Was the Guy Who Won the Client’s Audition Better than You?

This post fits loosely in the training and development category, I admit, but I think within this tale runs a thread that affects how we should look at people we are training. In this case, we are talking creative types, voice-over actors.

Granted, voice-over actors need training or coaching as much as anyone. Here a case is being made that the voice-over actor who gets the job must be “Better than me. Better than you.” The point being, if you don’t get the job, you need training. My answer, and not everyone is going to like this, is sometimes. But also sometimes you do need training to improve. And, sometimes it is the answer, but it should be self-motivated or pointed out by those you trust and not necessarily the guy on the street.

It's important to remember that not every opportunity that was missed was due to your own inadequacy. Is a stranger more qualified to give you feedback than someone you know? Both have advantages and disadvantages. Someone you know may be too kind; someone you don't may have another agenda.

The opposing voice says, “We are reminded that human nature has always been inclined to denigrate what it cannot have.” I agree somewhat reluctantly. But let’s not denigrate the actor by telling him he’s not good enough because he didn’t get the gig; it’s more complicated than that.

I suspect the voice-over artist espousing these words is not only a reasonable successful voice-over actor, but a coach–a trainer of voice-over actors. He is entitled to his perspective, but I think it may be colored by his business angle. I think it is often better to sell to the client who needs you rather than you to “hard” sell the client you need.

The voice-over professional, let’s call him Jim, goes on to say, “…isn’t it also true that when you win an audition, you believe that there was more than luck involved? You used your talent and skill, you strategized, you hustled, you paid attention to the directions, you ‘got it,’ you communicated your offer clearly, and you won. My point is that some people win a much higher percentage of auditions not because of the luck of the dice, but because they are better.”

I don’t agree on the basis of too many subjective factors—even Jim, the subjective professional voice-over coach and trainer.

Here’s my side. If you aren’t good enough, you wouldn’t even get the audition. Better does not equate to different. Professionals will get the training and practice they need. The big moneymakers will work toward that end. Others may work to be more than they are. I want to work. If I’m good enough for the audition, I don’t need my “competition” saying I didn’t get the gig because I wasn’t good enough.

If we got the audition, someone who knows us thinks we are good enough. Just because we didn't win the audition, doesn't mean we need to rush out to find someone to correct our mistakes. If we think about it, we may know the answers ourselves. Or, it could be we weren't selected because of issues totally unrelated to talent.

Maybe my performance was inadequate in some way, but I’ll leave that evaluation to others, a coach, a trusted colleague to give me the advice–if I ask for it. I’m professional enough to know I was “off,” and that’s up to me to correct. There are a lot of people getting gigs, but not just because they are “better.” Some actually get gigs because a producer selected the wrong guy and didn’t want to admit the mistake. Some get the gigs because they know someone.

Hate to tell you this, but sometimes it’s just salesmanship or the theory of if you ask ten times you get at least one, yes. I know some guys who used to apply it to pick up women, too. The more women they asked, the more they were likely to succeed with the pick-up, no matter how lame. The quantity versus quality thing. Even as an actor, I allow myself three shows that I’d really like to do in a theatre I’d really like to do it and audition. One out of the three is usually successful, but I have weighted my choices and options so that my success is driven as much by what I want–not necessarily the potential monetary reward–which is the main gauge some people use to measure success. The same old story. Not “sour grapes”—”just the facts, ma’am.”

Should I take a class or find a coach, who I don’t know but who must be better because he has an impressive website, just to feel I have improved? If I’m working, I’m proving it. I know who I am and I know my limitations.

Ever hear a “bad” voice-over? I’ve heard plenty. I wondered how the guy got the job–not why I wasn’t enough for it. Sometimes the people selecting a “voice” make mistakes. I started listening to an audio book that is being read by a gentleman with deep, modulating voice that I find unappealing and so stereotypical I won’t continue listening. Let’s not talk about the fact he can’t distinguish characters very well. Somebody wanted his voice for the Michael Crichton book. Maybe they just like it deep, not best.

I do like the idea of getting together with other voice-over artists (a good training idea) as Jim suggests, but it seems the really serious, experienced ones (the ones we could learn the most from) are working, always working and evaluating, not necessarily others but themselves. It’s always good to support each other; I don’t think any of us shrug off that we didn’t get the job because it is “anything but us.” On the contrary, our undeveloped talent may be one of many factors. Or, just a feeling the client had that someone else was a better company or demographic fit. Those other factors, remember?

