WEBVTT 00:00:00.330 --> 00:00:04.174 Hello, everyone. My name is Joanne Lockwood and I'm your host for the 00:00:04.212 --> 00:00:07.966 Inclusion Bites podcast. In this series, I have interviewed a number 00:00:07.988 --> 00:00:11.694 of amazing people and simply had a conversation around the subject of 00:00:11.732 --> 00:00:15.566 inclusion, belonging and generally making the world a 00:00:15.588 --> 00:00:19.358 better place for everyone to thrive. To join me in the 00:00:19.364 --> 00:00:21.806 future, then please do drop me a line to 00:00:21.828 --> 00:00:25.730 jo.Lockwood@seechangehappen.co.uk, 00:00:25.890 --> 00:00:29.094 that's S-E-E Change Happen dot Co dot Uk. You 00:00:29.212 --> 00:00:32.854 can catch up with all of the previous shows on iTunes, Spotify 00:00:32.892 --> 00:00:36.070 and the usual places. So plug 00:00:36.410 --> 00:00:39.994 in your headphones, grab a decaf and let's get 00:00:40.032 --> 00:00:43.722 going. Today is 00:00:43.776 --> 00:00:46.822 episode 95 with the title 00:00:46.966 --> 00:00:50.670 navigating challenging conversations, and I have the absolute 00:00:50.740 --> 00:00:54.154 honour and privilege to welcome Michael Dodd. Michael 00:00:54.202 --> 00:00:57.966 describes himself as a recovering journalist and 00:00:57.988 --> 00:01:01.774 media communication specialist. When I asked Michael to 00:01:01.812 --> 00:01:05.134 describe his superpower, he said, being able to ask tough 00:01:05.182 --> 00:01:08.994 questions in real interviews and enabling people to give 00:01:09.032 --> 00:01:12.580 great answers. Hello, Michael, welcome to the show. 00:01:12.950 --> 00:01:16.210 G'day, Jo. Great to be here on inclusion bytes. 00:01:17.110 --> 00:01:20.646 Great to have you. We've been planning this for some months. I'm really pleased we 00:01:20.668 --> 00:01:23.590 finally got it to happen. So, Michael, 00:01:24.170 --> 00:01:27.734 you're a covering journalist and you're used to helping 00:01:27.782 --> 00:01:31.322 people answer tough interview questions. So 00:01:31.456 --> 00:01:35.034 how does one go about navigating the challenge of 00:01:35.072 --> 00:01:38.746 having challenging conversations with. A bit of 00:01:38.768 --> 00:01:42.062 forethought, ideally, rather than just plunging in and saying 00:01:42.116 --> 00:01:45.726 what pops into your head. So one of the 00:01:45.748 --> 00:01:49.582 arts of interviewing people, which is what I had to do when I was 00:01:49.636 --> 00:01:52.918 trained by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation 00:01:53.114 --> 00:01:56.734 to put people under pressure, particularly politicians, 00:01:56.782 --> 00:02:00.002 but business people and others as well, in media 00:02:00.056 --> 00:02:03.890 interviews, is to actually ask 00:02:03.960 --> 00:02:07.494 questions which they don't really want to answer quite 00:02:07.532 --> 00:02:11.174 often. And these days I'm much more popular because I actually 00:02:11.212 --> 00:02:14.866 help people ahead of media interviews or ahead of tough 00:02:14.898 --> 00:02:18.054 conversations they might have to have with clients, with 00:02:18.092 --> 00:02:21.106 prospects, with even their own people, let alone tax 00:02:21.148 --> 00:02:24.890 inspectors. And the idea there is to get them 00:02:24.960 --> 00:02:28.118 to be thinking about things in advance. 00:02:28.294 --> 00:02:31.934 So they're thinking about the messages they want to get across 00:02:32.052 --> 00:02:35.886 to the audience, which may be to one asker or it may 00:02:35.908 --> 00:02:39.294 be to a massive audience. Beyond that, in the case of 00:02:39.332 --> 00:02:43.038 media, and it's all about thinking ahead, 00:02:43.204 --> 00:02:47.026 what are the tough questions they're likely to ask? What we 00:02:47.048 --> 00:02:50.782 call in the world of australian journalism, blowtorch on the belly 00:02:50.846 --> 00:02:54.686 questions. And if you think about those in advance, it's 00:02:54.718 --> 00:02:58.310 often a lot easier to get across 00:02:58.460 --> 00:03:01.974 what's in the mutual interest of you and the asker and any 00:03:02.012 --> 00:03:05.720 wider audience to keep everyone happy. So 00:03:06.170 --> 00:03:09.890 typically in this kind of the world of work the terms of 00:03:09.900 --> 00:03:12.410 conversations, probably around performance, 00:03:12.910 --> 00:03:16.282 redundancy, reprimanding somebody for something. 