. Memorising gets too much
in the way of spontaneity, but then few speakers can handle a

written text. President Clinton is the only modern speaker I know
who can make a written text come alive. He obviously rehearses
it a number of times so that it is mostly in his head. As a result,
when he delivers the text, he needs to refer to the written copy
fairly infrequently. He also understands that a written text must
be made to sound as though you are talking rather than reading.
Although I advise you strongly against reading a speech, there
is still merit in writing the presentation out in full, particularly if
you need to be precise in what you are saying. If you adopt this
technique, you then have a choice. You can take the written
speech with you and work from it during your presentation. If
you adopt this choice, try to avoid the temptation to read out
large parts of it. Your other alternative is to write out some
shorthand notes of the longer written text.
If you have not written out your presentation, try to con-

dense your notes to the minimum possible – in length, not size
of words! I usually write prompts on an A4 page. For example,
`Franklin' would remind me to relate my experience in campaign-
ing for Tasmania's Franklin River and what I learned from it. It is
a mistake to have pages of prompt notes because you will spend
too much time focused on them rather than relating to the
audience. On the other hand, I also avoid small notes in the palm
of my hand. It reminds me too much of the technique used in
school debating.
Summary: Persuasive Business Presentations
To sum up, thorough preparation is the key to any successful

presentation. Don't leave anything to chance.
Before the Day
• Identify key questions in the audience's mind.

• Create a profile of your audience. Include material that would
stimulate all four personality styles.
• Decide on a structure to use – five-point plan, four-part story
or question and answer format.
• Develop visual aids, keeping them simple.
• Write down the examples you want to use.
• Develop a metaphor for key points you want to make.
• Rehearse with colleagues.
• Rehearse in real time. How much time have you been allo-
cated?
• Practise relaxation and voice warm-up exercises.
• Get to the venue early and become familiar with the room.
For example, do you know where the light switch is on the
overhead projector?
• Build flexibility into your presentations so that you can respond
to audience signals.
• Pick out what you are going to wear well in advance. Ask
yourself: `Do I feel confident and powerful yet comfortable in
the clothes I have chosen?'
During the Presentation
• Be aware of your nerves. Remind yourself that it is natural and

expect to feel nervous.
• Be warm, be personal. Smile.
• Be positive. Remind yourself to lighten up.
• Use the point, reason, example structure in response to audi-
ence questions.
• Come alive – animate your face and voice. Be passionate.
• Communicate person to person – be personable, not declama-

tory, in tone.
• Be an anecdote machine – use parables, anecdotes and meta-
phors, and draw on personal experiences.
After the Presentation
• Ask yourself how the presentation went. What worked well?

What didn't work? Draw lessons for future reference. Seek
client feedback.
• Analyse whether you communicated your key messages.
• Go to see professional speakers make presentations and assess
them. Learn to model the behaviour of effective presenters.
CHAPTER 6
THE ASTUTE NEGOTIATOR
1 What happens in a 7 Step 2: Preparing

model negotiation? for the negotiation
2 Conflict and 8 Step 3: How to
competition apply your knowledge
3 Integrative versus of negotiating styles
distributive strategies 9 The framework for
4 Successful negotiating and stages of
is investing in a negotiation
relationship 10 The opening –
5 What happens when building rapport
we negotiate? 11 Tactics at the table –
6 Step 1: The five the middle stages
principles of 12 Closing a deal
negotiation 13 Summary
What Happens in a Model Negotiation?
Successful negotiating in a business context is very demanding on

the participants. It draws on the widest array of communication
skills. Prior to the negotiation, a time and place need to be set.
Thorough preparation then begins, as each side considers the
context for the discussion and ponders their interests and positions.
The astute negotiator also thinks comprehensively about the
situation facing the other party. Homework builds a solid infor-
mation base for establishing objective criteria for decisions. Where
appropriate, careful team selection needs to be made, balancing
personality styles and contributions. Brainstorming broadens the
options being considered. Work is undertaken to weigh the
consequences of what happens if the negotiation fails. Alternative
solutions are canvassed and, where possible, firmed up (Aristotle's
invention). Thought is given to the negotiating process, involving
the preferred order in which issues will be dealt with and how
differences will be resolved. Opening statements are drafted for
presentation in point form (arrangement). Rehearsals reveal
glitches (style and delivery).
As the parties sit down together, the theatre stage of the
negotiation begins. Building rapport is the first priority. Managing
the relationship between the parties and within each team remains
a high priority, particularly if the going gets tough. Active listen-
ing picks up the nuances of the other party's statements and
positions. Careful questioning helps unravel the interests which
lie behind their positions. Objective criteria for reaching a win-
win outcome are discussed. The common ground between the
parties is identified and separated from differences. Tentative
agreement is reached on areas where there is no dispute. Differ-
ences need to be tackled. A problem-solving approach is really
what is needed now. How is the gap between the two sides
bridged? Creative solutions are called for. Further questions reveal
how both parties might move forward to resolve differences. The
gap narrows as both sides make principled concessions. Final
agreement is reached as the parties strive to achieve a satisfying
outcome on both sides.
Once the negotiation is complete, the agreement is imple-

THE ASTUTE NEGOTIATOR 133
mented and commitments honoured. A system of monitoring and

reviewing performance alerts the parties to any problems.
Conflict and Competition
The model negotiation described above is based on the assump-

tion that both sides cooperate to reach agreement. Negotiation
ought to be a cooperative and not a competitive game. For this
to happen, both parties need to approach the game the same way:
you cannot have one-sided cooperation.
In reality, it is not so easy to be cooperative when both sides
start with differences. Our society is organised around conflict
and, unfortunately, much socialisation – especially for males –
involves purely competitive game-playing. Many of our
institutions, too, are modelled on the idea of conflict. Their
intellectual origins owe a debt to the school of dialectics in ancient
Greece. Dialectical argument is a three-step process. It involves
putting a proposition, hearing the opposite point of view, and
then forging a `truth' somewhere in between. In Australia, our legal
system, parliament and even the arbitration of wages are based
on this model. The system entrenches conflict rather than collab-
oration to find the best outcome.
The problem is that many people play the negotiating game
the same way. Their desperation to win or get their own way
means imposing a defeat on the other side. Often they are not
even conscious of their behaviour. They would be shocked to be
told how the other party really views the result. Àgreements'
forged in this way aren't solid. The losers lose, feel disgruntled
and seek to undermine the winner in some way. In business,
relationships break down. In marriage, irreconcilable differences
are the grounds for divorce. In politics, there's war.
Integrative Versus Distributive Strategies
Win-win negotiators bring an integrative or consensus-building

approach to the table. They see negotiating as a cooperative and
collaborative game aimed at resolving differences and strengthen-
ing the relationship between the two parties. They acknowledge
the legitimacy of the other side's interests. They set out to
accommodate those interests as well as their own and search for
an agreement which expands the available pie and satisfies both
sides.
Win-lose negotiators, however, are distributive or competitive
in their approach. They see negotiating as a game in which the
size of the pie is fixed, and the winner takes the biggest possible
share at the expense of the loser. They do not acknowledge the
legitimacy of the other side's interests and set out to gain as large
a slice of the pie for themselves as possible at the expense of the
other side. To them, negotiation is an exercise in dividing and
ruling.
Conflict occurs – possibly irreconcilably – when at least one

party adopts a distributive win-lose strategy. Rescuing the nego-
tiation from stalling in these circumstances is not easy. Ideas for
breaking such deadlocks are discussed later in the chapter.
Successful Negotiating is Investing in a

Relationship
Let me share a plain truth. The people we deal with today are
usually the same people we have to deal with tomorrow. And
they are often the same people we have to negotiate with again
at some time in the future. Indeed, in nearly all significant
negotiations, the parties have an interest in continuing the rela-
tionship well past the time of striking an agreement. This may

not be the case in buying a house or a car, but it is the norm in
most business and personal negotiations. Goodwill is the bottom
line of business. This reality places a premium on establishing
trust. A trusting relationship cannot exist where one party exer-
cises its power and dominance over the other. A negotiated
outcome where both sides feel satisfied means a win-win outcome
has been achieved.
What Happens When We Negotiate?
When two or more people sit down to negotiate, they have some
things in common and some differences. What they have in
common is that each side has something the other side wants.
Their differences lie in the fact that both want the best deal for
themselves. This might be the price of a car or a house. It might
be someone's labour or talents. It might be conceding land for
peace. The game of negotiating involves cutting a deal by settling
the differences in a way which satisfies both sides.
The fact that alternatives to a negotiated outcome exist for
both sides is what makes negotiation a test. Negotiation usually
takes place in some type of marketplace. There are always other
houses for sale. There are many different cars. In the job market,
there is more than one person to do the work and always more
than one job possible for the person seeking work. War is
sometimes preferable to peace on lopsided terms. In this market-
place of alternatives, the effective negotiator should not be too
intent on achieving a specific outcome. The buyer who has fallen
in love with a particular house is in a weak negotiating position.
Too much emotional investment in that one option greatly inhib-
its your ability to see alternative solutions. Your power is
enhanced, on the other hand, if you are prepared to walk away.

Naturally, your walk-away options are greatest when you feel
there are strong alternatives to the negotiated agreement.
Step 1: The Five Principles of Negotiation
The principles of negotiation have their root in Aristotle's con-

cepts of logos, ethos, and pathos which once again underpin the art
of persuasion. Invention and arrangement – logos – inform each of
the five.
1 Your information is the most persuasive tool you take to a

negotiation.
2 The pie is never fixed and can always be divided in more than
one way.
3 People are motivated by interests which lie behind their
positions. Your questions are the key to unlocking the real
interests of the other party.
4 Find objective criteria as the principle for agreement.
5 You need a walk-away alternative – a fall-back position – if
things go wrong.
1 Information is the Most Persuasive Tool
Information in a negotiation is persuasive power. Every negotia-

tion turns on information and most key information usually relates
to considerations of time and money. If your information is weak,
you may find yourself without a leg to stand on.
Much of the process of information-gathering involves learning
about the other side's people and numbers. The information you
need lies in the answers to simple questions. Who are the people
you are dealing with? What sort of deals do they enter? What
are the going rates in terms of time and money? Do they stick
with their deals? What will it cost them not to enter an agreement
with you?
Sometimes one side of a negotiation underestimates how much

information the other side can put its hands on. In one commercial
example, in a complex negotiation in Papua New Guinea over
mining royalties worth hundreds of millions of dollars, the Papua
New Guinea government had organised an on-line system which
provided them with instant calculations on different payment
scenarios. Their information system beat the mining company's
system hands down, an advantage which was not expected by the
mining company. Papua New Guinea was not going to be snowed
on that agreement.
2 The Pie is Never Fixed
There is always more than one way of resolving a problem or

area of difference. The more you build rapport with the other
side and seek to understand their interests, the more likely you
are to create solutions.
Sophisticated negotiators brainstorm on their own side and
sometimes with the other side in order to devise a broad range
of possible solutions. In international negotiations, there have
been spectacular successes achieved by the brainstorming process,
such as the secret Oslo meetings which led to a breakthrough in
the Middle East deadlock. The meetings had no official status and
were held among a small number of Israelis and Palestinians who
had no authority to make a deal. This allowed participants on
both sides to trade ideas without prejudice or commitment. Each
side reported back to officials, who then cautiously adopted some

of the proposals.
3 People are Motivated by Interests
As Roger Fisher and William Ury argue in their brilliant book,

Getting to Yes, the core of effective negotiating is discovering the
interests which lie behind the positions people take. Our interests
are those needs which motivate our positions. If we understand
the other party's interests, it is possible to begin exploring other
positions which may satisfy their needs.
When the other party presents their positions on an issue, it
is wise to search for the interests which lie behind them rather
than accept them at face value or as non-negotiable. Put the
position to the test of being explained. Ask: `Why do you want
that?' or `What is your reason for saying that?'
Questions are the most powerful device a negotiator can use
to get at the core of the issues that separate the parties. If you
are prepared to listen and if you frame questions well, you will
find out everything you need to know about collaboratively
working towards a solution.
Questions are also the bridge to understanding the other party.

In many instances, your questions will even help the other party
get a better understanding of their own positions and interests.
They are a check on the accuracy of your listening – ask: Àm I
right in saying that you believe . . . ?' or `You have told me that
. . .' They also help you test alternatives by asking: `What if . . .?'
As the negotiation proceeds, it will be time to check whether
your ideas and problem-solving suggestions are acceptable to the
other party. These questions always need to be framed with a
reciprocal obligation. Ask: `What would you do if I did . . .?'
Questions can help you save a negotiation which is in trouble.