I agree there is a need for coaches and trainers just as there is a need for any communicator who wants to improve, learn tricks of the trade, be told “you do this really well, and this not so much,” and whatever else we need to know. I am one who actually tells people I may be a costly alternative at this point when they may be more in need of the basics more cheaply delivered by someone else. I’m not independently wealthy, but I like to think I take clients I can really help rather those in need of some basic acting classes who are going to resent me later for charging so much for what they could have had at a community college.

Here’s the best way to help me, the voice-over actor: get me the job, help me with the interpretation and delivery, and assure me the client is going to like it.

It’s not possible.

It comes back to the basics.

Don’t promise what you can’t deliver.
Don’t set yourself up as the Czar of the Biz if you aren’t really “all that.”

It’s not a marketing game of who can get the most clients. I prefer client loyalty myself, and client recommendations because I was fair, honest–and good. Professionals of any kind know when they need help, but it’s a fit like anything else. We all do better when clients trust us. End of tale.

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

February 8, 2011October 1, 2022

Purposeful Stage Movement for Trainers, Speakers, Actors…

A-young-woman-working-at-the-customer-service

Although we could be seen as going off the training and development reservation on this one, once you read the entire article, you’ll agree we are actually too close to the subject not to bring it up. This blog is probably the most direct way of saying I think training, public speaking and acting are related–at least in terms of movement on stage.

Moving with a purpose makes your audience take notice. Without purpose, your movement is distracting and annoying--the last thing you want to do to your audience.

Public speaking is certainly coming into vogue as a performing art. Comedians, motivational speakers and others who inspire their audiences certainly give performances on stage. Some would argue everything that takes place on stage is all theatre. We may disagree with that notion, but that’s for another article. So, who are the critics and coaches if they aren’t other comedians and public speakers? The same people who are involved in the performing arts: actors, dancers, and singers are also coaching non-actors, including public speakers and trainers as I do, in the areas of communicating effectively with an audience.

Acting, singing, and dancing do have at least one thing in common when it comes to performance. They are all performed on a stage to an audience and involve movement. Now, add trainers, speakers and virtually anyone else who moves on a stage in from of an audience.

Many of the people in the business of motivating or providing inspiring speeches or presentations for corporate and business leadership may think more in terms of planning movements and gestures. Not done well, it comes off artificial. We know that actors and dancers must move with purpose on stage; singers move to show emotion, too, even if that movement doesn’t include dancing to the music. It is the same for comedians or professional speakers.

Strategies or plans to move around the stage can lack the fluid motion of natural movement. If you are speaking to an audience, and you don’t have to be a traditionally thought of performer, keep in mind the way you interact with your audience is based on your passion, your audience and subject matter. Look at general areas of the stage as points to reach your audience (all of your audience) on as many levels as you can; that means you may come down to them to get closer, or keep your distance by being upstage to take in the whole room. You may have to move to a side of the stage if you’re on a thrust stage. Imagine doing a speech in the round. It’s possible.

You should be led by those in your audience who seem to beckon for your attention. You’ll see it; you’ll feel it. Be careful not to wander the stage; it is distracting from the audience when your focus should be on them. In fact, if you want to make a strong point three steps forward will alert the audience you are about to say something important. When making an important point, center stage is your strongest area on the stage, but you don’t want to live there.

Just as a theatrical director looks at the stage to see the areas of strongest impact for the room for the audience and sets the stage for the scene, so should you. You may own the stage, but you are there to interact and communicate with an audience. Try not to leave anyone out. Now, Arthur in the musical CAMELOT moves to a specific point on the stage to punctuate a point. That’s a strategy. However, play it for fun or it won’t be effective. Want to make your audiences feel you really know what you’re doing, even without visual aids? Find an appropriate moment to go right to them. You’ll enjoy it and so will they.

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

February 1, 2011October 1, 2022

Training Assessments: Personality Counts

A-male-speaker-with-his-audience-in-a-conference-room

Personality theory and tests are useful also for management, recruitment, selection, training and teaching, on which point see also the learning styles theories on other pages such as Kolb’s learning styles, Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences, and the VAK learning styles model. — Personality Theories, Types and Tests at www.businessballs.com

Believe it or not personality really does count when it comes to training. And, it works both ways. The trainer, as we know is full of personality, passion and knowledge. The trainees or audience, filling their chairs with a multitude of experiences, passions and information they have already gathered on the trainer and training topic.

This article should be a companion piece for Don’t Assume in Training because it can easily come under the heading of “I knew that, but…” and “I can’t do anything about it.” But I think you can.