00:03:16.336 --> 00:03:20.186 And a lot of people, when they become a 00:03:20.208 --> 00:03:23.930 manager, don't think about this people 00:03:24.000 --> 00:03:27.726 side. They're thinking it's all sweetness and light, being in charge and everyone will do 00:03:27.748 --> 00:03:31.566 as they're told. But the challenging conversations is a learned skill and 00:03:31.588 --> 00:03:35.086 I'm sure you'd agree with that. Absolutely. And if you're dealing with people on your 00:03:35.108 --> 00:03:38.478 own team, taking them with you is not automatic 00:03:38.654 --> 00:03:42.446 and you've got to make sure you do that. So one of the arts 00:03:42.478 --> 00:03:46.082 of giving great answers is to get your head in the mind 00:03:46.216 --> 00:03:49.478 of those who you're dealing with, whether they're asking you questions 00:03:49.564 --> 00:03:53.190 or waiting for their reprimand or whatever it is. And 00:03:53.260 --> 00:03:57.046 if you can get into the mind of the person who 00:03:57.148 --> 00:04:00.470 is your target audience, then it's so much 00:04:00.540 --> 00:04:04.234 easier to tell them not what they want to hear, what they 00:04:04.272 --> 00:04:07.754 need to hear and what's in your and their mutual interest for them to 00:04:07.792 --> 00:04:11.590 hear by thinking it through beforehand. So a lot 00:04:11.600 --> 00:04:15.166 of my work is to do with media, helping people go on 00:04:15.268 --> 00:04:18.814 BBC programmes and CNN programmes, and to be 00:04:18.852 --> 00:04:22.574 thinking ahead rather than just be thinking. I hope they 00:04:22.612 --> 00:04:26.042 asked me the right questions, because journalists typically 00:04:26.186 --> 00:04:29.986 think it's their mission to ask you the wrong questions and you need to be 00:04:30.008 --> 00:04:33.406 ready for it. But what I found, the more I've worked, particularly with chief 00:04:33.438 --> 00:04:37.158 executive organisations, that's organisations where 00:04:37.244 --> 00:04:41.046 you get a bunch of chief executives working together to try 00:04:41.068 --> 00:04:44.854 and help improve their own performance. What I found is, 00:04:44.892 --> 00:04:48.694 for them, it's not so much media, which is their 00:04:48.732 --> 00:04:52.106 number one concern when it comes to giving great answers to tough questions, 00:04:52.288 --> 00:04:55.260 they typically think, well, what am I going to tell this 00:04:55.630 --> 00:04:59.354 person who I'm hoping will become a customer? Or 00:04:59.392 --> 00:05:03.150 what am I going to tell the official inspectors? Or if things go wrong, 00:05:03.300 --> 00:05:06.570 what am I going to tell the official inquiry or the courts? 00:05:06.730 --> 00:05:10.426 And the same principles apply where it's 00:05:10.458 --> 00:05:13.860 really important to actually get across a message 00:05:14.310 --> 00:05:18.050 for any particular occasion and to get across 00:05:18.200 --> 00:05:21.842 what you're planning to say, not what you're just thinking about 00:05:21.896 --> 00:05:25.314 on the run. I mean, people who watch great media 00:05:25.512 --> 00:05:29.142 interviewees often say, oh, they're really good at thinking fast 00:05:29.196 --> 00:05:32.934 on their feet, and the truth is, often they're not. But 00:05:32.972 --> 00:05:36.726 what they are good is at thinking ahead before they do 00:05:36.748 --> 00:05:40.442 the interview, what they're going to say, and actually, when the right 00:05:40.496 --> 00:05:43.946 question comes up, saying that, rather than 00:05:44.048 --> 00:05:47.754 saying what I hope I can say, and getting 00:05:47.792 --> 00:05:51.578 themselves in a mess. So planning, preparation and practise 00:05:51.674 --> 00:05:55.438 is really important before all important 00:05:55.524 --> 00:05:59.198 business conversations. I've noticed when 00:05:59.284 --> 00:06:02.634 I've watched politicians on various 00:06:02.682 --> 00:06:06.402 parties over the years and other 00:06:06.456 --> 00:06:10.180 great people who would get interviewed a lot, is that when 00:06:10.630 --> 00:06:14.334 they get asked a question, there's almost like a holding sentence 00:06:14.382 --> 00:06:17.934 you put out first. It's almost like you go, great question. I'm glad you raised 00:06:17.982 --> 00:06:21.334 that. So it's that immediate sound bite that gives your 00:06:21.372 --> 00:06:25.078 brain an extra 5 seconds to process something before you 00:06:25.084 --> 00:06:27.894 say the next thing, isn't it? And I think that helps you as well, not 00:06:27.932 --> 00:06:31.398 rush into the answer. Well, it can if you are taken by surprise. 