Ask: `Do you really want to reach agreement?' or `What do you

think would happen if our negotiation failed?'
Good questions helped unlock the difference between the

interests and positions of Israel and Egypt over the disputed Sinai
Desert. The Sinai is the strip of inhospitable land north and east
of the Red Sea and Suez Canal which Israel occupied in the 1967
war. In the negotiations leading to the Camp David accord of
1979, both sides had fixed positions over Sinai. Egypt was ada-
mant that Sinai must be returned as a condition of making peace
with its enemy. Israel would not move because the Sinai had been
the launch pad for a surprise attack on Israel.
In time, probing questions revealed the interests which lay

behind Israel's position. The issue was not land, but security. Israel
was not so much interested in a continuing occupation of Sinai
as in guarantees of security and an assurance that history would
not be repeated. A settlement was reached when Israel withdrew
from Sinai but Egypt agreed that the desert would remain
demilitarised to allay Israeli security concerns.
4 Find Objective Criteria as the Principle for Agreement
Finding objective criteria is the only way to persuade both sides

that a fair and mutually satisfying deal has been struck, but what
are objective criteria? The answer often lies in the way agreements
have been made elsewhere. What does the market pay? What is
the going rate? What are efficiency or professional standards or
quality criteria? What precedents come from other judgments
dealing with similar cases? How has it been decided in other
negotiations?
Identifying objective criteria involves homework before the
negotiation begins. Sometimes the information you need is on
the public record. At other times that information is a closely

guarded commercial secret which the other side will not divulge.
The difficulty is that both sides need to agree on what objective
criteria should dictate a solution. If you can strike agreement on
the principles of agreement, a solution will follow relatively easily.
It was once said that President Bush was such a bad negotiator
that he would pay full price for a Persian rug. I don't know a lot
about rugs, but I do know the principle of agreement has to be
the going rate.
Persian rug salesperson: This carpet is very cheap at $6500. I am
losing money on it.
Customer: The same one is down the road for half
that price.
Persian rug salesperson: No. That's an inferior product.
Customer: It's all I can afford.
Persian rug salesperson: It's a deal.
Identifying objective standards helps remove personality issues

from the negotiation. A clash of egos typically leads the parties
to dig into their positions. Agreement about principles allows both
sides to move towards each other without feeling compromised
by the pressure to give in. Negotiation on objective criteria or
principles is the mark of the integrative approach.
5 Find a Walk-away Alternative if Things Go Wrong
Samuel Johnson noted that hanging concentrates the mind won-

derfully. A negotiation which is about to collapse has much the
same effect. To put it bluntly, you need a walk-away alternative
to give you leverage. Without an alternative, you are virtually a
prisoner to the terms set by the other party. This may be fine if
the other party is committed to a mutually satisfying outcome. If
not, you will be hung out to dry. This situation is dangerous for
both parties because agreements reached in this way are likely to
come unstuck.
Your walk-away alternative is really your bottom line. In many
seminars I randomly ask participants what matters most in nego-
tiation. Knowing your bottom line is the typical answer. To me
this answer is both right and wrong. If by the `bottom line' a
negotiator means knowing their next best alternative, they are
absolutely right to have a realistic idea of what happens if the
negotiation fails. Too many negotiators only begin thinking about
their walk-away alternative when the negotiation is on the brink.
In these cases, they may have set their bottom line too high and
it may be too late.
However, getting locked into a bottom line can make things

inflexible. It actually negates what the negotiating process can
produce. The negotiation itself should create the opportunity to
think about the issue in new ways. Flexibility is a cardinal virtue
of a negotiator.
Sports superstars – or at least their agents – are an interesting

example of literally playing the walk-away alternative. Promoters
want the superstars at virtually all costs. Golf tournament
organisers are prepared to pay superstars like Tiger Woods and
Greg Norman $300 000 or more as appearance money. It is only
in recent decades, with the emergence of manager/negotiators
such as Mark McCormack, that such sky-high incentives have
been paid. Changes to the sporting/business environment made
these negotiated outcomes possible. Television radically changed
the economics of top-line sport through its capacity to deliver
mass audiences which, of course, follow the superstars. Faced with
only a `no pay, no show' option, the promoters paid.
Step 2: Preparing for the Negotiation
Most of the deals that really count in your professional life are
predictable episodes that can be planned months ahead. Yet, in
many cases, preparation is left until the last minute, even though
the parties must live with the consequences for years.
An approach that arrives at a thoroughly reasoned set of
principles (logos) is what is needed. So, you should be intensive
about your preparation when the time for the negotiation is
approaching. Ask yourself the following ten key questions and
write down the answers.
1 What Do You Really Want to Achieve?
What is your wish list? What are all your objectives in the
negotiation? Don't aim too low. Don't aim too high. Don't go for
an ambit claim.
What principles or objective criteria exist to make your claims
realistic and your arguments persuasive?
2 What Do You Want Above All Else?
What are your two or three crucial objectives?
3 How Can the Pie be Expanded?
Looking at your answers to the first two questions, how can you
expand the list of outcomes? How can the pie be made bigger
and be cut differently? Brainstorm a list. Get outside advice.
4 What If You Need to Walk Away?
What is your walk-away alternative? Are you sure it is realistic?

Do some homework on your walk-away options to firm them.
Wherever possible, do this work months before the negotiation

begins.
5 What About the Other Side?
What do you know about the other side? What are their likely
objectives? What is their likely position(s)? What interests lie
behind their position(s)? What is your best assessment of the
numbers which bear on their thinking? How could you package
a win for the other side as well as your own?
6 What Is Your Own and Their Negotiating Style?
Who are you negotiating with? What personality style are they
likely to bring to the table? How can you best influence them?
See the section below on applying your knowledge of negotiating
styles before answering this question.
Who can best represent your interests? Yourself? A lawyer or
counsel? A team? Are your team's negotiating styles effectively
balanced?
7 Where Does the Power Lie?
What is your best-informed opinion about who has the most

power in the negotiation? What reasons support your opinion? If
the balance is tilted against you, what information would help
you change it in your direction? Does the other side have the
authority to close the deal?
8 What Is Your Best Expected Outcome?
What is your best expected outcome? What is your worst expected

outcome? What lies in the middle?
Balance Sheet
My Objectives Their Objectives
1 1
2 2
3 3
How I can Meet My Objectives How They can Meet Their Objectives
1 1
2 2
3 3
Figure 6.1 Balance sheet
9 What Is Their Best Expected Outcome?
What do you believe the other side thinks is its best, worst and
middle outcomes?
10 How, Where, When?
What negotiating process do you propose? When should the

negotiation begin? Where should it take place?
Write Up a Balance Sheet

After developing answers to the above ten questions, write up a
preliminary balance sheet which includes the following consider-
ations:
• your priority objectives and how the other party can meet
them;
• their likely priority objectives and how you can meet theirs.
Step 3: How to Apply Your Knowledge of

Negotiating Styles
Chapter 2 presented a detailed account of how to persuade

different personality types, but how do you apply that knowledge
to negotiating?
No one fits neatly into a box. Therefore, you need to be cautious
about type-casting any person as one personality type or another
based on a particular set of characteristics you observe. Your
observations about their thinking and behaviour should be treated
as clues to a complex personality type.
Communicators
Communicators are likely to be a hybrid mix, both distributive and

integrative. They need to guard against being poor listeners and
dominating the air time. This behaviour may obscure important clues
about how they are really perceiving the negotiation. Ego-driven
communicators risk imposing a win-lose outcome on the other side
without being attuned to what is really happening. Being self-confi-
dent people, they are also likely to under-prepare. If they face another
party who is well prepared, it may be difficult for them to recover
from that disadvantage. Such a stressful situation may cause the
communicator to be aggressive and dig into their position rather than
work collaboratively with the other party.
Shakers
Shakers are highly competitive and focused on the bottom line

outcome for themselves. This is the mark of a distributive
negotiator who imposes a solution on what they perceive as the
weaker party. Distributive bargainers create a win-lose outcome.
Shakers are sometimes inclined to displays of bullying and temper
tantrums to get their way. They are impatient and may be

impulsive. Their self-assurance and short attention span mean they
may under-prepare. They should avoid a crash-through or crash
approach to negotiating.
Auditors
Auditors also are often a hybrid mix of integrative and distributive

negotiators. Their patience and attention to detail are major assets
in negotiation. Although not likely to be as submissive to aggres-
sive behaviour as sharers, their own cautious natures may tempt
others to try it on. They are likely to be better prepared than
any other type. The risk is that their attention to detail may
obscure the big picture. This could mean they are not bold
enough in their aspirations.
Sharers
Sharers will be very integrative in their approach to the negotiation.

They want both sides to be satisfied. They risk giving away too
much. Their strong need for consensus can be self-defeating. This
may create a lose-win outcome where the other side gains effortless
concessions. They may not be sufficiently assertive in the face of
aggressive behaviour by the other side. The sharer needs to guard
against making unilateral concessions in which they give something
away but get little or nothing in return.
The Framework for and Stages of Negotiation
Although there are a number of predictable stages in most nego-

tiating situations, remarkably few negotiators start with a
framework in mind about how the process should be conducted.

Yet, as negotiation is as much about process as it is about
substance, being first to suggest a framework is a distinct advan-
tage. Naturally, a framework cannot be a rigid set of procedures
and it will evolve as the negotiation unfolds. The sorts of matters
which you should think about for the framework for your nego-
tiation are:
• location and time – the where and when;

• discussion of the process itself;
• priority issues;
• discussion of principles;
• the order in which issues will be considered;
• issues which will be set aside for later consideration.
The framework should be settled between the parties in the

opening stage of the negotiation. Almost every negotiation flows
through three distinct stages. Knowing what to expect at each
stage will give you a strong grip on the process, as well as the
content of the negotiation. Without losing sight of your overall
objectives, you can prepare for one stage at a time. The periods
between the stages of the negotiation allow you the opportunity
to think about and respond to what the other party is saying.
Opening Stage
This involves rapport-building, outlining the context for the

negotiation, the suggested framework and process for negotiating,
the principles or criteria which might apply to resolving the issues,
initial proposals by both parties, and active listening by both sides
to discover the interests which lie behind the positions adopted.
Middle Stages
The middle stage may take place over one or more meetings.
Responses are made to the initial proposals of both parties.
Agreement is sought over the order in which issues are considered.
Further discussion occurs on positions and interests of the parties.
Detailed discussion takes place over the principles or criteria
which are to be adopted in resolving the differences that have
arisen. Issues which are easiest should be dealt with first to ensure
that momentum is gained. Difficult issues can be put aside for
later discussions. Few major concessions will be made.
Concluding Stage
This is the agreement stage of the negotiation. A deadline is

usually pressing and these pressures will force concessions to be
made. Before proceeding, if you have not already done so, estab-
lish the principles or objective criteria which will dictate the terms
of agreement. Our human tendency to procrastinate means that
an 80/20 rule usually applies where 80 per cent of the concessions
are likely to be made in the final 20 per cent of the time before
a deadline. Do not make a one-sided concession without receiving
something of value in return. Watch out for last-minute dirty
tricks. Make sure every aspect of the agreement is recorded.
The Opening – Building Rapport
Negotiating is a theatre in which the negotiators are performers or

actors. Like any performance, negotiating is often stressful on the
participants. In fact, because important issues are at stake in negoti-
ations, many people find the process among the most stressful of
experiences. Thorough preparation is one of the best means of
reducing this stress. Another productive way to reduce stress is
to create an environment of rapport and ease with the other party.

This process can begin well before the formal negotiating period.
Herb Cohen, author of You Can Negotiate Anything, compares
national approaches to negotiation based on how much meaning is
invested in people relationships on the one hand and the explicit
terms of agreement on the other. Negotiators from nations such as
Australia, Germany, Switzerland and Scandinavia put great store in
the explicit language of negotiated agreements. At the other end of
the spectrum, nationals from Japan, China, Taiwan, South Korea and
Singapore put great store in the person with whom they are dealing.
This concept helps explain the different cultural approaches to time
horizons in which negotiations should take place. While the Austra-
lian negotiator is sometimes happy to cut a quick deal and run, an
East Asian negotiator usually seeks a more protracted process at which
social rituals play an important part in establishing formal rapport.
Japanese and Chinese business people are reluctant to deal with others
who aren't known to them or even part of their broader circle.
Becoming an insider may never be attainable, but the outsider who
expects to do business must be prepared to invest considerable time
in developing a relationship of trust.
Listening and Not Being too Quick to Speak
Rapport-building involves a willingness to listen and absorb every-

thing you can about the other party. Negotiation is a listening
test. It requires patient, active listening to understand where the
other side is coming from. You are likely to find out far more by
allowing the other side to finish their points uninterrupted, even
if their presentation seems to go on for too long.
The greatest block to active listening is your emotional reaction
to what the other side says. As your emotions switch on, your
listening is at risk of switching off. Active listening involves
seeking to understand what the other side says without judging

it. Another hazard which stands in the way of effective listening
is mentally preparing to respond to the other side before they
have finished. While your mind is occupied by your own
thoughts, you cannot be absorbing what you are being told.
The normal conventions of back and forth conversation don't
need to apply to negotiation. In day-to-day talk, we usually
interact continuously in a flowing dialogue. In negotiation, it pays
to be more hesitant and allow yourself time to think carefully
before speaking. This gives you more time to listen fully and
understand what is being said before you prepare your response.
Body Language
Body language – delivery, in Aristotelian terms – reveals the emo-

tional state of participants in a negotiation. It can say far more
than words do. Placing sole reliance on the verbal language of
the negotiation is closing your mind to signals which can be far
more important. People who are sensitive to the body language
communication of the other side can detect changes in mood and
atmosphere even before the other party becomes aware of the
change. This is because some people are oblivious of the real
signals that they are sending.
You should spend just as much effort auditing or monitoring
your own body language as the signals coming from the other
side. Nominate a member of your team to keep a check on the
body language and vocal communication of both sides. If you are
not part of a team, you must perform this task yourself.
Where to Sit
The choice of where to sit in a room in relation to the other party

sends an important physical signal about the negotiation. Sitting
across a desk or table from the other person is formal and tends
to reinforce differences. If the boss sits behind their desk while
they negotiate with you, they are telling you that they are still
the boss and are not meeting you on equal terms. If they shift
away from behind their desk and sit beside you, the relationship
becomes more of a partnership. Whenever the height of a barrier
separating people is lowered or removed – for example, by using
a coffee table instead of a desk, the gap between the parties is
reduced.
If you are seeking to create an integrative, problem-solving and
cooperative atmosphere, the best option is to sit side by side. You
are then literally working together side by side on the problem
rather than facing each other across a divide.
The way we sit also sends an important signal. Negotiating

sessions which last for hours are a challenge to the physiology.
Unfortunately, very little furniture is designed for real body
support. It is important to sit upright but at ease. Appearing stiff
is a signal of discomfort. Sitting slouched is a sign of disinterest,
boredom or low self-esteem.
Proximity to the other person is another body language signal.