As most of you know, if you’ve been following this blog, I wasn’t born a trainer. Actually, none of us were, but in my innocence as an actor and speaker first, then writer, and finally trainer, I realized early on there were important critical elements to develop effective training: design, analysis, assessments, evaluation. From this perspective, I think, the recognition of personality is an important factor in analyzing your audience emerges in any speaking situation; and therefore, essential as well in the training environment.

We sometimes train on personality types and personality predictors of behavior. How many of us consider the personality types when we are training? Even a simplified version of Myers-Briggs would help tremendously in how we might present our material. We would know better how most of our audience processed information. But, why is it necessary to focus there. How much you direct information in a certain way would depend on the percentage a particular personality type. Right? Or, do we mix it up to make it easy? Okay, loaded question. How do we train Type A or Type B personalities?

While I would love to give in depth personality tests to truly “know” my audience or classroom of trainees, I don’t think it terribly practical. So, I am totally open to your suggestions here on getting the most analysis in the simplest manner possible. There is Training to Read Minds…well, you know how that goes.

I think it is best to know your audience pretty well, be it through a simple questionnaire provided to the training manager or planner, or a more involved technique. Simple is more likely to be accomplished than the complex unless you have 100 percent cooperation of management. That questionnaire can incorporate questions that operate along the nature of a simple personality profile are of tremendous value to trainers as communicators.

Here is where whatever information we can learn about our audience, either discreetly or asking in public, are invaluable. Experiences, ages, sex, interests, work level, purpose of training, human resources ability to hire–fire and promote, financial stability, economic stability of local community, major issues important to employees, etc., are all incredible indicators of personality.

Here’s your chance to talk back and tell me what you think. Suggest simple tests or what you do as a trainer to assess your audience before you train. How much time do you take? Who is involved in the analysis?

Check out the article: Personality Theories, Types and Tests for more than my cursory look at personality tests and training.

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

January 20, 2011May 12, 2022

When Learning Takes Place: PowerPoint vs. Presenter

A-presenter-speaking-and-using-PowerPoint-for-her-presentation

Running a presentation skills seminar at a large federal agency’s training forum, I was impressed by how much learning takes place when participants share ideas in a Power Point-free environment.

I found this post on my LinkedIn Training and Development group and some of the responses given by professional trainers and speakers gave me pause. The responses were simple and direct answers of knowing when learning takes place. There can be clues, but no one really knows when learning occurs. This is what gave me pause. And, when I “pause,” I blog. It’s a bit like cursing at a motorist who cuts in front of you, making you drive defensively by applying your brakes before you really want to. Some people curse, I blog.

Many of the responses to the post above, I’m sure, were thoroughly thought out before being taken to the pen, but in the process of trying to sound intellectual and knowing, the responders lost something basic. At least I found something missing. Maybe the forums, while great formats for discussion, are not so good for the final answers. Are we ashamed to say that learning and effective communication are complex, and we don’t have all the answers? More than likely, I think, some of the writers were lost in trying to find one perfect approach to learning. Finding a simple, guaranteed approach to learning for all participants is no simple task. In my mind anyway. It is enough just to communicate well.

Here’s my perspective:

As trainers, we naturally have to be concerned with the amount of information that is actually absorbed by the people we are training. The same goes for presenters. Learning takes place internally. We can only facilitate it. To try to find a way to ensure it happens is something akin to plugging into our brain’s learning center and transferring information. As far as I know, that’s still science fiction.

We could be closer than I know technologically and I could be wrong, but aren’t we trainers and presenters better served concentrating on what we can to facilitate learning be it through inspiration or motivation, or by outlining the details to make them more accessible? Look back to my post on Training Sessions and Seminars: Who Should Do Most of the Talking? We can try to be all things to all people, but certainly not at the same time. I doubt we can be either, but being the best we can be (please pardon the cliche) is what we need to do. If you want to know what the audience has learned, give them a test, or…I don’t know…ask them. I do. It’s part of the communication process.

The impact of the knowledge presented is related to so many factors, all of which have to do with communication. Even the test is suspicious because of experimenter or tester bias, where the tested individual wants to please the tester and is, therefore, likely to give an answer that is expected rather than a true answer. Tester bias is a natural human behavior phenomenon that is very difficult to eliminate completely. Tell your audiences what you want them to get out of your presentation and there is a good chance they’ll tell you that’s what they got out of it.

Good communicators constantly look for feedback. I am a fan of PowerPoint but I know many a presenter who use it spoon feed information and think just because they present content on a visual, it is received, noted and remembered. A receptive and appreciative audience alone is no gauge.

