Friday, February 28, 2014

Glossophobia

A survey was conducted several years ago in which people were asked to name what they were most afraid of. Not surprisingly, such things as a debilitating disease or injury, the loss of a loved one, snakes, bankruptcy and death received a great many mentions. But the one happening that reportedly received the most tallies was public speaking or speech anxiety (glossophobia). Out of those results came a funny observation by comedian Jerry Seinfeld in which he mused that, if true, it is therefore quite likely the person giving a eulogy at a funeral in all likelihood would actually rather be the deceased. Funny. Right?  But is the same time, it also quite telling.


The results demonstrate just how intensely people want to avoid putting themselves in a position of public embarrassment Such a circumstance, one can surmise, is to be avoided at literally all costs. If one would literally rather die than speak before a room full of people, then the risk of one poorly representing themselves before others is, indeed, viewed as the most terrible of fates. Forget water boarding. Never mind electric shock. It would seem we have a new form of torture that surpasses all others: public speaking. Need a criminal to confess to a crime? Easy. Interrogation is not necessary. Simply have them stand up in front of a room full of strangers and talk about, say, how they spent their summer vacation.
Speaking before others is a key form of communication. In a class room, for instance, students are called upon to speak out nearly every day. At the workplace, it is not uncommon for employees, not just supervisors, to make known their views or share information in front of others. Do those afraid to do this have any problem cheering at a sporting event? I raise this question to suggest that such a fear might be more situational rather than across-the-board. In such cases, perhaps professional communicators can play a key role in helping those dealing with such an anxiety find their voice.

Tuesday, February 25, 2014

Kittens, Puppies & Pandas

World War II had its Big Three: Franklin Roosevelt, Winston Churchill and Joseph Stalin. In our current era of the Internet, we, too, have a big three: kittens, puppies and pandas. Each year, our current reigning trio generates literally millions of hits whenever they are featured in the form of You Tube videos, pictures or live-cams. In this time of heated debate, alienation and division, it turns out kittens, puppies and pandas are among the great unifiers of our time. Who knew? Nothing against the original Big Three, but I cannot imagine their generating nearly as many web hits or visits as the cuddly creatures that apparently so many of us hold dear today.


Perhaps a key reason for that is that while Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin were many things, no one accused them of being either warm or cuddly - at least in the same context as we view our current Big Three. World War II's  Big Three were serious men dealing with unprecedented challenges, including armed conflict, struggle, domination and death. Decisions they made were difficult and not without serious consequence. Choices they made affected human life and not always in a positive way. Our current Big Three does not carry such a burden. Not even close. Their lives are carefree. All kittens, puppies and pandas need do is simply be themselves. 


From a communication perspective, perhaps one reason kittens, puppies and pandas are universally popular is because one does not equate anything remotely serious about them. They represent love, gentleness and moments of bliss removed from the tension of our time. Men and women gravitate toward these critters because people desire such feelings as a way of better coping with a reality they view largely in a negative way. Thus, to communicate effectively, it is understandable that communicators tend to use symbols of happiness to help impart a particular message. While this is fine, it is important they not use our current Big Three to misrepresent the times in which we live.

Friday, February 21, 2014

Comfort Zones

While all of us may have a different notion as to what makes us comfortable, there is no doubt it is a feeling which we all enjoy and one to which we all strive. Feeling comfortable finds us in a special zone where we are relaxed, less tense or on-edge about that which surrounds us, and more receptive to the ongoing sounds and messages that comprise each of our environments. Bottom line: a comfort zone is a good place to be no matter the length of time of our visit. Further, it is a place to which we all want to return. Professional communicators know this This is why so many of their strategies are designed to create some level of comfort for its targeted publics.




As so much of public relations efforts are designed to persuade people to take certain action or support particular positions, a key challenge is to help those same individuals feel good about taking steps that represent change or departure. Specifically, campaigns designed to persuade often are geared to get folks to move from one comfort zone - one they know - to potentially one they do not. For example, a member of the public might be very happy - comfortable - with driving a certain model of car. Why, they understandably ask, should they switch to another? The challenge of the professional communicator is to answer that fundamental question in a way that suggests continuous comfort.  


Feelings of comfort can be physical, mental or both. In their messaging and outreach efforts, communicators seek to touch one or both of these buttons. They know being in a comfort zone encases one in a posture of safety. Who doesn't want to maintain that? Thus, in their messaging, communicators flood their publics they with an array of positive assurances, including they will be happy, continue to live within their budgetary means, be the envy of others, and be viewed as being upwardly mobile. Such feelings come from being in a zone of comfort.