Proximics is the study of how people relate to each other in terms
of space. Different cultures have their own rules about what is
acceptable minimum space between people when doing business.
Coming too close is intrusive and aggressive. Being too far away
is isolating and remote. Country people usually need more per-
sonal space than city people.
The Eyes and Face
• Maintain eye contact. People look at each other more when

listening than talking. It is typical for people to look at each
other for about 30-60 per cent of the time they are talking.
It is often quite distressing for a person to be speaking when

others are not looking at them. In the business gaze, strangers
rarely look below the eye level of the other person. In a social
context, friends extend their gaze to the mouth. Between
intimates, the gaze extends to each other's bodies.
• Look for signs of face tension in either party. Giveaways are
knitted brows and frowns, pursed and tense lips, locked or
rigid jaw. It may be appropriate to lighten the atmosphere or
take a break where there are obvious signs of such tension.
Hand to Face
• Look for body language clues in hand-to-fare gestures. Stroking

the chin or other parts of the face is usually a sign of
evaluation. Another gesture signalling evaluation is cradling
– placing the thumb under the chin and the index finger
along the face. Watch out for whether the evaluation
appears positive or negative.
• Watch for other gestures too. Pulling at the ear is a sign of doubt
or a sign of wanting to speak. Head scratching is a sign of
frustration or thinking, depending on the accompanying eye
gaze. Hair twisting is often a sign of anxiety. Covering the
mouth with the hand is what children often do when they lie.
The gesture is to hide the untruth. The adult version of this
behaviour is sometimes scratching the nose. But don't jump to
conclusions. The person may just have an itchy nose.
The Body
• Open gestures make the person much more approachable.

• Arms folded, legs crossed and body closed in a protective
position sends a negative signal about cooperation.
• Do not ask for agreement or a commitment when a person is
closed in their body language. They are likely to say `no'. Wait
for indications that the person is open and accommodating.
Voice
Listen for changes in tone of voice which give clues to mood

swings. It may be appropriate to use the information in the form
of a question – for example, `You sound really tense when we
discuss that matter. Why is that?'
Sometimes it's Better Not to Show Your Hand
Being open in your own body language will not always be to your
advantage. There will be times when it is better to obscure how
you really feel (if you can). Lawyers know this rule well. Peter
Biscoe QC, a Sydney barrister, was quoted in the Australian
Magazine as saying Ìf you see your case crumbling halfway
through on no account do you change your expression.'
There will always be times in a negotiation when you do not
want to reveal your feelings right away. You want time to consider
a response rather than simply react. It is these times when you
should be discreet about your non-verbal communication.
Tactics at the Table – the Middle Stages
In the heat of negotiations, tactics are sometimes employed which

exert pressure on the other side. The best defence against these
tactics being used against you is to know about them. The best
counter-tactic is often to name them òh, you can't use that old
trick with me.' Some of the key tactics are outlined below.
Middle stage tactics are:
• ambit claims;
• scarcity;
• aggressive behaviour;
• bad cop/good cop;
• equal time.
Concluding stage tactics are:
• making concessions;
• higher authority;
• the value of services declines;
• deadlines;
• last-minute claims.
Note: If you want to include positive tactics in the middle

stage/concluding stage organisation, then:
• Middle stage tactics are:

– Be doggedly optimistic.
– Use metaphor to reframe negotiations.
– Turn a deaf ear.
• Closing stage tactics are:
– Resolve deadlock.
– Think in terms of how the other side will sell the agreement.
Last-minute Claims
Negotiator 1: So, it's a deal then?

Negotiator 2: Yes. I think it's all sorted out. Just in
time.
Negotiator 1: Oh. There's just one last thing . . .
You may think agreement has been reached. As time runs out, putting
you under maximum pressure, the other party introduces a significant
new claim. The temptation is to give in to the claim rather than see
the whole negotiation founder. A better response is to name the tactic
and declare that if a new claim is to be entered by one side, then
the whole agreement must be reconsidered step by step.
Higher Authority
Negotiator 1: So, it's a deal then?

Negotiator 2: Yes.
Negotiator 1: Well, I'll just have to clear this with the
boss.
Some time later:

Negotiator 1: The boss likes the deal but wants to
make a few small changes.
Negotiator 2: No.
This is a common enough tactic used in car and merchandise

sales. During the final stages of the negotiation, it transpires that
the person with whom you are dealing does not have final
authority to close a deal. The other side has to clear the agreement
with their boss. This means that your terms are set, but the other
side can veto what has been agreed to by a junior negotiator. The
aim is to force a one-sided concession. Don't budge.
Bad Cop/Good Cop
Bad cop: You are not going to get a thing. You

don't deserve it.
Victim: That's not fair.
Some time later:

Good cop: He gets a little excited at times. Of
course you deserve something. I think
I can convince
him to make an agreement so long as

you're not asking for too much or being
unreasonable.
Victim: Oh, I am so grateful to you.
This bullying tactic is used in plenty of police stations (or at least

in movies). The bad cop sets out to intimidate the victim. The
bad cop is then called away and replaced by a good cop who,
by comparison, appears to be the source of all reasonableness.
The purpose of this tactic is to soften up the other party to make
big concessions in the psychologically more comfortable presence
of the good cop.
Aggressive Behaviour
Bully: I wouldn't give you the time of day. You
are completely untrustworthy. I find
your performance totally unacceptable.
Why should I bother to deal with you?
There are people everywhere who want
your job. And they could do it far better
than you can.
Aggressive behaviour is psychologically one of the most difficult

tactics to deal with. This game may involve shouting and even
personal abuse. It is sometimes a blatant attempt to manipulate
the atmosphere and destabilise or intimidate the other party.
Khrushchev even tried it at the United Nations by banging his
shoe on the table (it turned out that this was a third shoe, as he
was still wearing a pair). It is often tried by parties who are
under-prepared or feel they have a weak hand. It is certainly not
the stamp of a person seeking a win-win outcome.
Do not react to aggressive behaviour. An aggressive counter-
reaction merely escalates the tension. You can afford to let an

outburst pass. Do not attempt to negotiate in these circumstances.
Point out that you are ready to negotiate when the other side is
ready. Name the àggressive' behaviour and indicate that it is an
impediment to the negotiation beginning.
Equal Time
Negotiator 1: Let me come to another key point.

Negotiator 2: How can you justify what you've just
said?
Negotiator 1: I'd really appreciate it if you would
allow me to outline my case first. Then
I would be very happy to answer you.
Another aggressive tactic is interruption. If you are interrupted,

ask that you be given a `fair go' and allowed to finish your remarks.
Most people will back off when the other side pleads for reason-
ableness because they may not even imagine that their aggression
is unreasonable. If necessary, you can stand up to signal that you
wish to speak uninterrupted.
Ambit Claims
Negotiator 1: This house is one of a kind. The owner

won't accept $1 less than $600 000.
Negotiator 2: One of a kind all right. It's virtually
unsale- able. It would be worth $150
000 at the most.
Ambit claims are unrealistic claims, usually backed by rhetorical

flourishes. Typical examples are a price set way too high or an
offer made way too low. The party making the ambit claim hopes
that the other side can be persuaded to split the difference

between their price and yours. Don't be persuaded.
Scarcity
Signs: Order now before it is too late! Last

one! The offer expires today!
How often have you heard these claims? They are the oldest sales
tricks in the book. You need to be on the lookout not to be made
a victim of this tactic in negotiation too. Robert Cialdini, in his
book Influence, writes about how he made good money as a student
by buying and reselling cars. His tactic was to arrange for
potential buyers to turn up for an inspection at the same time in
order to create a competitive atmosphere among them.
The Value of Services Declines . . .
Negotiator 1: I need the money now.

Negotiator 2: What for? I'll pay you later.
Negotiator 1: I need the money now.
Members of the oldest profession know the rule that the value of
services declines once they have been rendered. Thus they seek
payment upfront. It is a dangerous thing to deliver the services
while you are still negotiating their value, relying on the good
faith of the other side to pay a fair price. You may not need the
money first, but you sure need the agreement.
Making Concessions
Poor tactics:
Negotiator 1: We are only a few thousand apart. Let's
split the difference.
Negotiator 2: OK.
Other poor tactics:

Negotiator 1: I am prepared to concede . . .
Negotiator 2: Good. Now we can agree.
Better tactics:
Negotiator 1: What if I conceded . . . ? Would you
give up . . . ?
Negotiator 2: I would consider it.
An important principle in cooperative negotiating is that neither

side readily adopts the approach of splitting differences between
bid and offer. Rather, both parties need to search actively for
principles which act as an objective benchmark for a satisfying
agreement.
There will always be occasions, however, where it is time to make
concessions in order to advance the negotiation towards agreement.
It is foolish, in these circumstances, to make unilateral or one-sided
concessions. As a general rule, if you are giving something up, you
should insist on being given some concession in return.
Deadlines
Negotiator 1: My plane leaves in two hours. You

really have to bend in order to reach
agreement.
Negotiator 2: There are always other planes. The
outcome of this negotiation will prove
to be very worthwhile to you if you are
prepared to be a little patient. We have
to live with the outcome for years.
Time is always a factor in negotiations. As a rule, it is always

scarce. The time factor is often used tactically when one side
presses the urgent need to make far-reaching decisions. Artificial
deadlines imposed by the other side need to be guarded against.

You can simply refuse to accept artificial deadlines or create
pressure of your own for the deadline to be changed.
The different approaches to time played a crucial role during
the Paris peace talks on the Vietnam War. The American side
was anxious to bring a quick end to the war. Their negotiating
team rented Paris hotel rooms by the night. The North Vietnam-
ese were in no such hurry to conclude peace. Their team bought
a villa outside Paris.
Positive Tactics
While you need to be ready to respond when negative tactics are

deployed by the other side, you should also be aware of a set of
positive tactics which you can use to advance the negotiation and
build agreement.
Be Doggedly Optimistic
Negotiator 1: This is getting nowhere.

Negotiator 2: It's tough, but we must persevere no
matter what. We are on the brink of an
historic agreement.
When the going is tough it is important not to become despon-

dent about the outcome and signal that negative reaction to the
other party. Do not create false optimism by being unrealistic
about the actual progress of a floundering negotiation. If the
negotiation is going off the rails, you are well advised to ask the
other side a series of questions about their genuine interest in
coming to agreement. For example, `You do want an agreement,
don't you?'
Use Metaphor to Reframe Negotiations
I know of many cases where introducing a metaphor to illustrate

the state of the negotiations has helped reframe the situation for
the parties. Sometimes a metaphor works in bringing one party
to its senses.
Person 1: I will not be treated as a doormat and

agree to accept whatever terms you
offer.
Person 2: I am certainly not treating you as a
doormat.
The metaphor you have in your head about the negotiating

process itself is an important clue to your behaviour. You may
not even be aware of this metaphor. It can be either implicit or
explicit. Is negotiating a battle or chess game in which there are
victors and vanquished? Or is negotiating one aspect of a rela-
tionship between business partners? In a formal business
partnership, such as a law firm or accounting firm, partners bring
different expertise and inputs into the joint pool and take a
different share of the profits based on an agreed formula. Another
metaphor of cooperative partnership is the relationship between
allies. Partners in an alliance sometimes have profound differences
from each other but agree to work towards the same goals of
common interest.
Turning a Deaf Ear
Kruschchev: [We will obliterate you.]

Kennedy: [I didn't hear that.]
On some occasions it is prudent to ignore things that are said in

the heat of conflict and negotiation. At a crucial point in the
Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962, Kruschchev sent contradictory
messages to Kennedy, one highly aggressive and the other more

conciliatory. Which position was the real one for the Russians? After
much puzzlement and deliberation, the Kennedy team decided to
pretend that the aggressive note had never been sent. In this volatile
situation wavering close to war, they responded only to the concil-
iatory gesture. This response seemed to work as nothing further was
heard of the threats made in the aggressive note.
Think in Terms of How the Other Side Will Sell the Agreement
Negotiator 1: Did I do a great deal today!