I think some presenters and speakers think their every word is relished by the audience, evidenced by a laugh or a nod, and would be surprised to find out relatively little real information has reached them. Sometimes it’s not about information but inspiration, motivation, interest, a professional need to be in attendance, etc. I know trainers who do all the right things and are tuned out by their trainees who are not drawn to them as people, so even “chemistry” plays a part.

Those are my thoughts. What are yours?

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

January 14, 2011May 12, 2022

Courtroom Drama – Training Lawyers to Act

What does an actor have to teach an attorney? Acting, improvisation, communicating, moving on stage. Sounds like an acting class. Don’t be surprised. It is.

Most of us would agree a lawyer’s education is mostly about the law; but the practical application of law requires research, practice, experience and some knowledge of speech and acting skills that may not be taught in depth in most law schools–just few classes on courtroom procedure, some mock trials, etc.

Those who will be spending time in court could use training in public speaking, interpersonal communication skills, social psychology, etc., and some lawyers do take those classes in college because they know they will be important someday. For others, even if they took the courses, they may have blown them off, seeing them as “fluff” classes. We’ve all done that. You only have so much time, right?

“After all, I’m going to be a lawyer–a mouthpiece. I can learn all I need to learn in law school,” or words to that effect–or so they say.

Let’s face it. Not everyone is a natural communicator. Sometimes you need a different approach. In this case, we’ll start with acting principles. Actors have to make real what is conceived and written in a script. Lawyers take what they know to be the truth and convey that to an audience convincingly. If they can’t be convincing with the truth…

It’s all about knowing your audience, knowing your subject and knowing yourself. If you’ve ready many of my blogs you know that is my mantra. At the heart of every communication is a need for all three elements. While some people are more natural communicators, others with fine minds as well may not be. You know about getting the training you need to do the job. Those who do get the training and learn will succeed. And, so it goes here as well if you are lawyer needing to communicate the law and persuade the jury to your way of thinking, a way any audience can understand.

So, how does a litigator gain those communication skills that help him win over a judge and jury, how does an attorney present depositions to court, help a witness remain credible, even though he or she may be scared to death of being on the courtroom stage. Believe it or not, he hires an actor. Often that actor may be partnered with an attorney or someone with a similar background.

In the Philadelphia area, I discovered an equity actor and educator, Celeste Walker who teaches a course she developed called Courtroom Drama, which almost sounds like a theatre genre, but in reality her course is designed to loosen up attorneys and prepare them for the practical uses of confident and effective communication in the courtroom. She uses theatre exercises, warm-ups, improvisation and other methods leading up to storytelling. After all, in a courtroom, it is all about storytelling.

“It’s also about audience,” Walker says.

“An attorney can’t talk to a jury if he or she isn’t aware of who makes up that jury. He has to win that jury’s trust and he’s not going to do that if he talks down to them or can’t look them in the eye while he is talking to them.”

It’s all about good communication. Yet, another job an actor can do–besides acting.

An interesting aside. I was surprised to learn that Celeste had actually performed a scene from The Verdict with Paul Newman in 1994 while she was in graduate school. Newman’s much acclaimed film, The Verdict, came out in the ’80s. Celeste holds a Master of Fine Arts Degree in Acting from The Actor’s Studio Drama School at the New School University in New York.

This isn’t just a Philadelphia phenomenon. Look around. There are other actors/educators engaged in the same business. If you are an attorney and are interested, look up the acting and presentation coaches in your area who might have a similar course to suit you. If you aren’t an attorney, but anyone in need of good communication skills in the course of doing a good job, check out those acting and presentation coaches anyway.

Good trainers are good communicators, and it can work both ways. We all need to be able to talk to and understand each other. In court, a misunderstanding has a lot of impact. The same goes for hospitals. Do doctors need training in communicating to patients and colleagues? Hmm. Maybe that’s my next blog.

As always, comments, suggestions, praise if you think we’re doing something right here, as well as links to your blogs and websites are always welcome.

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

January 7, 2011March 27, 2023

Training Solutions for the “Dumbest Management Concepts of All Time”

Re-training-staffs-as-a-means-of-downsizing

I just read an article on BNET, an online resource like the Free Management Library–no disrespect intended to FML, nor am I promoting BNET. I get my inspiration from all over. The article was titled the The 5 Dumbest Management Concepts of All Time.

The author says, “These five commonly-held management concepts are responsible for most of the bad management practices around the world.”

The rest of the article is an invective of management practices: downsizing, leadership, human resources, empowerment, and business warfare. Although I disagreed with the style of the author in writing this diatribe, I found an opportunity to look at business to see where some people could be coming from. The article had many applauding his case, but I think these people had been there personally and it affected their judgment. I’m smiling, but it happens to us all.