00:06:31.494 --> 00:06:35.034 But ideally I would be training people not to do 00:06:35.072 --> 00:06:38.762 that, just to basically have their great 00:06:38.816 --> 00:06:42.458 thing they're trying to get across, and to say it up front without 00:06:42.544 --> 00:06:46.286 any sleazy, slimy politician blabber that they've got to 00:06:46.308 --> 00:06:49.518 go through before they get to it. I mean, there's a great saying in the 00:06:49.524 --> 00:06:53.266 world of media training which hopefully won't shock too many of your 00:06:53.288 --> 00:06:56.898 audience members, Jo, it's that giving a great 00:06:56.984 --> 00:07:00.834 interviewee performance is the opposite of 00:07:00.872 --> 00:07:04.706 sex. The reason being is that when 00:07:04.728 --> 00:07:08.520 you get it right, the climax comes at the start. 00:07:09.130 --> 00:07:12.886 Now, if any young men listening, don't try this at home 00:07:12.988 --> 00:07:16.690 in the wrong field. But when it comes to an interview, when you're 00:07:16.770 --> 00:07:20.554 watching on tv, you want the sleazy, slamming politician to come 00:07:20.592 --> 00:07:24.182 to the point straight away. You don't want him saying what a wonderful, 00:07:24.246 --> 00:07:27.946 marvellous question it is and how wonderful you as the 00:07:27.968 --> 00:07:31.706 interviewer are looking today, et cetera. You want them to 00:07:31.728 --> 00:07:35.438 get straight to the point, climax at the front. And that can 00:07:35.524 --> 00:07:39.214 work in many non media occasions. They're not all of all 00:07:39.252 --> 00:07:42.998 occasions, but certainly a lot of conversational occasions. 00:07:43.114 --> 00:07:46.340 That's really important for getting straight to the point. 00:07:47.750 --> 00:07:51.458 Okay, I like that. I like the idea of just being 00:07:51.544 --> 00:07:55.314 that prepared. And I confess I've not done 00:07:55.352 --> 00:07:58.894 media training, but I've had people give me advice when I've gone on the radio 00:07:58.942 --> 00:08:02.502 and done other things. And the best advice I was always given 00:08:02.556 --> 00:08:06.134 was write down next to you on a piece of paper the key 00:08:06.172 --> 00:08:09.814 points you want to get across. And whatever they 00:08:09.852 --> 00:08:13.434 ask you, you answer the questions you want to answer rather than their 00:08:13.472 --> 00:08:17.274 question, or you fit in your answer that you want to get 00:08:17.312 --> 00:08:21.146 across, not as a direct response to their question, but as trying 00:08:21.168 --> 00:08:24.830 to give my message across rather than their message. Is that 00:08:24.900 --> 00:08:28.414 something you would talk about? It's certainly something I talk about and get asked 00:08:28.452 --> 00:08:31.470 about. And the trick is you're trying to do 00:08:31.620 --> 00:08:35.378 both answer the question and get across a 00:08:35.384 --> 00:08:39.118 message that's on your agenda for that particular audience. 00:08:39.294 --> 00:08:43.122 And there is a way of doing that, ideally every time, 00:08:43.256 --> 00:08:46.950 because if you watch BBC's news night 00:08:47.020 --> 00:08:50.520 or some other tough question asking programme, 00:08:51.610 --> 00:08:55.174 an audience member is pretty quick to judge yes, that 00:08:55.212 --> 00:08:58.902 person is honest and reasonable and addressing the question 00:08:59.036 --> 00:09:02.614 that the audience wants to know asked on behalf 00:09:02.662 --> 00:09:06.298 of a competent interviewer. And 00:09:06.464 --> 00:09:09.926 they don't want a lot of blabber. And they also don't want 00:09:10.048 --> 00:09:13.774 a politician setting their own agenda. They want 00:09:13.812 --> 00:09:17.630 them answering the questions that the question asker is asking 00:09:17.700 --> 00:09:21.454 on their behalf. And so, ideally, when 00:09:21.492 --> 00:09:25.258 you're trying to get it right as an answerer, you should 00:09:25.284 --> 00:09:28.626 be dealing with the question because people are asking the question for a reason. 