Tuesday, February 18, 2014

Engagement

Engagement is a tough thing to achieve. No, I am not talking about the kind when two people commit or agree to marry. I refer to a different kind of commitment, one that represents a challenge for any professional communicator to achieve and maintain. Often, public relations practitioners are given the assignment of coming up with a campaign or outreach effort to, among other things, boost ticket sales, increase membership or  generate support for a particular cause. This means their goal is to motivate others - more often people they, at best, know only a little about - to take some type of action or adjust their opinion on a given issue. Neither are small things.


People, generally, are creatures of habit. We all tend to gravitate toward that which we are most comfortable. Once locked or settled in to a particular pattern or perspective, we tend to resist even friendly or non-threatening requests to alter our behavior. A good friend of mine and I, for example, meet nearly every month  for dinner at an Italian restaurant we enjoy. Our pattern is such we almost always order the same meal every time. This, of course, is no big deal except it might be for a public relations professional hired to stop us from requesting our usual order and begin getting something else.


It is this kind of challenge that communication practitioners are hired to meet. They devise sophisticated strategies to get us to switch brands of toothpaste, change our voting pattern, attend an event at a time when are normally at home lounging in front of the television in our favorite chair, or become interested in an issue to which we have not given any previous thought. Their quest is to elicit a level of engagement in us that many times requires our to step outside our comfort zone. No way is that easy. Nevertheless, this is probably the biggest challenge that public relations practitioners on most any given day.

Friday, February 14, 2014

Public Speaking Anxiety

I cannot prove this, but my sense is one thing most all of us have in common is none of us like standing up in front of an audience and speaking. The exercise is nothing if not daunting. A room full of people stare at us while we try thinking of not just the right words to say, but articulating them in a way that is understandable, coherent, and possibly touches on being profound. As a former press secretary and current teacher for a combination of over 40 years, I am someone who has talked a great deal in front of others. Nevertheless, I cannot think of one time when it has not been anything less than a real challenge.


Over the years, in many of my classes I have had students give oral presentations or reports. Some, not surprisingly, have done better than others. Some have been more comfortable or at-ease while others - many - have given the impression they would rather be having a root canal than dong what they are doing at that particular moment. I completely relate to their anxiety. I also marvel at their courage for doing something outside their comfort zone. Risking embarrassing ourselves before others is akin to walking a tightrope. One slip and the result is a serious fall. In the case of public speaking, the risk is at least a temporary fall from grace.


One obvious solution to such a scenario is simply not to do it. It is akin to having a fear of sharks and dealing with it by simply never going in the ocean. More realistically, two primary suggestions, as I see it, to contending with public speaking anxiety are: becoming very familiar with the topic on which you are speaking and practice and more practice. Being thoroughly knowledgeable on a topic gives one confidence. Without question, talking about something on which we have much information at our command can be quite uplifting. Then, as far as practicing goes, while even that may not make us perfect, with learning the mechanics does bring with it a sense of comfort.  

Tuesday, February 11, 2014

A Messy Challenge

Communication can be a real mess. A complicated one, too. If you do not believe me, then look at the transactional model of communication, as first put forward in 1970 by communication scholar Dean Barnlund.. Barnlund suggested that communication is not a ping-pong match where first one person - the sender of the message - speaks and then the other person in the equation - the receiver of the message - responds.  In their interaction, the two, Barnlund suggested, actually are not even close to being as orderly as one might think. This is because the sender and receiver are communicating all the time during the course of their interacting even though only one at any given time may be speaking.


Much of their transaction revolves ever-evolving assessing and perceiving of the other each is doing. According to Barnlund,  this entails six what I call "trains of thought" that the two who are interacting are thinking about themselves and each other.  These include: who each thinks they are; who each thinks the other person is; who each thinks the other person thinks they are; who the other person thinks they themselves are; who the other thinks the person with whom they are interacting is; and who the other person thinks you think you are. (I applaud any one who reads that last passage and who does not up cross-eyed for a few seconds.)


Without question, this paints of portrait of two people engaged in conversation, who on the surface may be doing a lot of smiling, laughing, nodding, etc., but on the inside are doing even more analyzing and sizing-up of the other. It is akin to swimming in the ocean and not seeing all the complexity that is going on beneath the surface. No doubt, we are complex beings whose internal systems rarely, if ever, shut down. For the communicator, this requires constant vigilance in terms of being tuned into the one with whom they are talking. Such is the challenge all of us face in our daily acts of communication.