Those of us in training have the opportunity to see what may be wrong in the corporate culture and help employees, managers, and leaders alike improve their lot, while also helping the company and work toward changing the corporate culture.

Personally, I find invective to describe organizational failings hardly funny. I’d rather think about solutions.

It’s not the fault of individuals but an entire culture based on money and success based on who has more of it. This is obviously a piece about the author and other people who have had unhappy careers in business. The author made his point, but there are exceptions to every rule.

I’ve had people I was proud to work for and with, had personnel that really tried to help with my career plans, and had a boss who helped me achieve my goals even though it meant losing a “resource”–me. I don’t think this article is really about bad management concepts, but rather the corporate culture that made these Frankenstein creations, caring more about the bottom line and people are indeed just a resource, and not people.

As trainers, it is our duty and obligation to see to it everyone is served with what they need to succeed. Do that and all is great for the company, and hopefully consumer who is also well served.

Take these “bad” management concepts and look at them for a training solution:

Downsizing? Re-training for another job–even if it’s outside the company shows the company cares. A re-hiring of this person at a later date may be possible and he will have new skills the company may be able to use. And this person is probably not going to bad-mouth the company because he was downsized.

Leadership? If providing leadership training falls on deaf ears, perhaps, training means educating boards of directors about the corporate pitfalls and leadership monitoring.

Human Resources? HR personnel can be trained to be customer service friendly, to actually work for employees, rather than the company. I have seen it and seen it be a great retention factor. Helping someone direct their career within the company means the best use of that individual, not so much training in the traditional sense but certainly apart of it.

Empowerment? The biggest problem is not training people to empower themselves but to train others to allow it and use these empowered individuals to the company’s advantage. One empowered and enthusiastic employee is a team player and one less employee to watch closely.

Business warfare? That one I think just happens, but if we train our leaders right, concentrate on character, vision and those other traits that make company leaders great and companies thrive, who knows? It’s hard to do battle with a healthy, successful company. Business warfare will be a thing of the past.

Take care of people as you take care of yourself, and some people will do anything for you and the company, often for nothing.

If the corporate culture is flawed and I’m sure it is, we can still do our part cut down on the negatives, ensure the company’s most important resource is able to serve the company, and take an active part in molding that culture.

We all have our jobs to do. You can’t be unhappy with yourself if you’ve done your best. Complaining doesn’t solve anything, but people who look for ways to achieve positive change are heroes to the company. Unsung maybe, but I can live with that. Can you?

Happy training from the Passionate Communicator at Acting Smarts. Know your audience, know your subject and know yourself, and you’ll have the success only you can make as an excellent communicator (and trainer).

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

January 6, 2011March 8, 2023

Training to Prevent Customer Service Disasters–Whose Fault is It Anyway?

We all know the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is engaged in the important work to prevent customer service disasters involving extreme loss of life, and because its job is so important to us, the TSA as the big dog in charge has been getting the brunt of the criticism for any appalling incident involving airport security.

The administration even gets blamed for the headache-painful changes to our travel routines that have nothing to do with security–except we have to go through it at some point.

This is not yet another TSA bashing, but an article about the need for effective customer service.

There is a problem lurking about that can impact that very critical job performed by the TSA. I’m talking about customer service disaster that involves, (the same ones the TSA is getting the brunt of criticism for) that are really the fault, not only of the TSA but of the airports and the airlines as well. These minor disasters can distract TSA employees from the more serious application of their due diligence.

While I don’t believe the customer service disasters are all the administration’s fault just because a situation involves security, it does bear some responsibility as an organization to treat bad customer service with respect from the support team, as do those it is partnered with—the airlines and airports.

On a recent trip over the holidays, my family and I were treated with TSA employee “hospitality” as we expected. Naturally, we didn’t like the invasion of our privacy and dignity, but we understood its necessity. And, there is no denying that we were treated politely by TSA staff. However, our vacation “disaster” needn’t have happened at all had all the partners involved done their respective jobs with the proper respect that should be accorded to any customer base.

This article is about a terrific opportunity for trainers to offer airports and airlines training in something they seemed to have forgotten.

Airports and airlines once noted for fine customer service agents, seem to have lost the respect of their customers. Why else would the airport not be prepared to bring handicapped passengers through security–or do what they must to assist customers who need extra help from the customer service reps, thereby making the experience more pleasant for those who don’t need assistance but still have to stand in lines?

Fort Lauderdale does a lot of vacation business, and has a large aged population, so you would think people in wheelchairs and walkers, and small children, must be regular customers in the Fort Lauderdale Airport. That being said, the airport and those who work there should know their age and handicapped customer loyalty well. This was not my experience.