00:09:28.808 --> 00:09:32.354 But when you're really clever, you can get 00:09:32.392 --> 00:09:36.114 across the important bits that you've written down, Jo or whoever 00:09:36.162 --> 00:09:39.814 else is talking, you can cover those as well, where 00:09:39.852 --> 00:09:43.686 they're relevant. And so in any particular answer, a 00:09:43.708 --> 00:09:47.510 really good answer does answer the question, but goes 00:09:47.660 --> 00:09:51.146 on to get across a message, usually a 00:09:51.168 --> 00:09:54.954 positive message, on the topic that they're being 00:09:54.992 --> 00:09:58.458 asked about. So there's a win win to be had between 00:09:58.624 --> 00:10:02.174 the person answering the questions and the 00:10:02.212 --> 00:10:05.866 question asker and the wider audience who's listening 00:10:05.898 --> 00:10:09.360 in. You mentioned night there, 00:10:10.290 --> 00:10:13.886 the Fiona Bruce question that she asks these days. 00:10:13.988 --> 00:10:17.054 And you can just tell that the career 00:10:17.102 --> 00:10:20.414 politicians launch straight into the party 00:10:20.462 --> 00:10:24.226 manifesto, don't they? There's kind of this. Here's the facts and figures. This is what 00:10:24.248 --> 00:10:27.794 I want to tell you. And you end up with just party 00:10:27.842 --> 00:10:31.654 politics spouting kind of the corporate message, and you 00:10:31.692 --> 00:10:35.494 never really hear the real truth. And that's what I find. 00:10:35.612 --> 00:10:39.234 Well, a good interview is on BBC News Night and other programmes 00:10:39.362 --> 00:10:42.220 good at persisting and making sure 00:10:42.990 --> 00:10:46.714 the politician doesn't just get to say what they want to say. It's not a 00:10:46.752 --> 00:10:50.266 party political broadcast as far as they're concerned. There was a guy who 00:10:50.288 --> 00:10:54.026 was probably quite a reasonable interviewee, called Simon Hughes. He was a liberal 00:10:54.058 --> 00:10:57.726 Democrat. And he once famously said, on the 00:10:57.748 --> 00:11:01.354 Today programme on Radio Four, which is a serious 00:11:01.402 --> 00:11:05.134 political interviewing programme, he said, I can't answer 00:11:05.172 --> 00:11:07.906 the question you're asking, but I've got the answer to two other questions that you 00:11:07.928 --> 00:11:11.778 haven't asked. And this is what they are, and it's quite 00:11:11.864 --> 00:11:15.574 a glib statement, quite an arresting statement, but that's not 00:11:15.612 --> 00:11:19.240 really what the interviewer and the wider audience want. 00:11:20.170 --> 00:11:23.990 They want answers to the questions that they are asking about, 00:11:24.140 --> 00:11:27.726 not ones which a sleazy, slamy politician 00:11:27.858 --> 00:11:31.610 or even a reasonable, responsible, honest 00:11:31.680 --> 00:11:35.514 politician wants to do. But the real 00:11:35.552 --> 00:11:38.954 trick, and a great answer is effectively to do both. 00:11:39.072 --> 00:11:42.702 So you are answering what's asked, but you're also giving 00:11:42.756 --> 00:11:46.286 across sometimes that extra little bit, which can be your 00:11:46.388 --> 00:11:50.126 message as well on the topic, which 00:11:50.228 --> 00:11:54.062 can actually be very helpful for the viewers. I mean, what a 00:11:54.116 --> 00:11:57.966 good interviewee is often saying sometimes is they'll give the answer, but then they'll 00:11:57.998 --> 00:12:01.250 say, but what's even more important is this. 00:12:01.400 --> 00:12:05.074 And providing it's in the territory that's being asked about 00:12:05.112 --> 00:12:08.934 by the interviewer, then that's perfectly reasonable and often very 00:12:08.972 --> 00:12:12.022 helpful. And they can often put things in a new 00:12:12.076 --> 00:12:15.510 perspective, maybe partly for their own interest, but also for the interest 00:12:15.580 --> 00:12:19.402 of the viewers. And what a really 00:12:19.456 --> 00:12:23.146 good question answerer is doing is doing that a 00:12:23.168 --> 00:12:23.740 