Have you ever been asked to provide feedback to a presenter? If so, how did you organize your analysis and feedback? Members of Toastmasters become skilled at giving, and receiving, feedback. I believe the ability to receive feedback is underappreciated. It is very valuable to have team members who are eager to consider feedback to improve individually, as well as collectively.
During 2015-2016, when I served as International
President for Toastmasters International, there were a great number of public
relations requests. There were lots of newspaper interviews, podcasts, some TV
and radio. One Wednesday in July 2016 I received a call from our lead PR
staffer Dennis. We had a brief chat and then he said the organization had a
tremendous PR opportunity. The Los Angeles Times, a well known and
well distributed publication, had asked Toastmasters to write speech analysis
and commentary about the acceptance speeches that were to be soon delivered by
the nominees for the 2016 U.S. Presidential election. He continued and said the
first acceptance speech was the next evening by the Republican nominee, Donald
J. Trump.
I was silent. Trump was already controversial
after comments about building a wall, and about some groups “not sending their
finest,” and with credible allegations about his behavior towards many women
coming to light. Dennis heard my silence and quickly said “no, no, this will be
good for us, we’re simply providing speech and performance feedback as we do,
in Toastmasters style. We’re not commenting on policy.”
We talked a little further, and I clarified and
then agreed to prepare a Toastmasters style speech analysis for publication.
Dennis said great, the speech would be Thursday night and I had to submit the
column within two hours of its completion. The following week I did the same
for Hilary Clinton’s acceptance speech.
Organizing For Speech Analysis and Feedback
On the Thursday evening, I watched the speech
online with some note paper in front of me. I listed some typical areas to
assess and wrote them on my page so I could organize my observations. My list
of observation areas included speech structure, gestures, vocal variety, eye
contact, and segment transitions. As I watched, I made notes detailing key
points and transitions so I could later analyze the flow and see how one part
of the speech led to another. Once the speech was completed, I reviewed my
notes, analyzed the delivery, and prepared my commentary. Once I was satisfied,
I submitted it to the Times within the two-hour deadline. Here is a link to the
content (may be behind a paywall).
Because I’ve been speaking for years, when I’m
watching a speaker, I usually perform some sort of analysis considering their
skills and techniques. Mainly I focus on the clarity of the message and how
well it was delivered, and hopefully received by the audience. I don’t
typically offer any feedback unless it’s requested, or I notice a glaring
opportunity for improvement or an outright error or miss. I’ll note that when
people become Toastmasters members, they’re implicitly indicating they desire
developmental feedback, and each receives feedback from a variety of people
over their tenure, some feedback publicly and some privately. And public
figures, based on position, have opened themselves up for commentary and forms
of criticism.
The Value of Structure and Experience
I was fortunate to have experience and some
structure for analysis and organizing my thoughts when preparing this speech
commentary for the Times. Structure is helpful in planning and
preparing presentations, and also in assessing speeches and then delivering
developmental feedback.
No comments:
Post a Comment