What I witnessed was that, when faced with the fact that “these people” travel, too, airport employees treated them with disdain because they hold up the lines. Let’s not forget to growl and hiss at the children who also find Florida with their parents a fine vacation spot or jumping-off spot to activities in the Caribbean. While we’re at it, let’s disparage the TSA employees, blaming them as well as customer needs for delays.

While the TSA employees were as pleasant as they could be, with a little help from the airport or airline personnel in the environment where they must do the important job of security, they could have done that job much better for the customer service failure.

Procedures should be in place by the airport to bring people who need assistance through security, not pass them by, but assist them to smooth the process. How about a separate line for children? With someone who can talk to children without scolding or scowling (maybe some TSA), but the airport could help.

My 82-year-old mother-in-law in a portable walker/wheelchair combination was placed in a small boxing ring box, while security figured out how to make a woman stand who couldn’t stand without being in extreme pain, and the rest of us looked on embarrassed for her, hoping her incontinence would not take the opportunity to make itself obvious. Two TSA security guards were needed to make sure she didn’t run away. Do I need to mention how ridiculous that is? I suppose she could have been faking it. While we were on the cruise, she had to be playing the slots and run around the ship while we were sleeping. All the other times we wheeled her around the ship, the airport and anywhere else she wanted to go.

I’m sure customer service training is needed. There has got to be another way.

Making matters worse, we were sent to the furthest terminal—the wrong terminal and almost missed our flight because no one thought assistance was needed after we passed the evil TSA post. Mercifully, they held the plane and transported us via the carts to the proper terminal; the one we started in. Grit teeth. It’ll be over soon and we’ll be on vacation.

In Philadelphia, Mom was put in a bulkhead seat where she had a little more legroom. In Fort Lauderdale, we were on our own, despite many calling weeks ahead and trying to work out a solution. She sat in an aisle seat and cried silently in pain. Nobody seemed to care. She has a lot of trouble bending one leg. I suppose the airline’s attitude is “if you can’t manage the cramped quarters, let them eat first class.” Obese people beware. We’ve already seen how you might have to buy two seats. What if your size was the norm? I guess the airlines would have to adjust or no one would fly. But unless you can hire a private jet, you’re stuck with the only game in town. Money talks if you are disadvantaged, too.

Guess the economy has made the airlines numb when it comes to passenger comfort. Gone are the days of flying the “friendly skies;” my friends are on the ground. Coming home we waited until everyone else got off first–except for a couple with a small baby, who had brought a carrier to sit in the seat. We didn’t want to hold anyone up. Nor did the airline attendants come to assist, taking bags down or moving them to the front of the aircraft. Not in their job description. Maybe it should be.

Trainers, please make sure that airline personnel are not tactless enough to remark in front of passengers, “Gee, I just don’t know what is taking them (us, the passengers) so long to disembark.” Actually, she said, “leave,” with all the vehemence of “get lost.”

Finally, we disembarked, struggling to push Mom up the steep ramp to the terminal by ourselves, to hear the insensitive comment. We asked as soon as we arrived if we could have a cart to take us to baggage claim. We know we need assistance even if no one else does.

Three carts passed us by as we were obviously waiting for something and finally, in frustration, I chased down a manager who confronted the cart drivers who stopped not 30 feet away. Much argument–excuses really– about, “it’s not my job.” And, “I came by and no one was here.” Really? Where could we go and not stand out—a family of six with a red wheelchair? One comes back after obviously being chewed out and wants to see our boarding passes for some unknown reason; we are after all leaving the airport. We should have taken his number, but all we wanted to do was go home. Top it off, the cart couldn’t take us out of the terminal so without a word he drove us about 20 yards and stopped. We were on our own again.

A long post, I admit. I write a lot when I’m steamed, and I’ve had time to calm down. I saw here, not a situation unique to us, but an experience that need not have happened to us or any other family had three organizations, partners in a multi-billion dollar business, provide adequate good customer service and poor customer service training to anticipate and resolve the simplest of issues.

I’ll bet the airports would like to figure out how to re-direct people who have gone through security back to the restaurants and other vendors at the front of the airport. If people are like me, they want to get to their gate first, and then if they have time to shop or eat… If money talks, maybe that is a way to get the airports, at least, to take a serious look at customer service with the airlines and TSA, and how to achieve that goal of getting people back through security to the main vendors and back again with little hassle and time spent in the same page. If airlines did their part to help, more of us might like to fly the “friendly skies” again.