Negotiator 2: They agreed. It's terrific!
When the other party leaves the negotiation they will need to send
a message to their side that they have achieved a good outcome. As
a good negotiator, you should always bear in mind what sort of deal
you are handing to the other party. As William Ury says, you need
to package a victory speech for the other side.
Deadlock
Deadlocks are most likely to occur when one side or the other
is trying to impose a distributive outcome. Thus the challenge in
breaking a deadlock is to change the game to collaborative
problem-solving.
• Practising the virtue of patience is your first need in the case

of a deadlock. Worthwhile deals are worth spending time on.
• A good dose of infectious optimism is never harmful when the
going gets tough. All human beings are subject to mood swings
and despondency can kill a good deal in the making. As a team
member, take responsibility for spreading optimism to both sides.
Point out how much progress has been made already towards a
joint solution, even though there is still some way to go.
• Negotiation is a creative endeavour. An impasse means it is
time to look again at the assumptions you have made about
the other party. Have you fully understood their position and
the interests which lie behind it? Are your interests clear
enough to the other side? Look again at the universe of
possibilities for generating fresh solutions which can satisfy the
interests of both sides.
• Brainstorm ideas to expand the pie. This may be done by
yourself or with your own team. Why not suggest a joint
brainstorming session with the other side? One possibility is
for some members of both teams to brainstorm without com-
mitment at a separate session.
• In team negotiations, consider changing the players, especially
if personality conflicts appear to be a problem.
• Try to put more than one issue on the table. If the deadlock
comes down to non-negotiability about only one thing, creat-
ing movement may be seen as a back-down by the `loser'.
• Try to divide the problem into its component parts. For
example, if the deadlock is about money, introduce the time
issue: Ì am not able to pay you that sum now, but what if I
paid you in 90 days? Would you agree to that solution?'
• Consider inviting in a third party to mediate the problem. The
mediator's role is not to dictate a solution, but to suggest a
way forward to agreement.
Closing a Deal
Negotiations do not need to be brought to a conclusion or closed

by lengthy written agreements. One of Australia's most important
business deals, the Esso BHP agreement to explore Bass Strait for
oil, was sealed by a heads of agreement which was only a few
pages in length. The parties agreed to put in half the costs and
take out half the profits.
The merit of a short agreement is that it emphasises the need
for the parties to remain flexible in the future in dealing with
issues as they arise. The real basis of the relationship is trust.
The concession and real agreement stage is usually reached

quite late in most negotiations. An 80/20 rule usually applies.
Eighty per cent of the concessions are made in the last 20 per
cent of the time available. The negotiator who will succeed in
this hothouse climate is one who remains flexible and creatively
engaged in the process of seeking agreement until the very end.
The worst approach is to rigidly stick to a position.
Summary
Consider negotiation as joint problem-solving in which you and

the other party work to achieve a mutually satisfying outcome.
Picture yourself standing side by side addressing the problem with
the other side rather than face to face in confrontation.
Before
Conduct superior homework. Research and number crunch. What

do you want? Why do you want it? Put yourself in the other
person's shoes. Consider their needs.
What problem-solving principles should apply? What is fair?
Consider precedent, market rate, comparative value, costs, stand-
ards. Brainstorm ideas. Search for solutions of high value to you
and little cost to the other side.
What if the negotiation fails? Develop your next best alterna-

tive. Role-play the negotiation.
During
Offer a plan on how the negotiation should proceed. Patiently

seek to understand the other side's positions and needs. Don't
reject positions; probe what lies behind them. Ask questions to
clarify the other side's needs, solve problems, test options.
Be flexible. Don't lock yourself into fixed positions. The pie is
never fixed. Generate options to expand the pie.
Seek agreement on the principles for settlement. Yield to

principles, not pressure.
Concessions should be reciprocal. Package a victory for the
other side too.
After
Debrief and draw lessons from your experience.

Put in place a system for monitoring how the agreement is
working.
Engage in a formal review process.

CHAPTER 7
DEALING WITH THE MEDIA
1 Your audience 5 Ambushes and the

2 The media: How difficult questions
journalists work 6 Persuasive body
3 Making your news the language on television
news 7 Dress and appearance
4 The quotable quote 8 Summary: Dealing with
and the irresistible the media to communi-
sound bite cate your message
MEDIA ATTENTION FOCUSES regularly on organisations,

their chief executives or perhaps those nominated to speak for
them. Sometimes that attention is predictable; at other times it is
totally unexpected. If you find yourself having to talk to a
journalist about some aspect of your business, the experience can
be bruising – unless you're prepared. That few minutes of glare in
the media spotlight can make or break your career. If the pressure
is intense and you handle the situation well, it may help make
you. But it can sure help undo you.
A senior government official is giving a television interview

out of doors on a hot day. He is under the misapprehension
that the interview will last only five minutes. Twenty min-
utes into the recording, he is asked a question and his mind
DEALING WITH THE MEDIA 167
goes blank. He doesn't respond for fifteen seconds. It's an

eternity in television time. A current affairs program plays
the unedited sequence in prime time.
A national company has a food poisoning scare on its hands.

It offers no comment to the media and instructs its public
relations adviser to cool down the fraying tempers of the
waiting journalists. At the end of a long day, as the news
crews prepare to leave their doorstop positions, she bids
them goodbye, saying: `Have a good weekend'. Unknown
to her, a camera is rolling. Those flippant words became
the company's only òfficial' comment on national television.
National Mutual is estimated to have lost about $160

million in revenue after Four Corners broadcast a detailed
report on its disastrous financial standing. In fact, the
outcome would have been even worse for the company had
it not been for the skilled handling of the situation by the
managing director, Geoff Tomlimson. Tomlimson had been
extensively schooled before he faced an interview with the
late Andrew Olle at the conclusion of the taped report on
National Mutual. Every conceivable question that might be
put to the MD was extensively rehearsed.
The media can also be deeply intrusive into private life. Sara
Netenyahu, wife of the Israeli prime minister, stopped a
television interview for 30 minutes after she was asked point
blank whether she had tried to block the appointment of a
female cabinet minister because of suspicions that she was
involved in an extramarital affair with her husband. She
repeatedly got out of her chair and shouted at the interviewer.
The discussion continued only after assurances were given
that the offending section of the interview would be deleted.
In Australia, businesswoman Janet Holmes à Court, of her

own volition, told 60 Minutes that she was not involved in
an affair with former prime minister Paul Keating. In one
breath, she amplified the rumours a hundredfold.
These real stories illustrate the dangers of facing the media.

Not surprisingly, surveys of chief executives reveal that handling
the media is the greatest fear many of them face. Bosses who are
totally comfortable in their own company environment can feel
out of control in a media inquisition. After all, the media is not
their business: it is the business of journalists. Of course, it is
usually too late to start thinking about how to handle the media
when the spotlights are turned on you.
Gaining control is at the heart of successfully handling the

media. The inexperienced media performer holds none of
the control levers. They are left to respond as best they can to the
journalist's questions, with no strategy for avoiding questions they
do not want to answer. They may be unaware of the need to
develop and communicate an agenda. They do not know how to
introduce their own messages into an interview. They do not
know how to prepare a television or radio sound bite with impact.
They are not conscious of their voice and body language or what
dress to avoid on television.
This chapter will guide you in dealing with the media. It
explains how the media work, what they want and how to act
when you are in their spotlight. First, you'll need to understand
the audience you're talking to, and the media you're dealing with.
Your Audience
Many people talk to journalists without thinking about the audi-
ence to which they are communicating. Even if they do think
about who's reading or listening or watching, they don't think

much about the ways people use the media.
It is a fact that people tend to scan newspapers rather than read
them in detail. Australian Bureau of Statistics figures on time use
on culture/leisure activities show that the average Australian spends
sixteen minutes a day reading newspapers. They listen to radio for
much longer periods – 101 minutes a day. However, when people
listen to radio, they are inevitably doing something else – for
example, driving the car, taking a shower, buttering the toast.
Television gets most attention, with the average Australian

spending 172 minutes a day watching. However, as with radio
listening habits, people rarely pay full attention to what's going
on. Nevertheless, in cultures like our own – the United States and
the United Kingdom, for instance – about 80 per cent of people
regard television as their principal source of information.
The Australian Broadcasting Authority published a monograph,

Living with Television, in 1993. After surveying 1204 people about
their television viewing habits, it came up with the following data:
Programs watched with full attention

News 34%
Current Affairs 21%
Documentaries 19%
Movies 18%
Serials 18%
Sport 13%
Comedy 10%
Infotainment* 6%
Don't watch anything/unsure 16%
*
Infotainment refers to lifestyle programs such as Burke's Backyard, Getaway,
Healthy,
Wealthy and Wise. Comedy refers to programs like Seinfeld.
This information reveals a very different picture from the days

when the whole family gathered around the radio or television
to listen and watch attentively. It is clear that people no longer
devote their full attention to what is going on. People watch and
listen with a split focus – they are doing something else at the
same time. This means that viewers and listeners take impressions
rather than detailed observations from television and radio.
Another study in San Francisco, reported in the Bulletin, dis-

covered that 51 per cent of television viewers had no recall of
the stories in a news bulletin they had just finished watching.
Among the 49 per cent of those who could remember something
about the news, the average recall rate on stories was one item
in nineteen.
My own interpretation of this information is that, on the whole,

television and radio create and reinforce stereotypes. For example,
for years we did not notice the daily reports of the war in Bosnia
because there was very little real change. `Still fighting' was the
daily media status of the story. This was consonant, or consistent,
with our perceptions and attitudes about how things were in that
part of the world. We did not expect anything else. Then, one
day, the parties came together in Daton, Ohio, to negotiate. That
day, people would have noticed the news because the stereotype
had been broken by genuine change and new information. In other
words, it is only dissonance or inconsistency which forces us to
notice and adjust our interpretation of the world.
One implication of dissonance theory, first developed by

psychologist Leon Festinger in 1957, is that we are slow to shift
our basic attitudes and beliefs. When we watch television, listen
to radio or read newspapers, our perceptual filters tend to reinforce
the views we already hold rather than break them and form new
ones. This is why it usually takes totally iconoclastic behaviour
to force people to re-evaluate their attitudes.
I was in Tel Aviv in November 1977 when the brave Egyptian

president, Anwar Sadat, flew to Israel to embrace his enemies and
begin the process which led to the Camp David accords and his
ultimate assassination. In one stroke, Sadat's symbolic gesture
forced Israelis and Egyptians to rethink their views of each other.
The Israelis I spoke to were genuinely awestruck by Sadat's bold
move.
So if you want your audience to change the way they see you,
it may be necessary for you to act inconsistently with what they
expect. Audiences carry many stereotypes in their heads. They
expect politicians to be evasive and not address the question being
asked. They expect vested interests to be selfish and gild the lily
in putting their side of the story. They expect big business
spokespeople to play down the harm being caused by greenhouse
gases and give blanket assurances about safety and health
issues in their industry. They expect the farm lobby to dismiss
concerns about over-use of pesticides. On the other hand,
they expect environmentalists to look alternative in their dress
and appearance and be strident in their demands. In reality,
most stereotypes are amply reinforced by the behaviour of
spokespeople.
Occasionally, a few people break the mould. Following the

High Court's Mabo decision, Rick Farley, as executive director of
the National Farmers' Federation, publicly advocated a sympa-
thetic line on Aboriginal land rights. Somehow Farley's flexibility,
reinforced by the impression he made via the media, carried the
day against the conservative elements of the farm lobby. As a
result, Farley and the NFF achieved considerable leverage in the
negotiations on the framing of the new law on land rights. Down
the road, the mining lobby took a predictably hard-line approach
of no sympathy and compromise on land rights. Their attitude
effectively marginalised them from the process.
Tailoring Your Message
Sophisticated media players tailor their message according to what

television channel or radio station they are addressing. Each of
the major networks has a quite different audience profile. For
instance, in Sydney and Melbourne, women dominate the Chan-
nel 7 News audience while men usually prefer 9 News.
News audience profile

Channel 7 Women
Channel 9 Men
Channel 10 Younger households, outer suburbs, women
ABC AB demographic—that is, highest income and
education
SBS AB demographic—that is, highest income and
education; its charter includes multicultural
emphasis.
To use this knowledge to your advantage you need to develop

different language for the separate audience groups who watch
each network. For instance, if you are addressing a 9 Network
journalist, it makes sense to talk about the impact of your news
on men. On the 7 Network, focus on the impact on women and
families.
Example: Closure of the Newcastle steelworks

Sound bite for 9: Thousands of men will lose their
jobs.
Sound bite for 7: Thousands of families will be
affected.
Sound bite for 10: Thousands of lower income families
are affected.
Sound bite for The whole Australian economy will
ABC: be affected.
Sound bite for SBS: Migrant families, in particular, will
be affected by this decision.
In radio, some stations and presenters attract a particular type

of audience. For example, top-rating 2UE in Sydney boasts in its
own Station Profile that the popularity of breakfast broadcaster Alan
Jones ìs universal – male, female, blue collar, white collar, high
and low socio-economic groups'. It goes on:
Recently Alan conducted a couple of phone surveys in his

program. The first was with regard to the Member for
Oxley, Pauline Hanson's comments regarding immigration –
Alan received a staggering 37 000 calls in three and a half
hours with 98.4% agreeing to her comments. Prior to that,
Alan received 33 000 calls with regard to Premier Bob
Carr's decision regarding the downgrading of the Governor
General [sic] position – 92% were against the decision.
Information like this should give you a clue about how to handle
the Alan Jones audience, which is fed and responds to strongly
conservative opinions. There is little point in directly challenging
or baiting a populist broadcaster like Jones. If you are to be
effective in this environment, you must work with the grain,
without compromising yourself or your views. At the very least,
this knowledge should influence your choice of examples. What
can you say, or how can you say something, that this audience
might agree with?
Picture Your Audience
Before talking to an Alan Jones or anyone else in the media, it

pays to picture the audience to which you are speaking. Take the
time to write a brief word picture of the people who are listening
or watching. Where do they live? What is their age? What are
their occupations? What are their likely sympathies? What are
they doing as they listen to the radio or watch television? How

much attention are they paying to the program?
I have pictures in my head whenever I broadcast. On radio, I
imagine that I am talking to someone who is driving the car to
work. In effect, I am sitting in the seat next to them. I try to talk
the same way I would if it were literally the case that I was there.
Obviously they are not paying their full attention to the radio.
They are thinking about the traffic and the day ahead, too. I
imagine other people at home getting ready for their day. It is a
busy time so they are paying only some attention to the radio as
they move from room to room, getting the kids ready for school,
having a shower or buttering the toast.
On television, I try to picture just one person as the audience.