Friday, February 7, 2014

A Juggler's Challenge

If you ever watched a juggler at work, you know one of their two big challenges is keeping track of the location of  the items they are juggling. (The other primary challenge is two-fold: keep catching them and keep  them in motion.) Should they take their eyes off the ball, plate, flaming torch or whatever it might be, the juggler in all likelihood will lose the rhythm of their items and probably end up dropping them. That, of course, is a juggler's worst nightmare. A fear of failing to keep track of all that is in motion is not unique to jugglers. It is something that keeps many professional communicators awake at night, too.



A perfect example are organizational spokesmen and women or press secretaries. Those holding down such a position are unique in the world of public relations. The great majority of these practitioners operate behind the scenes. They help arrange interviews and press events. Thus, they are often found standing behind the curtain while the person or persons they have prepped are out in-front. Press secretaries are different as it is they who are in the spotlight, taking questions and making public statements. In carrying out this responsibility, their challenge is two-fold: speaking to the facts of the current situation while not losing track of their client's long-term mission.




Often, the press secretary is called upon to answer questions and/or address a situation that has just occurred or a new decision or course of action about to be launched. Unfortunately, their responsibility does not end there. It is key that the spokesperson place this turn-of-events in the context of their client's overall grand vision. For instance, if a university elects to raise tuition, their press secretary provides all the details about the action while also providing an explanation as to how such a decision coincides with the institution's mission of providing its students with an education of the highest quality. Is this easy? Not always. But by being a good juggler, the communicator plays a vital role in helping the public better understand and support sensitive decisions.








Wednesday, February 5, 2014

Test of Time

I am like many throughout the world who admires the skill and dedication of the athletes who compete in the Olympics. These men and women, no matter their particular sport, are quite an inspiration and deserve medals just for making it as far as they have in a field each obviously loves. One of the big sources of enjoyment in watching the athletes compete comes from knowing that each is as the peak of their physical power. They are at their best. Indirectly at least, we in the audience benefit from the commitment that each athlete brings to their respective event.


Reality, of course, tells us that this time for the athletes is fleeting. They will not always be able to perform or compete at the level at which they are currently able to. As they age, if they want to remain even close to where they are today, then the athletes will need to train harder than ever as well as adjust to the natural decline of their bodies. There is a parallel between their challenge and the one that many communicators face in attempting to remain connected with various publics over extended periods of time. Establishing a connection is one thing, but devising strategies that help maintain such a connection is a different challenge. In many ways, it is one that can be even more daunting than the initial effort.


When a relationship, such as a marriage or business partnership, is established, a danger of complacency is always possible. Participants view the connection as being successful and, as a result, may conclude they no longer need to try as hard as they once did to ensure their bond remains strong and viable. This reminds of the line from a old country-western song: "The lovin' was easy, it's the livin' that's hard." Living requires just as much focus as loving. Therefore, communicators need to make note that when, on behalf of a client, for example, they have brought together their client and a particular public, such an achievement is only half the job. The other half revolves around keeping the two connected. It means passing the test of time.

Sunday, February 2, 2014

Even Speed Has Limits

Not too long ago I drove from Virginia to Texas (over 2,000 miles thank you very much) and must say enjoyed the view a great deal. The Mississippi River, downtown Oklahoma City and the hills of Tennessee were among the highlights of my trek. With all the political turmoil, episodes of violence and economic challenges that seem to dominate much of our country's headlines these days, we sometimes forget just how beautiful so much of the United States really is. Seeing part of it only reaffirms my desire to keep enjoying our country's landscape as often as possible. It tends to balance the weight of those negative headlines that tend to hit us over the head every day.


Driving, of course, meant I traveled at a fairly fast clip - certainly compared to those who took similar journeys throughout much of our nation's history. For them, traveling 20 or 30 miles in one day was quite an achievement. The fact we now have the capacity to go so much further in much shorter periods of time speaks volumes about how much we as a society have advanced. The intellectual and creative achievements of the men and women who came before us that enables people like me to drive from Virginia to Texas in approximately two days is quite impressive. Still, looking back on that drive, I am not totally convinced that faster is always better.


This applies particularly to communication. Sometimes, efforts to connect with others do not have to be driven by how quickly one does it. Any one of us, of course, can send an email to a friend and have them receive it in less than one minute. We can pick up the phone, call a loved one and be talking with them in a matter of seconds. Even "snail mail" allows us to connect with another in a matter of days. But speed has sits limits. Bonding with another person, for example, should not be treated as a 100-yard dash. It takes time to truly connect with another. At least it should.  In such a scenario, slow but steady does win the race.