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

As always I look forward to your comments, especially those related to training and development. On those and related issues, involving communication and training, contact me through my website: http://www.actingsmarts.weebly.com.

January 2, 2011May 12, 2022

Training Using Life Simulations

Group-of-people-seated-on-the-front-row-of-a-training-session

I recently had the pleasure of reviewing Naomi Karten‘s book on Presentation Skills for Technical Professionals and found it an excellent resource, not only for its intended audience but for others who may be giving technical presentations such as trainers. Naomi Karten, the author of several books, including Presentation Skills for Technical Professionals: Achieving Excellence and Changing How You Manage and Communicate Change: Focusing on the Human Side of Change, is my guest blogger today. You’ll appreciate her insight and guidance on facilitating learning through mimicking real life simulations in the classroom.

To Facilitate Real Learning, Use Experiential Training

by Naomi Karten

No doubt, you’ve attended training sessions in which the instructor reads from bullet-point-laden slides to students seated in rows, like second graders. For some topics, this passive approach to training is appropriate. But for helping people develop critical organizational skills such as communicating effectively, building relationships, and managing change, nothing beats experiential training.

Experiential training revolves around the use of simulations—activities designed to mimic real-life situations. In participating in these activities, students learn about themselves and others, and because they are fully engaged rather than passive listeners, what they learn tends to have staying power.

Here’s an example of a simple simulation that I’ve used dozens of times in my presentations on managing change. After introducing the topic and offering some initial comments, I ask everyone to gather their belongings and move to a seat that’s at least two seats away from their present seat.

When people get settled, I ask for their reactions to being asked to move. Keep in mind that these are people who lead (and experience) large-scale organizational or technological change. Surely, something as simple as changing their seats would be a minor matter. Or would it?

Here are some typical responses:

I didn’t want to move. I liked where I was.

It seemed like a fun thing to do.

I had the perfect seat and I wanted to stay there.

My seat had a bad leg. I was glad to move.

It seemed silly.

I resented having to change where I was.

I didn’t understand the purpose, but it was fine.

I got here early to get the best seat and you made me move.

I was thinking of refusing to move, but finally I went along.

The presence of so many different reactions, from resentment and anger to eagerness and curiosity, is an eye-opener for those who assume everyone else must have had the same reaction they did. This range of reactions beautifully sets the stage for my information on how people experience change and what that means for change leaders.

About a half-hour further into the presentation, I ask people how they are now with their new seats. The woman who said she had the perfect seat and wanted to stay there admitted that her new seat was just fine. Others voice similar comments; though they may not have been eager to move, they adjusted to their new location. Their realization of the change process they just experienced enables them to join me in identifying guidelines for reducing the duration and intensity of the turbulence associated with change.

This experiential approach invariably helps people gain insights both into how they themselves respond to change and how they can better manage change in their own organizations. In addition, it generates some fascinating discussion. It’s full of learning for those present including, I’m happy to say, the presenter.

*******

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

Naomi Karten (www.nkarten.com) is the author of several books, including Presentation Skills for Technical Professionals: Achieving Excellence and Changing How You Manage and Communicate Change: Focusing on the Human Side of Change. Contact her at naomi@nkarten.com.

December 22, 2010May 12, 2022

Training Sessions and Seminars: Who Should Do Most of the Talking?

A-presenter-in-front-of-a-group-of-people-in-a-business-seminar

The Ongoing Debate Between Subject Matter Experts and Communicators

To most who have read other blogs by me, you will think you know my answer to this question. You might be surprised. In my usual style I will try to delineate why I believe as I do and why others disagree. As always I take the middle to begin with to say there are times for both to be effective in their own way. Now that I have said that, the debate can begin.

What I am really talking about is interest, focus and passion.

We talk about different ways people learn, process information, and deliver that information. If those things matter, what does a subject matter expert (SME) offer that a communicator does not? A little bit of a no brainer. Knowledge, of course. Specific knowledge. The communicator: general knowledge. What does the audience need? Specific knowledge? How specific? Is he or she doing research at the seminar?

Is it best to get the highlights and get back to the SME to clarify and add information not available or not enough time to deliver in the seminar? So maybe the seminar or training session is not the place to gather as much detailed information the SME has available or wants to give at one time, but the fact he was there made you come.

What if he were there to answer your technical questions instead of speak and make a presentation? We can leave the less technical details of introducing the topic and putting it in perspective for its audience to someone who specializes in doing that, a subject matter expert in communicating with an audience.