My mind focuses on a fine woman, Ena, who lives on a mixed
farm on the Great Dividing Range in northern New South Wales.
The busy life on the farm keeps her well occupied but she also
takes an interest in what is happening far beyond. I just talk to
her as if I were sitting across the kitchen table.
Picturing your audience like this helps you communicate in a

way which makes people want to listen and watch. You are
communicating one on one. It is also comforting for me to know
that people are not listening, watching and judging like a mass
audience. There may be many people listening and watching at
the one time, but they are not in the one place. So, you are each
person's companion. It's a relaxing and liberating notion, isn't it?
It greatly adds to my sense of control.
The Media: How Journalists Work

If it is in your interests to cooperate with journalists, then you
must understand how they work and attempt to fit in with what
they want from you.
Some things are constants. Shocks make news. Conflict

makes news. Drama makes news. Human interest stories make
news. Identifiable personalities make news. Oddity makes news.
Occasionally, even good news makes news. Many people get
depressed by how much bad news there is in the media. They
are right up to a point. However, the sorts of societies where the
media is dominated by `good' news usually are not big on freedom
of expression. A government censor is behind the scenes some-
where.
Journalists work fast. They want to break news and cover news
as it happens. Tomorrow is too late. I recall working for the AM
program when a damaging story was circulating about a motor
vehicle manufacturer. Our program called the manufacturer for
comment but was told that their office did not open until
9.00 a.m. No further help was offered. Our program ran with the
damaging story without any reply from the company involved. If
something spectacular is happening, you should be ready to
comment on air with minimum notice. If you know the issue and
have authority to comment, go for it within minutes if necessary.
Most journalists cover many stories every day. In a typical

Radio National breakfast program I will interview a dozen differ-
ent people on perhaps as many different subjects. Like most
journalists, I know a little about many subjects.
The average newsroom journalist covers at least a handful of

stories each day. Some cover scores. So don't forget that you
are the expert in your field, not the journalist. The journalist
who rings you may know nothing about your industry or situa-
tion.
This ìgnorance' of journalists or the worldly inexperience of

young journalists is a common topic of conversation among
people who deal with news organisations regularly, but there is a
danger in developing a cynical attitude to journalists. Sometimes,
annoyance with the journalist can come across on air. I was part
of a conversation with a leading national figure in public affairs
who featured prominently in the media. Someone present asked
him why he always appeared so angry on television. He replied:
The journalists piss me off.' However, to someone at home
watching him on television, it appeared that the person was angry
with people in general, not the journalist.
What a journalist usually needs most from you is a good quote

or, if it is television or radio, a good sound bite. A quotable quote
is the heart of any story. A good quote is one that is lively and
interesting and says something.
If you are going to appear on radio and television for more

than a quick grab, a journalist or producer will assess you as
`talent'. Do you have a real point of view? Can you put it
forcefully? Do you have enough to say to sustain a longer
interview? Is your voice interesting to listen to? Are you energetic
or dull? Do you appear to be unduly nervous?
In nearly every situation, a journalist wants to help you tell
your story, but you need to know what your story is in order to
communicate it. A journalist really appreciates it when the people
they are dealing with know what makes a good story.
When things are hot, journalists want to talk to the real players
in the event, not a public relations person speaking on behalf of
the company. Public relations and issues management consultants
can play a vital role in briefing an organisation on how to handle
media inquiries on key issues but, when it comes to the crunch,
a public relations spokesperson lacks the credibility of an insider.
Savvy public relations firms are the first to know that and advise
their clients accordingly.
Most journalists do not want a lot of background material.
They don't have time to read it. They need material that is
succinct. If you are briefing a journalist, one or two pages is far
better than a dozen. Unless the journalist is working on the same

story all day, more than half a dozen pages will not be read.
The Average Journalist
Most journalists are young (in their twenties and thirties). All
except senior journalists are not particularly well paid. Most young
journalists are tertiary educated. Nearly all journalists sympathise
with the battler. However, if a journalist is assigned to a specialist
round (industrial relations or finance or economics), they tend to
absorb the dominant values of people who work professionally in
that area. An outstanding example of this has been the acceptance
by nearly all finance and economics journalists of the premises
underlying the level playing field philosophy pursued in the 1980s
and 1990s by Canberra politicians and bureaucrats. Basically,
however, journalists are trained to be sceptical. Journalistic scep-
ticism partly grows out of the fact that journalists are often lied
to. Therefore they do not necessarily believe you are telling the
whole truth. At the very least, the journalist will expect that you
are putting a positive spin on what you say. If they are any good
at what they do, they will wonder about the other side of the
story. Journalists are especially sceptical, if not cynical, about big
business and bureaucracies.
Many young journalists make role models of tough and aggres-
sive senior journalists like Kerry O'Brien, Paul Lyneham, Quentin
Dempster, Mike Munro and Richard Carleton. This gives the
young journalist a lot of front without corresponding substance.
Some journalists will be rude to you. However, most journalists,
even the aggressive ones, are conscious of a code of fairness. If
they forget it, remind them. The journalists I know regard it as
their primary ethical responsibility to allow all sides of a story to
be told.
How Television Journalists Work
Ray Martin, of A Current Affair, is on record as saying, `Show me

an intellectual television program and I'll show you a dead one'.
He made this remark in the context of a discussion he once held
with Rupert Murdoch, who told him that an intellectual news-
paper is a dead one. I don't know whether Martin means that an
intellectual program is the same thing as an intelligent one. At
the ABC, at least, he would have a real fight on his hands by
suggesting that there is no room for intelligent television. Intelli-
gence, after all, is the power of the mind to know, understand
and reason. But, sad to say, the Ray Martin view seems to reflect
the dominant values that rule the most powerful medium ever
invented.
Television news is pretty simplistic stuff. So is a lot of television
current affairs. It's so simplistic that television gets out of its depth
in handling complex information. And if God delivered the Ten
Commandments to Moses today, tonight's TV news would simply
say that Moses went up the mountain and came back with two
tablets of stone. In fact, if Moses wasn't followed up Mount Sinai
by a camera crew, the story would probably not get into the news
at all. A news or current affairs producer will usually look at the
pictures before writing a script for their story. It follows that if
you can offer the television journalist good pictures to go with
your story, you greatly increase the chance of getting your story
covered.
Television appears fast when it is broadcast, but it is a relatively

slow process to put together a news story. It takes a lot of time
to set up television lights and shoot a television interview. City
traffic is slow, and moving around locations and back to the studio
takes time too. Editing for television consumes more time. A fair
rule of thumb is that every minute of a story on a news bulletin
or current affairs program takes one hour to edit. That means that
a five-minute story on The 7.30 Report will take five hours to edit,
or a 90-second story on the TV news 90 minutes.
These logistical constraints mean that television producers and

journalists usually have a very developed view of what their story
line will be and how you will fit into it before they begin work
on shooting an interview with you. They will often approach the
story with a `schema' or formula in mind about what the inter-
viewee will say. They may even make suggestions to you about
the words to use or the angle to cover. This is one stop short of
putting words into your mouth.
The length of a `grab' or `sound bite' on television is now about

six seconds. This means that you will barely get a chance to say
more than one or two sentences in the finished report. The
journalist will often wind up an interview once they have a usable
grab. To gain most control in this environment, you must thor-
oughly prepare and rehearse your key messages and how to say
them. Advice on how to construct sound bites follows later in
this chapter.
The `six-second grab' convention means that TV stories

have little subtlety. Television is the medium of `goodies
and baddies'. If you are considered a baddie, such as a
company which is pitted against a battler, then getting your
own point across in this environment can be challenging, to
say the least. The trivialising nature of the six-second
grab has forced the BBC to consider banning them in favour
of more discursive question and answer sequences. The BBC
is particularly concerned about how experienced media
operators like politicians can manipulate news reporting
with the quick grab. The system allows politicians to sidestep
answering key questions which demand more than six-second
answers.
Evolution of a Television News Story
The chief of staff assigns a reporter and crew to cover a story.

The crew will shoot the pictures which make up the backdrop to
the story. The reporter conducts preliminary conversations with
the `talent' to be interviewed. Short on-camera interviews are then
conducted to get a sound bite. On returning to the studio, the
story producer and reporter will look at the video and write a
script around the pictures. The sound bed is then laid down with
the journalist's voice-over. Interview sound bites of about six
seconds are selected and edited in. Finally, the pictures are edited
to match the words of the story.
How Radio Journalists Work
Radio is the fastest medium. Its strength is its instantaneous ability

to report things as they happen. It only takes a telephone to be
connected to anyone or any event in the world. It would not
daunt a radio journalist to hear about an event one minute and
have something on air the next.
This means that if you can respond quickly and coherently to
stories as they happen, you may get plenty of opportunities for
radio coverage.
In radio, sound bites used in news are longer than in television.

You may get a whole fifteen seconds to explain yourself! You
need to prepare your sound bite for radio as thoroughly as you
would for television.
Although it is true to some extent of all journalists, the good

radio journalist gets through by asking simple questions. An
experienced journalist will put considerable time into thinking
through questions for more important or longer interviews. It
usually doesn't take long for an old hand to think up questions
which will be difficult for the interviewee. You must be well
prepared to deal with this reality and avoid repeating the mistake
of a leading businessman who told a persistent reporter from the
AM program, Ì am sick of answering your bloody questions'. Mind
you, the answer did not appear to affect this man's wealth. He is
one of Australia's richest men. He obviously could afford to take
the cavalier approach.
Radio journalists may invite you to the studio for the interview.
This can provoke an anxiety attack for some people, who feel
much more comfortable talking on the telephone in the familiar
environment of their own home or office. Usually, an invitation
to the studio is an indication that the producer expects you to be
good talent. It is wise to accept if you want a better quality on-air
result. Studio microphones and atmospherics are superior to tele-
phone conditions. You will probably be given more time to tell
your story. You may even be offered a cup of coffee. Ask for a
glass of water in case your mouth dries up.
Beware of ìnfotainers' like Alan Jones or John Laws or Derryn

Hinch or Howard Sattler. For them you are a mere pawn in the
game. These personalities thrive on taking the moral high ground.
You might be their victim. It is an unequal contest. The talkback
hosts know that when they talk over you, a technical device
known as the `ducker' means that they will be heard and you will
not. The host also decides when to end the conversation.
Evolution of a Radio News Story
The chief of staff will monitor the numerous sources of news and
information and will assign a reporter to cover a particular story.
Specialist reporters initiate this process themselves. The reporter
will contact the relevant authorities to establish the basic facts,
then interview the key player and follow up by seeking reaction
interviews. These interviews may be conducted face to face or on
the telephone. The journalist is seeking a sound bite of about

fifteen seconds from the talent. The reporter will edit the inter-
view themselves and the sub-editor will check their copy for
accuracy and style. This process is simpler than television and so
the radio reporter will be assigned to cover many more stories in
a day.
How Newspaper Journalists Work
Each newspaper has its own production cycle of deadlines

which vary enormously according to what part of the paper
your story is to be run in. For weekly papers, the deadlines are
often days ahead of publication. Even at daily newspapers,
deadlines for special sections and weekend feature pages involve
a long lead time. At the dailies, deadlines for the news pages are
early or late evening. This means that if a newspaper journalist
calls you at 10 o'clock in the morning, it is a fair bet that they
are probably just fishing for a story. The serious stuff comes later.
If they call you back around mid-afternoon, they may really be
interested.
Newspaper journalists do not face the same time constraints
as their radio and television counterparts. They may even speak
to you for half an hour or longer. They may say they are talking
to you for `background' or òff the record' (see caution below).
You will say a lot in half an hour. In fact, one prominent Australian
expert has told me of her frustration at what she regards as the
laziness of some journalists in virtually asking that she write their
story for them.
A lengthy chat with a journalist involves some dangers. I find

that people who are quoted in newspapers regularly complain
that they are quoted out of context or the journalist missed the
real point. Often the interviewee contributes to this annoying
situation by saying too much. If you have too many points to

make you can't expect the journalist to report faithfully the one
which most interests you. You are presenting the journalist with
a smorgasbord of choice. To limit this problem, it may be in your
interests to set a time limit on the discussion and stick to it. Let
the journalist know that you have an appointment to make or a
plane to catch.
A newspaper journalist needs a quotable quote from you just

as much as a television or radio journalist.
The best newspaper journalists, like the legendary Michelle

Grattan of the Financial Review, have a passion for accuracy. They
will ring you back after they have written their story just to
double-check their copy. Happily, such diligence is not confined
to the quality newspapers. The populist magazine Who Weekly,
part of the American Time empire, follows a similar procedure.
Others don't. I find it is sometimes wise to play a little dumb and
say something like: `Would you mind calling me back with the
quotes you are going to use because I may be able to sharpen
them up for you. I'm often not very clear about what I'm trying
to say first off.' I do this not to seek a veto over what is used but
with the genuine hope that I can be helpful to the journalist and
myself. And they often call back when asked.
Evolution of a Newspaper Story
The editor, chief of staff and other key journalists will gather at
a news conference where the day's priorities are determined. Staff
will be assigned to cover the chosen stories. Specialists will focus
on their own rounds. The newspaper journalist works the tele-
phone, talking to the relevant players and developing their story.
Good journalists double-check their information and the accuracy
of the quotes they choose to use. Naturally, the importance of
the story will determine the space and position given to it. Once
the story is filed, it will be checked by a sub-editor for accuracy
and style. The author does not write the headline above their
story.
Making Your News The News
Real news is telling the world something it doesn't already know.