lot. 00:12:26.690 --> 00:12:30.174 Yeah, I certainly watch some 00:12:30.212 --> 00:12:34.014 really good interviews, and I know people like Laurel Kunsberg and 00:12:34.132 --> 00:12:37.906 Fiona Bruce on those sort of programmes, Andrew Neal on this week, and 00:12:38.088 --> 00:12:41.854 they really are good at asking questions and different styles 00:12:41.982 --> 00:12:45.110 and different directness. But as you say, the tenacity, 00:12:46.090 --> 00:12:49.590 if you're a career politician or you've got a 00:12:49.740 --> 00:12:53.538 high position, high rank in some organisation, when you go onto 00:12:53.554 --> 00:12:57.186 those perennials, you really know that you're going there to be in the lion's den. 00:12:57.218 --> 00:13:00.026 You know you're going to get the tough questions. You're not going there for a 00:13:00.048 --> 00:13:03.030 chat and a coffee, are you? So you are prepared. 00:13:03.190 --> 00:13:06.922 And I think something comes across 00:13:06.976 --> 00:13:10.574 as this combative type attack and 00:13:10.612 --> 00:13:14.014 defence, rather than it being a true meeting of 00:13:14.052 --> 00:13:17.294 minds. It's almost too 00:13:17.332 --> 00:13:20.862 staged as an audience. That's how I sometimes feel. Well, as an 00:13:20.916 --> 00:13:24.734 interviewee, you don't want to be coming across as if you're 00:13:24.782 --> 00:13:28.418 being staged. There's a nice little expression which 00:13:28.584 --> 00:13:32.354 I actually got from the BBC, which is 00:13:32.392 --> 00:13:36.006 all about saying something, but making it 00:13:36.028 --> 00:13:39.842 relevant at the time and making sure that it doesn't 00:13:39.906 --> 00:13:43.414 sound like it's pre planned. So the term they use is. 00:13:43.532 --> 00:13:47.322 It's called planned spontaneity, which 00:13:47.456 --> 00:13:50.426 your astute listeners will know is an 00:13:50.448 --> 00:13:54.026 oxymoron. It's a contradiction in terms, but the 00:13:54.048 --> 00:13:57.674 idea is to be saying what you plan to say 00:13:57.712 --> 00:14:01.306 when this topic came up, what you planned to say before the interview, 00:14:01.418 --> 00:14:05.038 and you're saying it, but you're saying it in such a way 00:14:05.204 --> 00:14:08.766 that it just sounds like, oh, right, yeah, I've just thought of 00:14:08.788 --> 00:14:12.578 this plan. Spontaneity is a good thing, 00:14:12.744 --> 00:14:16.498 particularly for people who are inclined to sound 00:14:16.664 --> 00:14:20.194 like they're a bit too. You 00:14:20.232 --> 00:14:23.966 know, a lot of the interview is about having emotional punch 00:14:24.078 --> 00:14:27.746 as well as giving the facts. And if you get good at planned 00:14:27.778 --> 00:14:31.014 spontaneity, then you can be a much more 00:14:31.052 --> 00:14:34.294 scintillating interviewee. Hopefully I'm doing this with you, 00:14:34.332 --> 00:14:37.850 Jo. Give me a Michael. 00:14:38.750 --> 00:14:41.210 Very spontaneous. Spontaneous. 00:14:44.430 --> 00:14:48.118 Where are we now? We're closing out 2023. And I'm 00:14:48.134 --> 00:14:51.760 sure most people who are listening in the UK will have heard 00:14:52.450 --> 00:14:56.190 Rishi Sunak, Boris Johnson, et al. If you like, 00:14:56.260 --> 00:14:59.534 talking about COVID and the COVID years and the 00:14:59.572 --> 00:15:02.994 inquiries. And there's been some 00:15:03.032 --> 00:15:06.222 shocking. I'm going to call them untruths 00:15:06.286 --> 00:15:09.714 or misinformation coming out. How does 00:15:09.752 --> 00:15:13.586 anyone manage to lose all of their WhatsApp messages every time they 00:15:13.608 --> 00:15:17.198 change their phone? You'd think that this was really kind 00:15:17.224 --> 00:15:20.882 of phone 101, isn't it? This is kind of like the very basics, 00:15:20.946 --> 00:15:24.114 don't lose my messages, don't lose this. But all of a sudden, 00:15:24.162 --> 00:15:26.920 conveniently, they've gone. 00:15:27.850 --> 00:15:31.690 Do they really believe the public? Believe them? Well, 00:15:31.760 --> 00:15:35.498 if you ever find yourself giving answers where you 00:15:35.504 --> 00:15:38.858 don't think the public will believe you, you're probably going to be right on that. 00:15:38.944 --> 00:15:42.614 You're probably not going to be