Communicators can boil a complicated subject to a level understood by many members of the audience. We all don’t have the same level of understanding or interests. I have spoken to high level audiences, even Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates, a Chinese delegation of political leaders, civic and industry leaders from around the country. In most cases, we should say these are not dummies, but I spoke on Air Force Military Logistics and the Industrial Military Complex, which I can assure you I am no expert; there were plenty of SMEs in the room to answer questions, but you need only one. And, as a communications expert (a public affairs officer, in this case), I was less likely to blurt out information of a classified or sensitive nature that I shouldn’t have.

Sometimes the overview is what matters, giving the audience time to think about what is said before applying it to their particular interest. I also spoke on the operations of the North American Aerospace Command complex inside Cheyenne Mountain and Air Force Space Division missions and projects. Now, again, I am no expert, but I was able to know enough to be credible and to encourage the use of SMEs for a more in depth view, most often the high-ranking man or women running the show on the inside. How’s that for credibility?

Most speaking opportunities or even training sessions are not intended to be the end all—all the information you’d ever want relayed. What I recommend is a look at what the audience needs and what they are likely to get at that moment. If you want your audience to be pumped up about learning new information on a topic it’s better to get a person who is passionate in a way lay people can understand. SMEs are passionate about their subjects, too, but may lack the ability to “dumb” it down enough for an audience. Communicators lack the specific knowledge, but good ones can lay it out for an audience and make them want more.

Now I welcome your thoughts and comments as always. Meanwhile, if you need a communicator, an SME in communication (and training), give me a call.

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

December 13, 2010September 30, 2022

Icebreakers – The Who, What, When and When Not to Do Them

A-woman-addressing-a-team-on-quality-management

Personally, I have never liked icebreakers. Just ask anyone you know who doesn’t like them and you’ll probably find an introvert. That’s me, too, an introvert. I derive my energy from quiet time alone, but my job is as a trainer. Focusing on my job and others is different from focusing on myself. So, as a trainer I use icebreakers when I have to, and there are times it is necessary.

When is that exactly? When you need to bring everyone’s energy to same level.

To do so will affect a similar level of learning. There are probably a multitude of other factors that exist that make this as an imprecise gauge (I did say “similar”), but when has teaching or training anyone been an exact science? If there are different ways that work best for us to learn as individuals, why not use the different ways we use to gain energy?

So, why icebreakers? Because there are those who will benefit from them: the extroverts, in particular–those who derive their energy from having others around them rather than reading a book or seeing a film. The icebreaker will bring them to a comfortable place, and, if we’re lucky, they may have gained some enthusiasm from their interaction with the others for the training ahead.

Icebreakers are necessary if only to charge a part of the group.

I use an indirect way to charge the part of the group that’s left. Here’s the sneaky part: I use the introverts to control the rest of the group during the icebreakers. I put them in charge and give them a specific job to do. There is no need for “forced” socialization for that group. It wouldn’t take, and that’s not part of the deal. The deal is training, right?

As an introvert myself, I am intimately aware that in a room of strangers and the “forced” socializing imposed by “breaking the ice” is simply added stress to an already anticipated pressure-packed environment. It’s not that introverts don’t like people, they do; it’s just more comfortable and easier to be the lone wolf. Quite frankly they’d rather not be trained by anyone at all.

We know the best learning occurs when our students or trainees least expect it so I like to keep them unaware of when that learning might occur. Seriously, we are preparing our learning environment and that includes the students and trainees themselves. My cadets at the U.S. Air Force Academy illustrated that for me on my first day of teaching. When I entered the room, the lead cadet called the room to attention and said, “Sir, the class is prepared for instruction.” I can live with that attitude for learning.

We don’t usually get that. In the corporate training room, it may appear that way on the surface. In reality, we start with room of opposing magnetic poles, and it is our job to make them stop opposing one another (and us) and focus that magnetism–that energy on learning.

Even a room of people who do the same jobs it is highly likely it will be at the very least a mix of introverts and extroverts. While those outward-looking individuals are more gregarious and seemingly ready to learn, the more inward-looking introverts are happier left alone to their own devices. I know those inward-looking individuals are not going to appreciate the intrusion of an icebreaker function.

So, rather than intrude, I let them intrude. The introverts I have identified or usually have identified themselves to me by the frowns on their faces become my helpers and thinkers, what they like doing best–use their own devices, and leave those who want to participate to be led by those who don’t. We’ve all done this before probably without thinking much about it. For example, when we let our class nemesis lead the class and thereby gained an ally.

Everyone is charged and happy. I’m ready to train. Are you?

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

For a look at the human side of training from my Cave Man perspective, please check out my book, The Cave Man Guide to Training and Development. Cave Man II and III are coming soon,