Real news is a real scoop. Real news is scarce because it often
requires the work of investigative journalists to unearth. Richard
Nixon was brought down by the real news uncovered by
Washington Post journalists Bob Woodwood and Carl Bernstein
about the Watergate break-in and the Nixon-inspired cover-up
that followed. Real news sometimes comes in the form of a major
leak such as the boxloads of documents, known as the Pentagon
Papers, which detailed American involvement in the Vietnam
War. That leak changed the course of the war. Real news can
come in the form of an unexpected revelation in an interview. As
federal treasurer in 1986, Paul Keating said Australia was becom-
ing a banana republic. It instantly changed the political and
financial landscape. That's when people will really sit up and take
notice. But remember that there is very little real news. In fact,
real news is so scarce that there would be no regular newspapers,
radio or television news broadcasts if editors waited until real news
occurred. So most news is manufactured.
Consider the remarkable array of happenings we call news:
political announcements (federal, state, local), parliament (federal
and state), council meetings, political parties, economics and
business, pressure group activities (consumer, conservation, femi-
nist, industry, chamber of commerce, farming, education, health,
welfare, RSL to name only some), opinion polls, court rounds,
police rounds (accidents and hold-ups, and so on), stock exchange

and company announcements, sporting events and results, human-
made disasters (fire, plane and train crashes, building collapses) and
natural disasters (floods, bushfires, drought, earthquakes), royal
commissions, public inquiries and hearings, medical breakthroughs
and health, hardship and charities, lotteries, schools and higher
education, agriculture, fashion, books, film, theatre, opera, dance
and ballet, anniversaries, diplomacy and international relations,
communications (television and radio programs), births, deaths and
marriages, the royal family, personalities and gossip, film stars and
models, astrology, science and technology, the public service.
To get your news in, you'll need more than just a fax and a
prayer. What do you do if you want the news media to run your
story?
A story needs a peg and so do you. Although there are
literally thousands of stories we call news each day in the
media, most do not occur in a vacuum. They rely on a `peg'. A
peg gives a story something to attach it to the news agenda. For
example, stories on home heating depend on the peg of the onset
of winter. It's hard to get a story up about home heating in the
middle of summer. So if you want to get some positive news
going about your home heating invention, wait until the onset of
cold weather!
Example of Story and Peg
Story: New developments in radar technology

Peg: Airline crash in India
Longevity: Less than one week
In the above real example, a mid-air crash between two planes in

India sparked a rash of stories about aircraft safety. With adroit
use of media contacts and/or releases it also provided an unex-

pected opportunity to canvass and publicise developments in radar
technology. However, the media's appetite for running stories on
aircraft safety was soon satisfied. It is hard to imagine interest in
such a story lasting more than three or four days.
Many people who want media exposure do not understand
what is news. Some news just happens: train crashes; disasters;
court cases. We can be sure that these happenings will be reported
on the news tonight. However, there is always space for con-
structed news which is actually a non-event. Here, opportunistic
newsmakers step in. The successful media performer knows how
to construct news. Such news usually involves the contest of ideas
and points of view. This news happens when there is something
at stake. It usually means there are winners and losers and people
on both sides of an argument. What these newsmakers have to
say will always somehow challenge the status quo. Remember that
things are only news when someone gives a damn about the
outcome.
To make this sort of news, you must really say something

which counts. Who you are counts too. You must use
your positional power in your job or in the community to give
impact to what you say. That is why no one cares what I think
about interest rates, but every journalist in the country stops to
listen to what the Reserve Bank governor has to say on the same
subject. You often need a catalyst to attract attention to your
story:
• Commission research or conduct it yourself.

• Commission or conduct an opinion poll on your subject.
• Survey people affected by your issue.
• Write a book or report on the issue.
• Offer to write a feature article for a newspaper.
• Develop case studies of people affected by your issue.

• Enlist famous people to your cause.
• Cultivate some sympathetic or interested journalists.
• Become a source of valuable information.
• Stage an event with real novelty value.
The Media Release
Media releases are an important means of letting the media know

that you have something to say. They are also an important means
for you to organise your thoughts on paper.
The problem with media releases is that news organisations
get flooded by hundreds of them each day. Making a media
release cut through the noise of all the other press statements
competing for attention is no easy task.
Cultivating a Relationship with a Journalist
If you have a need to communicate regularly through the media,

you should get to know the journalists who cover your round.
There are great advantages in building a relationship of trust with
a few key journalists. A journalist who needs you as a source will
think twice before sledging you in a story. If the journalist breaks
your trust in them, they will pay a price by losing you as a source.
A journalist with whom you have a good relationship is much
less likely to portray you adversely.
With a Little Time for Preparation
When a journalist contacts you, first, you must decide whether

you want to be interviewed at all – and, if so, prepare some
answers. There are some simple structures for answering questions
to communicate your own agenda. Once you're familiar with
them, they are perfect to use when you've had little or no warning
of an interview.
To Talk or Not to Talk
The first question to ask yourself before talking to a journalist is

whether it is in your interest to do so. I have been amazed over
the years by the number of people who have agreed to interviews
when it does not appear to be in their best interest. Radio and
television producers and newspaper journalists are often very
skilled and persuasive in talking people into agreeing to interviews.
They are often extremely persistent.
In one remarkable example, I recall a producer approaching a
Tasmanian politician to be interviewed about the fact that he had
been found out feigning a false identity on a talkback radio
program. For the life of me I could not see any advantage to the
politician in agreeing to the request. Nevertheless, he agreed. Some
time after the interview was recorded, but before it was broadcast,
the politician rang back. He pleaded that we not use part of the
interview in which he had freely admitted that it wasn't the first
time he had used false voices on talkback. In fact, the interviewer
had not even noticed the comment. Now we really had a story!
The politician should have politely declined to be interviewed in
the first place. He compounded the error by his return call. The
story may have died a natural death if he had not cooperated.
Of course, one consequence of adopting a `repel' strategy and
refusing to be interviewed is that you may have to put up with
being named on the program: `We contacted so and so from XYZ
corporation but he/she was unavailable'. Or, more seriously, `but
he/she refused to comment'. Or, most seriously: `We have made
several attempts to interview so and so but they have consistently
refused to speak to us'. Whatever your circumstances, refusing to
comment can make you appear like the guilty party. You are
damned if you do, damned if you don't. Polite refusal, however,
is often the right thing.
Communicating Your Agenda
The most important thing to do when speaking to a journalist is

to communicate your agenda. Your agenda is your message. It
should consist of only one point if it is a sound bite for news. It
should never be more than three points in a longer interview. So
your agenda is the list of one, two or three things you must
communicate. Write them down and number them. Take the
piece of paper with you if you are leaving the office to meet a
journalist or have it by the telephone if you are talking to a
newspaper reporter or on radio from your desk. No matter how
urgent the need to speak, do not begin without taking a few
minutes to nut out your agenda.
Agenda
1 ...............................................................................................
2 ...............................................................................................
3 ...............................................................................................
Do not wait to be asked about the points that you want to

make. You will never be asked in direct terms. You have to be
assertive about getting your agenda across or the conversation
may be entirely one-sided. Most journalists have a list of simple
questions to ask. The journalist may never find out what you want
to talk about unless you are forceful in getting out your message.
This means that you have to answer the questions you would like
to be asked as well as the questions that you are asked. Without
these assertive skills, you will sound only as good or bad as your
Figure 7.1 The Prime Minister writes out his agenda. So should you.
ability to respond to someone else's questions. The fact that you

have your own agenda to communicate also shows that you are
proactive rather than just reactive in the situation.
Q=A+1
When Ronald Reagan was seeking a second term as president of

the United States, he performed badly in the first televised debate
with his opponent, Fritz Mondale. Reagan appeared tentative and
uncertain of his points. He took some advice from Roger Ailes,
who writes about the experience in his book, You are the Message.
Ailes recommended that Reagan use the following simple formula
to answer questions:
Q=A+1
Your response to a question (Q) should have three elements.

First, do your best to answer (A) the question which is asked.
Brief answer Your agenda point
Q = A + 1
Question Control Phase
Figure 7.2 Q=A+1
Second, you will need to use a `control phrase' (+) to segue to

your agenda point. Third, add your message (1).
Talk about your own agenda as you answer the first question.
Inexperienced interviewees are shocked by how quickly the time
passes when the tape or cameras are rolling. If you hesitate your
moment will be lost!
Control Phrases (+)
How do you shift from answering the question to inserting your

agenda? Control phrases are transition statements between the
first part of your answer and your own agenda point. You should
develop some control phrases of your own. Here are some samples
of control phrases favoured by politicians:
The facts of the matter are . . .

. . . but an even more important question is . . .
What I want to say is this . . .
The real issue is . . .
The most important point is . . .
. . . but that is not the most critical thing . . .
The reality is . . .
The key to all this is . . .
Look . . .
Don't follow the example of politicians too literally by completely

ignoring the questions being asked and only talking on your own
agenda points. Politicians are expert at deflection, but the well-
honed filters of the media savvy audience mean they know exactly
what game is being played. There are few points to be gained
from ignoring every curly question or pretending it wasn't asked.
Or, as one former Queensland premier used to say by way of
standard reply, `don't you worry about that'. Try to answer the
question before proceeding to your agenda.
The Three Parts of an Answer
A recent participant at one of my seminars told me that: Èven

though I've already done over 100 TV interviews, 200 radio
interviews and have had several hundred articles published, this
workshop has been a very worthwhile experience.' What proved
so worthwhile to even such an experienced media hand was
learning the following simple formula for structuring an answer.
Every good answer has three parts:
• point;
• reason;
• example.
Let me illustrate with the following example:
Question: What impact will staging the 2000

Olympics have on Australia?
Answer:
Point: This will be the most important
international event ever held in
Australia.
Reason: That is because there are far more
countries competing and far more
athletes than ever before.
Example: For example, the world television
audience for the Olympics is now
several billion.
In reality, what you say last – your choice of example – is likely

to influence the framing of the next question. Knowing this, some
interviewees will leave an important point hanging in the air. For
instance, they may end their previous answer with the words:
`There are plenty of examples of that.' This begs the question:
`What examples?' It makes sense to choose your example carefully,
because it will probably stimulate follow-up questions.
Of course, you don't have time to think consciously of any formula
for answering questions during the helter-skelter of an interview. The
time for burning this structure into your mind is before you begin.
Now is a good time! During rehearsals for the interview which you
conduct with your colleagues, stick by this structure. By the time you
get to the real thing, you'll know it subconsciously.
Once you have briefly worked through the three parts of the
structure, shut up. Avoid the temptation to go on too long. It is
the interviewer's job to fill the silence. They will soon come up
with the next question.
The Quotable Quote and the Irresistible Sound

Bite
What are you going to say in your next interview which will
really ram your message home? What is your quotable quote?
What will be memorable about what you say? What will make
your message condensed and forceful?
The Clever One-liner
To control the outcome so that the journalist is attracted to what

you really want reported, you must construct your sound bite to
be the most expressive thing you say. Like a bait, it will hook
the attention of the audience. Metaphors create focus, so they
make great sound bites. A well-chosen image will sum up your
case in a few succinct words. Tony Blair did it with the
catchphrase `twenty-two Tory tax rises'. Remember, too, the
famous phrase used by lawyer Johnny Cochran in concluding the
defence for O.J. Simpson: Ìf it doesn't fit, you must acquit.' He
was referring to the glove which O.J. had allegedly worn during
the murders. At his trial, Simpson had tried on the glove, but it
was too small. The fit of the glove became a metaphor for the
fit of the other evidence.
The BBC called Cochran's image a master stroke. Time reported
that the slogan and the idea behind it proved pivotal. The words
had been thought up by defence lawyer Gerald Uelman, who
said: `What I was really proposing was that it would provide a
good theme for the whole argument, because so much of the
other circumstantial evidence didn't fit the prosecution's scenario.'
A good sound bite will always sum up your case.
People in the know often set up their sound bites. Tell the
audience it's coming as JFK did: Ànd so my fellow Americans . . .'
It gets the journalist and audience to listen more carefully to what's
following. Other simple phrases which can set up your quotable
quote are: `Look . . .', Ìt all boils down to . . .', `To sum it all up
. . .', `This is the real point . . .', `The heart of this issue is . . .'.
Some great quotable quotes:
A house divided against itself cannot stand. I believe this govern-

ment cannot endure permanently half slave and half free
Abraham Lincoln, June 1858
What is good for the country is good for General Motors,

and what's good for General Motors is good for the coun-
try.
Charles Erwin Wilson, to US Senate Committee, 1952
The buck stops here.

President Harry Truman summing up his philosophy of office
Well may he say God save the Queen because no one will
save the Governor General.
Gough Whitlam, 11 November 1975
We'll just end up being a third rate economy . . . a banana

republic.
Paul Keating, May 1986
I want to be the Queen of Hearts.

