Strategy. Innovation. Brand.

Miscellaneous

90 Days of Anger

What’s wrong with people laughing? The short answer: they just want to go on laughing. That’s good for teaching but not good for politics.

People love to laugh. If you’re trying to persuade an audience to your way of thinking, it’s good to get them to laugh. They’ll trust you more and, more importantly, they’ll think, “Oh good, she’s funny. Maybe she’ll tell some more jokes.” If they’re anticipating more jokes, the audience will pay more attention. You can get your point across more easily because the audience is primed and attentive. (By the way, this doesn’t work if you tell lame jokes. You have to tell funny jokes).

So why is this bad for politics? Because in political speeches, you’re aiming to motivate people and humor doesn’t motivate. People who are laughing just want to go on laughing. They don’t want to canvas neighborhoods, call friends, give money, storm the barricades, or even get off the sofa to vote.

The emotion that motivates is anger. That’s why political speeches and advertisements are so angry. The politicians want you to do something. Making you angry (and scared) is the simplest way to accomplish their objective. Making you laugh is counter-productive.

In rhetorical terms, the simplest way to make an audience angry is a technique known as “attributed belittlement”. You tell the audience that your opponent (or competitor) belittles them. “They don’t respect you. They think they’re superior to you. They think they have the right to tell you what to do, because you’re dumb. They’re elite and you’re not.” Sound familiar? No one likes to be belittled, so this is a very effective technique. (I’ve used it myself in commercial competition and it works).

So what can you expect in the 90 days leading up to the presidential election in the United States? A flood of angry messages and, more specifically, a tidal wave of attributed belittlement. If you’re like me, you’ll just want to tune out the whole mess.

This is a different kind of communication than I normally teach. I usually focus on “deliberative” presentations — you present a logical argument and the audience deliberates on it. A political presentation is usually a “demonstrative” presentation — you’re demonstrating solidarity and group loyalty, partially by demonizing the opposition. There’s no need for logic. You can learn more about deliberative and demonstrative presentations here.

Does your e-mail address say you’re a psychopath?

psychopath - man with axThe first thing I know about a person is often their e-mail address. From that small scrap of information, I start building an image of what the person is like. If you think first impressions are important, think about what your e-mail address says about you. Your e-mail address is often the first element of your personal brand.

Some people use their e-mail addresses to identify their hobbies or interests, like bookworm@xyz.com or bikerbob@wxy.com. But I’m usually more interested in the information after the @ sign. If I receive an e-mail from an @aol.com address, I think the sender is over the hill and out of date. If it comes from a cable company (e.g. @comcast.net), I think they’re not very technically astute. If they change cable companies, they’ll have to change their e-mail address as well. How boring!

I thought I might be alone in these perceptions so I was interested to learn that no less an authority than the New York Times‘ David Pogue has similar biases. In an article in yesterday’s Times, Pogue introduced Microsoft’s new e-mail service. In passing, Pogue referred back to Microsoft’s previous service, Hotmail. Pogue writes that, “Even today, a Hotmail address still says ‘unsophisticated loser’ in some circles.”

For these reasons, I was deeply disappointed when Apple tried to shift its e-mail service from @mac.com to @me.com. My e-mail address has long been a variant of myname@mac.com. Part of my personal brand is that I use a Mac. It’s OK with me if people know that. Maybe they’ll think that I “think different”. When Apple changed it to me.com, I was horrified. In my humble opinion, anyone who uses an e-mail address of myname@me.com is self-centered at best or a psychopath at worst. Even if I think “it’s all about me” (and I do sometimes), I don’t want to project it in my personal brand. Thankfully, I can still use @mac.com designation and I hope I always will.

I teach my students that they need to think about their personal brand. It’s important for getting a job or a promotion. Your brand is a combination of how you behave, how you speak, how you dress, and so on. Each of those sends clues about who you are and whether you’d be good teammate or not. When you think about your brand, begin at the beginning — your e-mail address.

Questions & Charisma in The Job Interview

Effective communication can make or break your chances of getting the job you want. That’s the essential point I’ve tried to make in my recent postings about job hunting. Studying rhetoric – the art and science of persuasion — is a good first step. Rhetoric doesn’t just help you give a great speech. It can also help you get a great job.

In preparing my get-a-job posts, I read widely and learned a few things myself.  Two articles seemed especially relevant, both by Jeff Haden in Inc. magazine. The first helps you prepare the questions you’ll want to ask when your interviewer says, “Do you have any questions you’d like to ask?” Hint: don’t ask when you can take your first vacation. You can find the first article here.

Haden’s second article defines what makes people charismatic. It’s really not about you. It’s about how you treat other people. If you always try to draw attention to yourself, you’ll be perceived as arrogant and self-centered. If you deflect the attention to others, you’ll be perceived as charismatic. Here’s a simple question: how do people feel when they’re around you? Do they feel suffocated because you suck up all the air? Or do they feel positive and enthusiastic because you take them seriously and promote their interests? Haden’s second article gives ten tips on how to be charismatic; you can find it here.

Will Good Grammar Get You a Job?

Good grammar won’t get you a job but bad grammar can prevent you from getting a job. That was certainly my attitude as a hiring manager and many of my colleagues hold similar opinions. We take grammar to be a marker of many other characteristics like intelligence, curiosity, and creativity. If you don’t know (or don’t care) about the difference between your and you’re then we have to wonder, what else don’t you know or care about? Good grammar is fundamental to good communication and good communication is fundamental to business success.

I just found an article by Kyle Wiens that makes this case better than I ever have. It’s posted on the Harvard Business Review Blog (HBR Blog) and titled, “I Won’t Hire People Who Use Poor Grammar. Here’s Why.” You can find it here.

 

Writing a Winning Resumé

I’ve read thousands of resumés. Most of them look alike and sound alike. They’re boring and they all run together in my head. Everybody wants to follow the rules of resumé writing … so they just come across as rules followers. That’s fine if you want to work in a rules following organization. However, I don’t want to hire rules followers. I want to hire people who can  think differently and come up with insights that I might never find. I think most hiring managers want something similar. So, how do you break through? By not following the rules and by writing an advertisement, not a history lesson. That means you need to stand out and you need to state a benefit. Learn more in the video.

My Social Media

YouTube Twitter Facebook LinkedIn

Newsletter Signup
Archives