World Champion Evaluator evaluating like a champion

I wonder whether an iPad could be a useful tool for evaluating speeches. As I wonder this, I also am considering what my fellow competitors would feel about the use of an iPad in the evaluation contest. There’s no rules against it.

Maybe time to start thinking about creating that app???

Posted under evaluations

The recent series of evaluation and speech contests have got me thinking of what is most important, style? or substance?

An evaluation that delivers much needed feedback to a speaker delivered in a poor style will not likely win a contest, and most likely will alienate the speaker. The advice will be ignored.

On the other hand a vacuous evaluation delivered with poise and panache will give you a fantastic chance of winning a contest, but will be of little benefit to the speaker.

Clearly, style AND substance would be preferred. It is quite a challenge to deliver an effective evaluation with style, but it is possible. This should win any contest, but sometimes does not. Why?

I believe that you need to have style and substance that are congruent with each other. Your presentation style needs to match the content. If you suggest having bigger gestures, your gestures should be bigger, but not uncomfortably so. In other words, if you wouldn’t take your own advice, why are you giving it?

Now, there’s an argument for needing to give advice to internalize it ourselves. I have done this and it is a great mechanism for personal improvement. Just don’t expect to win higher level contests if you don’t talk the talk yourself.

Posted under evaluations

At an Area Evaluation Contest last week, the contestant interview question was to share 1 tip to the audience on evaluations.  There were some excellent tips.  Here are my favorite three which I feel sum up evaluations in Toastmasters:

1. It’s not about the evaluator, it’s about the speaker.
2. Everyone in the room can learn from an evaluation.
3. Learning to listen is the fruit of learning to evaluate.

Posted under evaluations

Three attributes that are essential go great feedback.  Without them you are abusing a “knee-jerk ability to pontificate.”

Posted under evaluations

Stop focusing on winning.  Focus on blowing the judges socks off.

Posted under evaluations

..I’ll ask for it.

From Seth Godin:

When I want your opinion, I’ll ask for it

Posted under evaluations

I know I am guilty of this. Putting something into a speech because I loved it rather than it fitting the speech.  It seems especially true with contest speeches.  We want to impress.

Have you ever done this?

Can you recognize when another speaker is doing this?  Can you tell them?

John Kinde has an excellent newsletter where he wrote:

Too often, we’re tempted to force fit something into a talk that really doesn’t fit…the square peg in the round hole.  This applies not only to magic, but also to other things we love; stories, humor, a song.  A speaker who opens a talk with a joke, for the sake of the joke, is taking the same risks as a speaker who opens with a magic trick.  Anything we add to a professional talk needs to organically fit into the speech.  It needs to blend naturally into the content of the speech.  Adding something to a speech just because “we like it” is a critical mistake.

It really is a critical mistake.  I have seen evaluators focus on commending the square peg instead of calling it out for what it is.

Do the speaker a real favor, let them know if they are trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.

Posted under evaluations

Being in the throes of the Holiday season, I am focusing a lot of my time on giving. Gifts for my family and friends, the gift of time for worthy causes, and the gift of feedback to public speakers.

I have identified three types of feedback gifts that it is possible to give to experienced speakers:

1. The Re-gift – the evaluator passes along wisdom they have received with little thought.  Evaluators hear that vocal variety is important, so they pass this nugget on without regard to whether it would actually improve the speech or the speaker.  Not all speeches would be better with more vocal variety.
2. The Thoughtful Gift – the evaluator puts a lot of thought put into this gift.  If the speaker really takes to heart this feedback they will definitely be a better speaker…in your opinion.  Their speech will be dynamic and compelling if only they used the active voice.  Not all speakers would be better if they took your advice.
3. The Gift of Receiving – the evaluator does not give this gift directly.  Instead, the evaluator describes gifts received from the speaker.  The focus is not on what was done well, or could be done differently, but instead on how the speaker touched the evaluator  Surely all speakers want to know how they touch their audience?

When starting out in Toastmasters, we model the behavior of more seasoned members.  We re-gift the advice we have received.

As we grow, we learn to create unique feedback based on our experiences.  This feedback can be very good and helpful to the right person.

Finally, you can transcend to a new level by not “trying” to help the other person.  Instead you, as the evaluator, express how the speaker made you feel.  The speaker is free to create their own advice from your experience.  Often experienced speakers know what techniques they used effectively and what needs work.  They need feedback that goes beyond mechanics.  If they are to become great public speakers, they need to get into the minds of their audience.

What kind of gift are you giving?

Inspired by the Public Speaking Holiday carnival.  Check it out: http://www.definiscommunications.com/blog/public-speaking-and-the-holidays/

Posted under evaluations

I recently joined a new club.  Last week I had the opportunity to evaluate a speaker in that club for the first time.  I was a little nervous as I was trying to reconcile my personal style (a focus on improvement) with the style of the club (positive and uplifting).

I am pleased to report that the evaluation went well.  The speaker did one of the best jobs I have seen with vocal variety.  She is a gifted speaker.  Natural delivery.  It was almost as if she wasn’t even trying.  She did say the word “so” a lot.  I learned a little later from the Grammarian that this is feedback she has heard before.

Although I evaluated the speaker, I received the best feedback this day.  The speaker came to me after the meeting and told me that she loved how I even made the constructive criticism a positive.  I did this by saying she was so good with her vocal variety,  that she even varied her use of the word “so.”  I then proceeded to mimic some of her uses of the word!  A lighthearted reference which added some humor.  A technique I have picked up from my mentor (thanks Jennifer!).

When you deliver your next evaluation, consider using a lighthearted approach rather than a critical eye.  It makes a world of difference to the speaker.

Posted under evaluations

Michael Cortes has a thought provoking post on evaluations called Practice Being a Coach to Improve Your Presentations.  The premise is sound and one that I completely agree with.  It is similar to the axiom that if you want to get better at something, teach it.

What I found interesting though, was the comparison of the feedback from Bruno Tonioli, a judge on Dancing with the Stars.  Here is a sample of his feedback from the article:

“You need to work on your rhythm. You looked like Shrek lumbering about for your dinner!”

and

“You were on, you were off, your were on… You had a section in the middle where you were with the music, but you need to work on that. Work on staying with the music.”

At first glance, it would seem that the second comment is better than the first.  Michael even makes that point.  I agree that it is worded much better.  As Michael points out as well, this is a TV show, and being nice does not necessarily boost ratings.

I would like to argue that the first comment is better because it is more actionable.  There’s a clear message about what the dancer was doing.  In the second comment, it is more vague.  If the dancer knew how to “stay with the music” they would already be doing it.

Now, I actually don’t think that either comment is especially good because they are both not specific enough.  This may be due to time.  I would go to the level of exactly which move didn’t stay with the music, how did the move manifest itself, which move did go well with the music, and how to make the moves that didn’t work stay with the music.  This would give the dancer information they can use to get better and make concrete changes.  They don’t have to guess what stay with the music means.

When you give an evaluation to a speaker in Toastmasters, you don’t have to boost ratings, and you do have enough time.  Spend that time being specific about what the speaker can do differently.  Avoid saying something like “Your gestures were great” or “I thought your vocal variety could have been more effective.”  Expand on your comments and give the speaker something actionable they can do.  They will really appreciate it.

Posted under evaluations