believed. And part 00:15:42.672 --> 00:15:46.334 of what you want to be doing as a person answering questions is to be 00:15:46.372 --> 00:15:50.174 believed, not just because you're telling the truth, but you're saying 00:15:50.212 --> 00:15:53.666 it in a way which is credible, it's enhancing your 00:15:53.688 --> 00:15:57.294 credibility. So it's a matter of getting the truth 00:15:57.342 --> 00:16:01.074 right, getting the structure of how you actually say it, 00:16:01.112 --> 00:16:04.210 which is why the climax of the front thing is important, 00:16:04.360 --> 00:16:07.990 because getting to the number of the matter right up front is really important. 00:16:08.140 --> 00:16:11.606 But it's also a matter of how you look and how you sound 00:16:11.788 --> 00:16:15.526 as you're giving your answers. And that's where 00:16:15.628 --> 00:16:18.982 media response training comes in, where you're 00:16:19.046 --> 00:16:22.746 practising with people, giving them the tough questions in advance that 00:16:22.768 --> 00:16:26.554 they might get, but playing it back to them so that they can 00:16:26.672 --> 00:16:30.522 see themselves and hear themselves as other people hear 00:16:30.576 --> 00:16:34.318 and see them. And that's a great way to teach, because it's a 00:16:34.324 --> 00:16:37.806 great way to learn, if you can actually see on the 00:16:37.828 --> 00:16:41.646 camera that you're looking nervous because your hands are shaking, or you're whopping 00:16:41.678 --> 00:16:45.518 the sweat off your brow as you're talking, or you're 00:16:45.614 --> 00:16:49.394 trying to project being in control, but your 00:16:49.432 --> 00:16:52.420 hands are kind of telling a different story, 00:16:52.870 --> 00:16:56.454 it's really important to have your body under 00:16:56.492 --> 00:16:59.878 control and have your voice under control 00:17:00.044 --> 00:17:03.718 so that you not just are telling the truth, you are 00:17:03.804 --> 00:17:07.366 sounding like someone who is telling the truth. And 00:17:07.468 --> 00:17:11.306 allied to that, apart from your actual performance, is often I 00:17:11.328 --> 00:17:14.986 mentioned earlier about getting across a message. When you've got a message to get 00:17:15.008 --> 00:17:18.666 across, it's typically an abstract thing, 00:17:18.848 --> 00:17:22.346 but what you want to be doing as a great communicator 00:17:22.538 --> 00:17:26.314 is putting a picture in people's minds, a real picture, 00:17:26.442 --> 00:17:30.000 so that they can actually see what you mean. So 00:17:30.930 --> 00:17:34.510 if you're talking to your media 00:17:34.580 --> 00:17:38.402 audience, or maybe your own audience inside your own company, and you're an important person 00:17:38.456 --> 00:17:42.146 in the company, what you want to be doing is getting across, 00:17:42.328 --> 00:17:46.066 say, you might be saying, well, we're making some changes to make the 00:17:46.088 --> 00:17:49.750 company better. And your people might think, well, heard 00:17:49.820 --> 00:17:53.334 other people say that it may or may not be true, but if they can 00:17:53.372 --> 00:17:57.206 then give a real life example of one of the things that they 00:17:57.308 --> 00:18:01.034 are doing that paints a picture in people's minds so they can see 00:18:01.072 --> 00:18:04.582 it, then bang, it's believable. 00:18:04.646 --> 00:18:08.086 So I'm making this up on the spot here. This is not planned 00:18:08.118 --> 00:18:11.786 spontaneity, but, I mean, if the company boss 00:18:11.818 --> 00:18:15.280 is saying, well, we know that workers work better 00:18:16.050 --> 00:18:19.514 when they're well fed on really nutritious, 00:18:19.642 --> 00:18:23.278 healthy food, which tastes great as well, and 00:18:23.364 --> 00:18:26.914 we're going to be putting this into practise. And in fact, we've already started because 00:18:26.952 --> 00:18:30.674 you've noticed that our company canteen has cut 00:18:30.712 --> 00:18:34.082 its prices to make the food available for whoever wants it. 00:18:34.216 --> 00:18:37.830 And also they've upped the nutritional content 00:18:37.900 --> 00:18:41.346 of what they're doing. And we've got top chefs in there making it particularly 00:18:41.378 --> 00:18:45.014 tasty. And the audience