Diana, Princess of Wales, in BBC interview, 1995
Few, if any, of the great quotes are spontaneous. Churchill under-

stood that the best spontaneous quotes are always well rehearsed.
Occasionally you may have the good luck to create a memorable
line on the run. However, most good quotes are the result of
focused creative thinking. Ideas to help you prepare a memorable
line are contained in Chapter 3. When you have devised your
sound bite, rehearse it out loud before you speak to the journalist.
The Timed Sound Bite
The art of the sound bite or quotable quote is not only being
colourful but also succinct. The quotable quote that the newspaper
journalist wants is really only one or two sentences which expres-
sively sum up the story. The fifteen seconds which the radio news
journalist wants could be the same few sentences you give to the
newspaper journalist. The six seconds which the television news
journalist wants is one sentence or even as little as a phrase to
sum up the story.
The way to control the sound bite or quotable quote is to
make it riveting. It has to be the most expressively interesting
thing you say. You need to prepare carefully to ensure that your
message stands out from the rest of what you say to the journalist.
You must then say it in the interview, come what may!
Most journalists looking only for a sound bite will end the
interview once they have what they want. Typically, the journalist
will ask you a few questions and at the same time be listening
carefully to see how your answers can be tailored to their story.
Australia's deputy prime minister, Tim Fischer, is a master of

the sound bite. He says sound bites can be a positive in giving
people a clear-cut message. He shared his talent for tailoring his
message to the time available in a discussion with Agnes Cusack
on Radio National's Media Report. He used as an example how he
would respond to a question about whether Medicare should
support the IVF program being used by lesbian couples. He began
with a fifteen-second sound bite which would be suitable for radio:
Yes, of course we should tolerate homosexual and lesbian

gay couples and they should be allowed to go about their
lives. But that does not mean that they have a right, at
taxpayers' expense, to obtain designer children and do so

under the IVF program.
Moments later, Tim Fischer reduced this message down to the

five-second version suitable for television:
Of course, we should tolerate gays but that does not mean

we have to fund their child-bearing whims.
Discipline Your Message
Experienced communicators learn the art of self-discipline. If you

have one message that you want to communicate, then do not
be distracted into answering a question that does not relate to
your message. This is the essence of being in control.
Michael Deaver, Ronald Reagan's one-time deputy chief of
staff, advises his high-profile public relations clients that no matter
what the product is, the recipe for communication success is the
same: discipline, focus, repetition.
Look at the following exercise in message focus and discipline

being practised by Bob Carr, the New South Wales premier. It
was broadcast as part of a Radio National Background Briefing on
the premier. This is Bob Carr's telephone conversation with an
ABC radio news journalist. His repetition of the one point gives
the journalist no option about which message to broadcast in the
news sound bite.
Bob Carr: Loud and clear? OK. You can say that the
premier, Bob Carr, said this morning that the
government would proceed with its bed tax
proposal as part of the budget legislation in
the state upper house. I'll give you a grab to

go with that . . .
Well, we've asked the . . . Start that again . . .
We're asking the taxpayers to put $620 million
into Olympic construction this year, and at
the same time, we as a government are
putting computers into schools, expanding
the hospitals' budget and putting extra police
on the beat. Frankly, the big city hotels
ought to be making a modest contribution
to a budget which has funded the Olympics
but maintains essential social infrastructure.
Journalist: So, you'll be standing firm on this?
Bob Carr: Well, we're asking the taxpayers generally to
put over $600 million into Olympic
construction, and at the same time,
we're maintaining the social expenditure of
New South Wales with increases in the
budget for hospitals, for schools and for police.
Frankly, the big city hotels ought to make the
modest contribution. They, after all, are
the industry sector that will do most
handsomely out of the Games.
Journalist: So, there won't be any negotiation?
Bob Carr: No. See you later. Bye.
Journalist: [after disconnection, chuckling] Can't believe
it.
There you have it. Discipline, focus, repetition.
No comment
If you don't have a choice in the matter and the microphone is

already on, when should you say `no comment'? There is no simple
answer to this question, as it will depend on the circumstances.

A situation of personal distress is one good example of when you
should be extremely cautious. Insist on your right to privacy unless
it is an issue of corporate responsibility. If there is no option but
to make some statement about an accident at work or whatever,
you have every right to name when and in what form the
statement will be made.
Answering possibly defamatory allegations against you requires
great caution. If the story is wrong you must say so to a journalist
but agreeing to answer allegations can sometimes simply amplify
them.
Sound Bite Rules
In delivering a sound bite, you need to bear a few rules in mind.
• Write down your sound bite on paper. Memorise it.

• Tailor your message to the length needed. Newspapers want
a few sentences for a quote, radio about fifteen seconds for
news, television about six seconds for news.
• On radio and television, try to encapsulate the question in the
answer. It makes it vastly easier for editing by saving the
journalist the need to set up the question in their script.
For example:
Question: What have you decided?
Answer: We've decided that . . .
• End your sound bite on a downward inflection. Keep your
sentences disciplined. Sentences need a clear starting and
ending point.
• Make your body language work during the sound bite. Where
appropriate, be passionate.
Metaphors and Anecdotes Make Sound Bites
In Chapter 3, I referred to Ray Martin's reply to the question

about the best people he had ever interviewed. He mentioned
Peter Ustinov, David Suzuki and a few others. Martin summed
up by saying: `They are anecdote machines.'
To make people remember what you say, you need to become
an anecdote machine too. Drive what you say by stories and
examples. Use images and metaphors. Refer to Chapter 3 for ideas
about how to construct effective sound bites.
The Double/Triple Whammy Sound Bite
A double whammy is simply repeating the same form of words;

a triple whammy repeats them again.
Example of repetition:
Veni, vidi, vici.
Julius Caesar, at Zela, 47BC
I cannot forecast to you the action of Russia. It is a riddle,

wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma.
Winston Churchill, 1 October 1939
Compelling Comparisons as Sound Bites
Finding just the right evidence and presenting it effectively can

be very persuasive. The campaign to stop tobacco sponsorship of
sport made a huge leap forward when Ros Kelly, the then federal
sports minister, was presented with a graph showing that more
kids in New South Wales smoked Winfield while more kids in
Victoria smoked Peter Jackson. The two brands were the major
football sponsors in each state. Kelly says her mind was made up
by this simple evidence.
50
40
30
%
20
10
0
NSW VIC SA
Rugby League AFL Aust. Rules
Major sponsor Major sponsor Major sponsor
Winfield Peter Jackson Escort
Winfield Peter Jackson Escort
Figure 7.2 12-14 Year Olds: What they smoked in 1984

Source: Sydney Morning Herald, 2 April 1992
Never underestimate the power of simple facts and compelling

comparisons. They become hard stories to beat.
Getting Numbers Down to Size as a Sound Bite
Few people can grapple with the real meaning of big

numbers.
I recall a Melbourne Age story on the current account deficit
which reported that, in the month just ended, for every dollar
Australia spent abroad, we earned only 94 cents. It was a powerful
means of making a multi-billion dollar figure seem comprehensible
at the simplest level.
Example:
Imagine every available place at the Melbourne Cricket Ground

being filled; well, that's how many young people are unemployed
in Australia.
Think of the key numbers associated with your issue. Find a means
to get them down to a comprehensible size.
Playing on Opposites as a Sound Bite
A powerful rhetorical device is to play on opposites. The possi-

bilities are many: up/down, out/in, above/below, win/lose,
ahead/behind, wide/narrow.
Example:
Unemployment is up, hope is down.

As the budget blows out, belts have to come in.
Spend a few moments creating òpposites' to add rhetorical spice

to a key message in your news grab.
Rhyming Language as a Sound Bite
Search for language which rhymes like a chime. A useful asset is

a rhyming dictionary, organised around the rhymes of final syl-
lables.
Example:
All the way with LBJ.
Spend a few moments creating rhyme in a key sentence of your

message.
Ambushes and the Difficult Questions
The Doorstop Interview or Ambush
Sound bites are often delivered at doorstop interviews. The rapid

movement of these encounters lends itself to the drama of news
reporting on television and radio. The experienced media handler
exercises considerable control at the doorstop interview by walk-
ing away when they have finished what they want to say. In
politics, many of these doorstops are planned by ministers whose
staff notify journalists that they will be available for a doorstop.
The politicians come ready with their sound bite. Less often, the
doorstop can take the form of an ambush where the person being
confronted has no idea of what's coming.
Practise, practise, practise
Even a self-confident performer like Margaret Thatcher would set

aside several hours to rehearse her answers to likely questions in
parliament. Her apparent spontaneity was nothing of the sort.
Her onstage performances reflected her preparation offstage.
The best way to handle tough questions is to anticipate them.
Work with a colleague before the interview and brainstorm what
would be the most difficult questions. Write them down. Write
out possible answers using the point, reason, example structure
discussed earlier. Then rehearse your answers out loud.
You Don't Need to Answer the Question
Many interviewees act as though they are in a court of law under

cross-examination when speaking in a television or radio inter-
view. You are not. You do not have to answer the questions that
are put to you. There may be any number of reasons why it is
inappropriate to answer the questions. These may include issues

of confidentiality, privacy, defamation, or sub judice. It may be
just plain bad politics to answer a direct question on a sensitive
subject. Whatever the reason, you firmly and politely say that
you will not answer the question.
You might employ a two-stage strategy to a question you don't
want to answer. In stage one, simply ignore or deflect the question.
In stage two, if the interviewer is being persistent about it, state
that you will not answer the question. You may give a reason if it
feels appropriate. If the journalist is like a terrier and won't leave
the bone alone, use the broken record technique: say again and
again you will not answer the question. Stick by your resolve.
Avoid Loaded Words
Words are bullets in the media. Sometimes words will be used in

a question that you should never repeat in your response even if
only to rebut them. Examples of loaded words are disaster,
mismanagement, disorganised, disillusioned, corrupt, unhappy and
bankrupt. Never get set up by a question such as, Ìsn't this
mismanagement?' by saying in reply, Ìt is not mismanagement'.
The editing process will simply use your reply and expose you to
damage from your own words. If you doubt this, try not thinking
of a black cat. The mere suggestion of a black cat puts the image
in your mind, even if I am telling you not to think of a black cat.
Likewise, if the audience hears the word `mismanagement', the
smell of `mismanagement' lingers. When loaded words are thrown
at you, ignore them.
Rebut Wrong Information
Although you should side-step loaded words, you must confront

wrong information or assumptions contained in a question. If you
do not challenge error, it becomes a truth. Go straight to the

error with words such as: `What you are saying is wrong.' In radio
and television interviews, challenge the errors at the first oppor-
tunity you get.
Òff the Record'
You need to be wary when journalists use terms like òff the
record'. What do you think it means? The problem is it means
different things to different journalists. To some it means that
what you say to them will be treated purely as background and
you will not be quoted. To others it means that you can be quoted
but not by name. However, what you say in these situations may
give away your identity anyhow. It is safest to assume when you
are talking to a journalist that whatever you say may end up in
print. You may be quoted from the moment you answer the
telephone until the moment you hang up.
What Do You Do if Things Go Badly Wrong
I referred at the beginning of the chapter to a man who had the

appalling experience of his mind going blank while being inter-
viewed for a television current affairs program. In the midst of a
long interview being conducted out of doors on a hot day, he
lost his train of thought. The interviewer tried to be helpful. He
prompted him a few times. Still silence. At last the man was ready
to talk again. He said: `We can roll again now.' What he didn't
know was that the camera hadn't stopped rolling. The next night,
the whole unedited sequence was shown.
Leaving aside the ethical question about whether the network
should have shown this sequence, what might the man have done
to prevent it?
The first step is not to take the good faith of the interviewer
or television program for granted. The man did not ask that the
offending section not be shown. No one from his office did
anything for 24 hours. At this late stage, a phone call was made
to the program asking whether this lapse would be deleted. By
then a decision had presumably been made to show it.
Everyone has lapses. If you lose your train of thought or something
else goes seriously wrong, ask on the spot to be given another chance
to get it right. The professional interviewees get away with it, why
can't you? Your chances of being treated fairly in this situation will
increase immensely if you are going to be of some future use to the
journalist and if you remain cool. If the journalist on the spot is
unhelpful, call their boss. Should you go further by taking out an
injunction to stop the media from showing something after you have
agreed to an interview? You are probably wasting your time and
money, but if you really must, ask your lawyer.
Persuasive Body Language on Television

Many people who appear in the media are so focused on their
content that they are unaware of the messages being sent by their
body language and tone of voice. Body language and voice reveal
how you feel about what you are saying. Your audience will place
more trust in how you say something than what you say.
Appearing in the media is a performance. For many people, it
is also an anxious experience which makes them retreat into
defensive and negative body language. You need a positive and
persuasive repertoire of gestures to show confidence in yourself
and your message. You need to `free' yourself in order to be yourself!
On television, you are inviting yourself into someone's lounge-

room. Your body language and voice need to reflect the intimate
surroundings in which you are talking to your one-on-one
audience.
You may encounter hostile questions. It is vital that you do

not allow your feelings towards the interviewer to become your
message to the audience.
As you begin a media appearance, remember to `lighten up'.

Remember too that, in the media, everything needs to be a bit
bigger than in everyday life.
Eyes
• Keep eye contact with the interviewer only.

• Open your eyes wide. Eyebrow movement can help.
• Be so alive that your eyes sparkle.
• Do not look at the camera. Do not create a shifty eye look by
glancing back and forth between the interviewer and the camera.
• Avoid wearing glasses that reflect television lights.
Head and Face
• Smile. This gesture will win more friends and warm up your
interview more than anything you say.
• Allow yourself to laugh.
• Feel free to sometimes nod to acknowledge the question, even
if you disagree with the proposition.
• Avoid frowning even though the matter you are discussing is
serious.
• Don't hold your head rigidly.
Hands and Arms
• Use your hands to get your meaning out. Hand movement will
help animate your voice, face and body.
• Keep your hand movements below the conventional head and
shoulders camera shot. Do not obscure your face with your hands.
Standing
• Try a quick relaxation exercise as the crew prepares its

equipment.
• Avoid folding your arms and crossing your hands behind your
back or in front of your crotch.
Sitting
• Sit slightly forward. It shows engagement.