saying, oh, yeah, that's right, lunch yesterday was 00:18:45.052 --> 00:18:48.762 fantastic. So what the communicator is doing is 00:18:48.816 --> 00:18:52.618 ideally not just saying a message, but backing it up with a 00:18:52.624 --> 00:18:55.850 real life example, which what's in communication terms 00:18:55.920 --> 00:18:59.466 is hitting a resonant chord. So 00:18:59.568 --> 00:19:03.358 it's basically activating the brains of the listeners who are 00:19:03.364 --> 00:19:07.054 saying, oh, yeah, lunch has been really good this past week with this new 00:19:07.092 --> 00:19:10.814 chef who's come in, and so, bang, what the person 00:19:10.852 --> 00:19:14.386 is saying is really connecting effectively with the 00:19:14.408 --> 00:19:17.438 audience. Yeah, I get that. So you're 00:19:17.454 --> 00:19:21.154 signposting these messages that you're trying to follow through on 00:19:21.192 --> 00:19:24.754 and selling a vision, selling a dream as well. But 00:19:24.792 --> 00:19:28.086 ideally, it's not just a dream or a vision, but you're backing it up with 00:19:28.108 --> 00:19:31.926 real facts. So that's where the painting of real pictures comes in, which may 00:19:31.948 --> 00:19:35.766 be real life examples of something which has happened, or it might 00:19:35.788 --> 00:19:39.002 be a real life example of something which is being 00:19:39.056 --> 00:19:42.586 implemented now. And so if we're talking about a 00:19:42.608 --> 00:19:46.314 fantastic new recreation room. Maybe 00:19:46.352 --> 00:19:49.882 the builders are sort of coming in this morning and you can see them all 00:19:49.936 --> 00:19:53.726 up there on floor 13 or whatever, who have brought in 00:19:53.748 --> 00:19:57.434 the new table tennis tables and the new dartboards and the new exciting 00:19:57.482 --> 00:20:01.134 electronic games. And you've probably seen them this morning, all being 00:20:01.172 --> 00:20:04.466 delivered just in time for you lot to play them. 00:20:04.648 --> 00:20:08.162 So you basically always want to make sure that your 00:20:08.216 --> 00:20:12.018 messages backed up with real life examples which 00:20:12.104 --> 00:20:15.934 are happening. Or if you're talking about the vision thing, as President George 00:20:15.982 --> 00:20:19.798 Bush I in America used to say, the vision thing, which he 00:20:19.804 --> 00:20:23.574 had trouble with, it's actually putting that real picture so 00:20:23.612 --> 00:20:27.306 that people can actually see the same vision that you're talking about in 00:20:27.328 --> 00:20:31.066 a way that's real and believable and that makes for good 00:20:31.088 --> 00:20:34.646 communication. Yeah. One of the things I struggle 00:20:34.678 --> 00:20:38.090 with is having the conversation 00:20:38.430 --> 00:20:42.062 to tell someone I want to have a conversation, because 00:20:42.196 --> 00:20:45.674 if you're trying to tell bad news or challenging 00:20:45.722 --> 00:20:49.518 news, you want to set the scene. Can we have a quiet moment later 00:20:49.604 --> 00:20:53.386 or quiet moment in a minute? And of course, the first reaction 00:20:53.418 --> 00:20:56.754 to that is, so what's wrong? What do I need to know? And you try 00:20:56.792 --> 00:21:00.514 not to signpost too much of the conversation and make it sound too bad or 00:21:00.552 --> 00:21:03.918 too good. How can people 00:21:04.024 --> 00:21:06.950 signpost the need to have a chat 00:21:07.770 --> 00:21:11.494 and feel comfortable about setting that scene without giving too 00:21:11.532 --> 00:21:14.950 much away and losing the impetus of the conversation? 00:21:15.530 --> 00:21:19.334 There's a great professional speaker called Anthony 00:21:19.382 --> 00:21:22.858 Steers who you may have come across Jo yourself. 00:21:23.024 --> 00:21:26.490 We're in an organisation where you, I and him are all in it, 00:21:26.560 --> 00:21:29.994 and Anthony has this great concept of permission to 00:21:30.032 --> 00:21:33.798 speak and it's basically like, say, if you're making 00:21:33.824 --> 00:21:37.230 a phone call and you're going to have that conversation, it's no good just 00:21:37.300 --> 00:21:41.054 bursting into it. The climax of the front thing I mentioned earlier has to wait 00:21:41.092 --> 00:21:44.802 a bit because you want to make sure that it's a good 00:21:44.856 --> 00:21:48.590 time for the person. You've got their attention before you're 00:21:48.670 --> 00:21:52.110 raising what can be a highly emotional topic. 00:21:52.270 --> 00:21:55.890 So actually, to be saying at the start of that 00:21:56.040 --> 00:21:59.878 is now a good time to talk about your glorious future career in 00:21:59.884 --> 00:22:03.734 this company and getting their buy in on that means that 00:22:03.772 --> 00:22:07.050 when you've got some points to make, a couple of which may be 00:22:07.120 --> 00:22:10.906 constructively critical, you've actually got them there 00:22:11.008 --> 00:22:14.474 and they've committed to giving you the time 00:22:14.672 --> 00:22:18.474 to go ahead and discuss it. So you're not putting 00:22:18.512 --> 00:22:21.734 yourself in a position as the instigator of this tough 00:22:21.782 --> 00:22:25.534 conversation where you're not making it too easy for them to say, sorry, 00:22:25.572 --> 00:22:27.438 I've got time now, I've got to go home, I've got to pick up my 00:22:27.444 --> 00:22:30.974 kids or whatever it is you're getting buy in right at the 00:22:31.012 --> 00:22:34.674 start, before you're raising the big issues. And 00:22:34.792 --> 00:22:38.626 setting the scene correctly is really helpful for when 00:22:38.648 --> 00:22:42.274 you're getting to the substance of the issue. So 00:22:42.312 --> 00:22:46.066 kind of. We need to have a chat. When would be a good time for 00:22:46.088 --> 00:22:49.542 you? Is a good lead. Absolutely, yeah. That's so much better 00:22:49.596 --> 00:22:53.446 than you've got to be in my office right now, when they might be working 00:22:53.468 --> 00:22:56.886 on something that's massively important for the company or massively important for 00:22:56.908 --> 00:23:00.522 themselves and they won't be able to focus on it. So, yeah, getting 00:23:00.576 --> 00:23:04.358 that permission to speak at the right time is a great concept, 00:23:04.454 --> 00:23:07.260 and so I would recommend it ahead of 00:23:07.630 --> 00:23:11.226 tough conversations, which could feature blowtorch on the belly 00:23:11.258 --> 00:23:15.082 questions and even brilliant answers 00:23:15.146 --> 00:23:18.894 if the scene is set right. It's so much easier for a win 00:23:18.932 --> 00:23:22.706 win to be established between the two principal people taking part 00:23:22.728 --> 00:23:25.380 in the conversation. Yeah. 00:23:27.670 --> 00:23:31.474 I've been naughty in my life, as most of us have, and I've been 00:23:31.512 --> 00:23:34.530 on the receiving end of challenging conversations 00:23:34.870 --> 00:23:38.626 and I've experienced mastery, for 00:23:38.648 --> 00:23:42.040 want of a better way of describing it, of people who are able to 00:23:42.570 --> 00:23:46.146 fit, to be, lead you down this tunnel and there's 00:23:46.178 --> 00:23:49.906 nowhere to escape from it, basically. They're very good at asking the questions, so they've 00:23:49.938 --> 00:23:53.594 obviously got an agenda. They know where they're trying to get the conversation, and all 00:23:53.632 --> 00:23:57.114 you can do is tell the truth, or lie, I guess. And there's the two 00:23:57.152 --> 00:24:00.780 options, and if you want to tell the truth, they just keep honing in. 00:24:01.650 --> 00:24:05.022 And I've noticed this as well. They start by describing a big 00:24:05.076 --> 00:24:08.414 picture and then ask you to sort of re 00:24:08.452 --> 00:24:12.186 explain a smaller part of that picture and then a smaller part of that picture 00:24:12.218 --> 00:24:15.986 and a smaller part of that picture, and eventually you get to the end and 00:24:16.008 --> 00:24:19.746 you're focusing on one tiny detail. But you started massive, and 00:24:19.768 --> 00:24:23.060 I found it's a really great way of getting me to 00:24:23.430 --> 00:24:27.266 hone down on the answer they wanted. Well, that's 00:24:27.378 --> 00:24:31.206 something that I learned to do as a blowtorch on the belly interview on 00:24:31.228 --> 00:24:34.886 behalf of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Often, I 00:24:34.908 --> 00:24:38.518 mean, supposing you mentioned someone called Boris Johnson, a british prime 00:24:38.534 --> 00:24:41.930