• Sit on the tail of your jacket to stop it riding up over your
shoulders.
• Avoid swivelling in the chair.
• Do not fold your arms or cross your hands in your lap.
Practise Being Interviewed
• Assess your performances. Get a trusted colleague to give you

specific feedback about your body language.
• You will benefit from prior practice as you seek to improve
the confidence of your on-stage body language. The bathroom
mirror and videotaping yourself are good ways to start.
Being open in your own body language will not always be to

your advantage. There will be times when it is better to obscure
how you really feel (if you can).
Dress and Appearance
Dress and grooming are an important part of the non-verbal

message that you send on television. Your objective should be to
make the audience feel comfortable with you.
What is `comfortable' for an audience? In general, the answer
is what an audience expects. If you are a minister in the govern-
ment, then the audience expects you to wear a suit Monday to

Friday and more casual clothes on Saturday and Sunday. If you
are in tropical climates, that's different. You can dress for a tropical
climate in a businesslike way. If you are in rural Australia, you
can dress more casually than if you are in urban Australia.
Sometimes an important message can be sent by not dressing
in the way an audience expects. Breaking stereotypes can be
powerful. During the Franklin River conservation campaign in
Tasmania, the green campaigners went to considerable lengths to
urge protesters to dress conservatively. The object was to allow
audiences to see their mirror image, people who appeared just
like themselves on the television screen. The message was to
appear absolutely mainstream and non-threatening. As a tactic, it
worked. On the other hand, some conservation campaigns have
been handicapped by featuring television coverage of alternative
lifestylers who can all too easily be dismissed by a middle class
audience as `not one of us'.
A Few Basic Rules
• On television, white shirts can fuzz and sharp pinstripes can

flare. Avoid wearing them where possible. Pastel colours are
good for shirts.
• Dark, solid colours look best in suits.
• Avoid tartans and large checks.
• Shave off the beard. With rare exceptions, they hide the face
and get in the way of open communication.
• Audiences tend not to trust men in bowties.
• Earrings and jewellery need to be conservative so that they do
not distract attention.
• Higher necklines usually flatter women on television.
• If you normally wear glasses, think about whether you need
them for the interview, whether you look better with them on
or off. If you appear regularly and need to wear glasses, make
sure the frames are large enough not to hide your eyes.
Adjustments can be made to frames to avoid studio lighting
glare.
• Avoid glasses which tint in the light.
Some people who never know when a television interview may

occur next keep a change of clothes in their office wardrobe.
Wear clothes you feel good in. Clothes selection is important but
remember that your expression is the most important thing that
you wear.
Summary: Dealing with the Media to

Communicate Your Message
Before the Interview
• Research the purpose and likely duration of the interview; think

about your audience.
• Decide whether you should agree to the interview. Will it
serve your interests?
• Develop one message for a news interview and up to three
agenda points or messages for a longer interview. Write them
down.
• Write one key supporting argument for each point or message.
• Write down the examples you want to use.
• Develop your quotable quote.
• Anticipate the most difficult questions. How would you answer
them? Rehearse with colleagues.
• Practise relaxation and voice warm-up exercises.
During the Interview
• Be positive – particularly when you are on the defensive.

• Remember Q = A + 1. Answer the question and use it as a
springboard to raise your agenda points. Don't just be reactive
to questions.
• Use the point, reason, example structure.
• Come alive. Animate your face and voice. Be passionate. Smile
and lighten up. Enjoy it!
• Keep your answers short.
• Communicate person to person – your audience is no bigger
than a few people in one place.
• Be an anecdote machine: use parables, anecdotes, metaphors
and draw on personal experiences.
After the Interview
• Analyse whether you communicated your key messages.

• Assess your performance and draw lessons for future reference.
• Observe radio and television programs – learn to model the
behaviour of effective communicators.
FURTHER READING
Ailes, Roger, You are the Message, New York: Doubleday, 1988.
Aristotle, The Art of Rhetoric, London: Penguin, 1991.
Fisher, Roger and Ury, William, Getting to Yes, Sydney: Century
Hutchinson Australia, 1981.
Kennedy, George A., A New History of Classical Rhetoric, Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1994.
Minto, Barbara, The Pyramid Principle, London: Minto Interna-
tional, 1987.
Satir, Virginia, People Making, Palo Alto: Science and Behaviour
Books, 1972.
Thompson, Peter, The Secrets of the Great Communicators, Sydney:
ABC Books, 1992.
Zelazny, Gene, Say it with Charts, Homewood, Ill.: Business One
Irwin, 1991.
INDEX
Index compiled by Russell Brooks
answer format for presentations and speaker aids 103-18;

36-7 delivery and pathos 118-20;
arguments: constructing 34-5; invention 94-9; non-verbal
deductive 30; inductive 30-2 messages and personality 122-3;
performance anxiety 125-8;
arrangement 5-6, 16, 99-101
persuasive 93-130; picture your
artistic persuasion 7-10 audience 97-9; and rehearsing
auditor personality type 72-5, 123, 123-5; style and pathos 101-2;
146 summary 128-30; using notes
127-8
auditory senses 42, 43
Button, John 76
Beazley, Kim 76 Buttrose, Ita 70
Bell, John 11-13, 57-8
Bjelke-Petersen, Joh 67 Carlopio, James 13
Black, Conrad 70 Carr, Bob 74
Blair, Tony 55, 194 Carville, James 33-4
body language: persuasive 119, character 7, 8
120-2, 150-3; and television 206-8 charts 106-12
brain, switching on the whole 39- Churchill, Winston 14, 18, 47, 53
41
Clancy, John 52
Branson, Richard 66
Clinton, Hillary 70
Brown, Senator Bob 76
Cohen, Herb 149
business presentation: 7, 87-130; communicating your agenda
arrangement and logos 99-101; 189-93
body language 120-5; breathing
communication: 40, 42; capacity
and voice exercises 126-7; charts
for playing opposites 78-83; Galton, Sir Francis 62

cross-cultural 32-3; non- Gandhi, Mahatma 77
verbal 118-20, 122-3; Gates, Bill 66
persuasive 6-7; style profiles George, Jennie 76
64-78, 83 Gorton, John 76
communicator personality type Graham, Billy 20
65-8, 122, 145 Greiner, Nick 74
confirmatio 17
conflict 133 Hagberg, Richard 73
Confucius 38, 42 Harvey, Geoff 66
Costello, Peter 70 Hawke, Bob 67, 76
Court, Richard 74 Hayden, Bill 76
Hill, David 70
Dalai Lama 77 Hitler, Adolf 18
Deane, Sir William 73 Holmes à Court, Janet 76
delivery 6-7, 118-20 Howard, John 74
Doogue, Geraldine 77 Hughes, Tom 33
Downer, Alexander 76 humour 54-6
Dunlap, Al 69-70
invention 5, 94-9
Einstein, Albert 101
Elliott, John 70 Johnson, Samuel 140
ethos 7, 8, 11, 15, 95-7, 136 Jones, Caroline 77
exordium 17 Jones, Clare 87, 88-93, 101, 123
Joss, Bob 73
Fahey, John 76 Jung, Carl Gustav 62-3, 64-5
Farrahkan, Lewis 67
Fischer, Tim 76 Keating, Paul 50-1, 70, 184
Fisher, Roger 138 Kelty, Bill 76
five-point plan of persuasion 18-28 Kennett, Jeff 67
four-part story of letters of Kernot, Cheryl 76
proposal 28, 29-30 key points 33-4
Fraser, Bernie 73 Keynes, John Maynard 53
kinesthetic senses 42-3, 44
King, Martin Luther 18, 67
INDEX 215
Kipling, Rudyard 39 audience 168-71

Kramer, Dame Leonie 70 Mehrabian, Albert 119
memory 6
language: body 119, 120-5, 150-3, metaphor: 23, 46-8; Biblical 48-9;
206-8; persuasive 38-9 and business presentation 101-
Lee Kuan Yew 70 2; in business and economics 51-
letters of proposal 28-30 2; and images 54-9; and media
Levi-Strauss, Claude 47 200; and negotiation 161; in
Lock, Simon 67 politics 50-1; Shakespeare 49-50;
Locke, John 38 sources of 52-4
logos 7, 9, 11, 15, 71, 74, 99-101, Mitsui, Cathy 51
103-18, 136, 142 Murdoch, Rupert 70
Lumby, Catherine 47-8 Murray, David 73
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator 63
McKinsey and Co 16, 25, 28, 29

Mandela, Nelson 77 narratio 17
Mason, Sir Anthony 73 negotiation: 131-65; aggressive
media: 166-211; ambushes and behaviour 156-7; agreement 162,
difficult questions 203-6; 165; ambit claims 157-8; bad
communicate your message cop/good cop 155-6; building
210-11; communicating your rapport 148-53; closing a deal
agenda 189-93; discipline your 163-4; conflict and competition
message 197-8; dress and 133; deadlines 159-60; deadlock
appearance 208-10; journalists 162-3; defined 135-6; doggedly
174-84; and metaphors 200; optimistic 160; equal time 157;
news 184-8; newspaper five principles 136-41;
journalists 182-4; no comment framework 146-8; higher
198-9; picture your audience authority 155; integrative versus
173-4; quotable quote 193-203; distributive strategies 134; last-
radio journalists 180-2; tailoring minute claims 154-5; making
your message 172-3; talk or not concessions 158-9; metaphor to
to talk 188-9; television reframe 161; model 131-3;
journalists 178-80; television positive tactics 160; preparing
and body language 206-8; timed for 142-4; and relationships 134-
sound bite 196-7, 199-202; your 5; scarcity 158; stages 146-8, 153-
63; styles 145-6; tactics at the 83-5; shakers 68-72, 122-3, 145-6;
table 153-63; turning a deaf ear sharers 75-8, 123, 146; styles 63-
161-2; value of service declines 4; types 65-78, 145
158 Peters, Tom 60-2, 66, 70
neurolinguistic programming Plato 2, 3
(NLP) 42-3 presentations 36-7
Nixon, Richard 184
probatio 17
non-verbal: communication 118-
20, 122-3; messages and
personality 122-3 questions: answering 35-6; for
notes and business presentations presentations 36-7; see also
127-8 media
Nugent, Helen 25-6
Reagan, Ronald 67, 76, 78
passion 7, 9-10 reasoning 7, 9
pathos 7, 9-10, 11, 15, 67, 101-2, rehearsing 123-5
118-20, 136 rhetoric: 16-18; five principles 5-7
performance anxiety 125-8 Roddick, Anita 66
peroratio 17-18
persuasion: 7-10, 33; and different Satir, Virginia 122
personalities 60-86; five-point senses, the 42-4
plan 18-28; in Greece and Rome
shaker personality type 68-72, 122-
16-18
3, 145-6
persuasive: being wholly 58-9;
Shakespeare, William 49-50
body language 119, 120-2;
sharer personality types 75-8, 123,
business presentation 93-125,
146
128-30; conceptual framework
Simon, Paul 76
15-16; language 101-2
Singleton, John 67
personalities: auditors 72-5, 123,
146; capacity for playing Smith, Adam 47
opposites 78-83; communication Smith, Dick 66
style profiles 64-78, 83; Socrates 2, 3-4
communicators 65-8, 122, 145; speaker aids 103-18
different 60-86; and non-verbal Sperry, Roger 40
messages 122-3; self assessment storytelling 56-8
INDEX 217
Strong, James 76
style 6, 101-2
Sun Tsu 52
technology and business

presentations 112-18
Teresa, Mother 77
Thatcher, Margaret 70
Ury, William 138, 162

visual senses 42, 43
voice exercises 126-7
Wedgwood, Josiah 53
Whitlam, Gough 67
Willis, Ralph 51
word pictures, creating 45-6
Wran, Neville 70
Zelazny, Gene 104

Thompson - Persuading Aristotle (1998) PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Thompson - Persuading Aristotle (1998) PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Thompson - Persuading Aristotle (1998) PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What are the main topics discussed in the book?

What are the main topics discussed in the book?

How does the book describe Aristotle's teachings on persuasion?

How does the book describe Aristotle's teachings on persuasion?

PERSUADING

ALLEN & UNWIN

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted

First published in 1998 by

National Library of Australia

Thompson, Peter, 1952 –

ISBN 186448 739.9.

1. Persuasion (Psychology). 2. Persuasion (Rhetoric).

Digital processing by The Electric Book Company

1 HOW PERSUASION WORKS: WHAT ARISTOTLE TAUGHT 1

1. Background 3. `Artistic' persuasion

The fool tells me his reasons. The wise man persuades me

Contra negantem principia non est disputandum.

EVERYTHING WE KNOW about the art of persuasion today in

influence public opinion. Those who understand the power of

At school and university, teachers and professors transfer the

So, in many different areas of contemporary life, we are still

Aristotle, Socrates and Plato were the three greatest minds in

pioneered at the Harvard Law and Business Schools and taught

Aristotle returned to Athens in 338BC and founded his own

Plato was greatly disturbed by techniques which had the

He rejected the injustice which flows from verbal trickery,

Socrates was plunged into this dubious moral context to defend

his life at a trial which took place in a politically unstable interval

Perhaps you think, O Athenians, that I have been con-

(Translation from Lewis Copeland and Lawrence W. Lamm (eds),

The miscarriage of justice at the trial of Socrates carried profound

What Aristotle Taught

In Athens, learning the art of persuasion had great practical

The Five Principles

`Invention' is about identifying the central question which lies at

`Arrangement' is about how to structure and order an argument.

which framework to apply is the most valuable shortcut in the

`Style' involves choosing the most persuasive and evocative

`Memory' refers to the Greek-Roman habit of memorising

`Delivery' is about aligning your voice and body language with

Non-verbal communication reveals your real emotional state.

Without doubt, we share one thing in common with those

Aristotle's principles, with the exception of memory, remain

Aristotle said that you can persuade someone through direct

Figure 1.1 Aristotle's Rhetoric

Being persuasive is really about speaking from your heart, your

Greek thinking about persuasion began with ethos, meaning

In Greek, logos means reasoning or argument. Homo sapiens, the wise

dominate the unpredictable wiles of the heart. The experience of

Yet a life which lacks the yeast of emotion is dull beyond

Passion changes the world and it is the people with

My friend, the businessman John Bell (1949-93), embodied real

We had met when I spoke at a business function to launch the

At Esprit, John Bell decided to pursue a strategy of making his

John Bell was full of plans. He wanted to set up a clothing label

To get his message out, John began arranging a heavy schedule

“As soon as you move one step up

He built an evidence bank. A diary/scrapbook was his constant

I am often asked the question: Are great communicators born