OnSpeechwriting

The Time is Now

It’s that time again. Time to think about sparking your speechwriting career. Time to think about how to take your speechwriting to a new level. Time to think about re-energizing your creative batteries, hearing solutions to age-old questions, and rubbing shoulders with some of the best folks in speechwriting today.

Yes. It’s time to make sure your 2013 budget includes a trip to the Ragan Speechwriting and Executive Communicators Conference.

Full disclosure: Yes, I’m speaking. In fact, if you register early, you can reserve a spot in my pre-conference workshop: The 10 Thorniest Problems for Speechwriters (and How to Solve Them).

But I’m just one of many speakers this year. It’s an all-star cast: Jeff Shesol (former Clinton speechwriter), the incredible Mike Long, Jill Giacomoni from Microsoft, Pete Weissman, Rosemary King, Colin Morehouse, Randy Lee, Rob Friedman and so many more. You have presenters from all aspects of writing. The international folks will be there, as well, with three presenters from Denmark. Did I mention David Murray of Vital Speeches will be speaking? And Steve Crescenzo?

So sign up. Now. Early. Reserve your spot. More to come later.

Required Reading for Speechwriters

Attention all speechwriters (and the leaders they serve): There is required reading for you this weekend.

Two great pieces on communications appeared over the weekend and if you missed them you missed a fantastic opportunity to learn about the importance of real, purposeful communication. The first talks about how to determine a key message in a speech. The second talks about how - and why - to connect that speech to a larger narrative.

When I speak about and teach speechwriting, I often encourage writers to begin with a simple 1-2-3 process:

1. Analyze the audience and determine what it’s needs are;
2. Determine your purpose for speaking;
3. Choose your key message - your narrative - carefully and accordingly.

These have to be taken in this order, by the way. One builds on the other. If you pick your key messages before you know what the audience needs – a mistake more common than you might believe – you waste a tremendous opportunity and risk alienating the audience. In fact, you will probably do more harm than good to you and your organization.

A common gaffe among many speakers is going to the podium with either A) too many key messages or B) no key messages or narrative at all. The result is a confusing jumble of words and speeches that may inform but do little else. They don’t creat understanding. They don’t reinforce values. They don’t change opinion. And they certainly don’t elicit action.

But you don’t have to take my word for it. Two illuminating pieces over the weekend reinforce this idea very eloquently.

The first is from the master speechwriter Bob Lehrman, the chief speechwriter for Al Gore and now a professor at American University. His opinion piece at The New York Times is a must-read for any one who even ocassionally writes speeches.

In this highly entertaining essay, Bob talks about how he got into speechwriting, the importance of story, why establishing and protecting ethos is critical and awesome power of simplicity. And he speaks with the experience of someone who’s fought the battles: “It also can be difficult,” he writes, “to make someone sound like Moses addressing the Israelites when you announce a three-point plan for reducing the deficit.”

I would encourage you to pay most attention, however, to his words on Monroe’s Motivated Sequence. He says it’s the most popular structure for political speeches and I have no doubt he’s correct. But it could be – and perhaps should be – the go-to structure for those in the corporate and not-for-profit sector as well. Why? Because it forces the speaker to go through the 1-2-3 process I outlined above and places the speech message where it should be: on the audience and its needs.

I call it choosing your own headline. If you fail to choose your own headline – by writing speeches with either no clear, audience-centric message or too many messages – you leave that critical task to the audience. That's a failure of purpose communication and a failure of true leadership.

The second piece is from The New York Times Magazine, a great piece of writing from Matt Bai. Again, the subject is how – and why – establishing your own narrative with the audience is crucial. Case in point: President Obama’s failure to do just that for four years.

Too often, leaders get caught up in the day-to-day. A speech here on health care. A speech there on trade. Another one on the importance of energy or national defense. As Bai points out, there is nothing wrong with that, expect when it’s unconnected to an overall narrative or storyline. In other words, it's fine to have great speeches but do the speeches - collectively - help tell a larger story that resonates with your audience?

David Gergen is quoted as comparing a leader’s need for a clear narrative to a clothesline: “You adopt your clothesline and then you hang your policies from it. They’re missing the clothesline.”

And when you fail to establish that narrative, you create a vacuum. And nature abhors a vacuum ... but only for an instance. Why? Because the moment you fail to fill that void with your own story, someone else will fill it for you. And why would anyone surrender their own narrative to someone else?

Two great articles. Two great lessons. Enjoy.

Learning to Write a Vital Speech - In 60 Minutes

The essential truth that speechwriters share is, “A speech is not an essay standing on its hind legs.” 

A great speech is so much more—and in an exclusive one-hour audio conference sponsored by Vital Speeches of the Day, I will show you the art and science involved in crafting a persuasive speech that connects the speaker with the audience.

You’ll learn:

• How to make speeches that connect with audiences—emotionally, intellectually, even spiritually—and why those connections aren’t just ideal, but actually crucial to a successful speech.
• The one best structure for virtually any talk. (No, it’s really not any more complicated than that.)
• How to use evocative language. The right way to use statistics. How - and when - to tell stories.
• Why less is always better than more.
• And why planning a speech is just as important as actually writing the speech.

By the time this conference is over, you’ll be able to take your speechwriting to an entirely new level.

And you won’t even need to take notes, because with your registration you’ll receive a FREE copy of my definitive speechwriting guide, 10 Steps to Writing a Vital Speech. That’s a 39.95 value—and a priceless professional asset.

The 135 Rule

Heres a question that comes up nearly every week from someone: How much do I need to write for a speech of XX minutes?

Seems like an innocent question. Unfortunately, reality and experience suggest otherwise.

My general rule of thumb on the length of speeches is to write – as a first draft – 135 words per delivered minute. Notice I said “as a first draft” and “general rule of thumb.” Exceptions abound.

In general the 135 Rule will get you in the ballpark. For a 20-minute speech, shoot for 2,700 words. For a 15-minute speech, 2,025 or somewhere around 2,000.

Problems arise on two big fronts. First, not every speaker is the same. I used to write for an executive from Mississippi. A great man, leader and gentleman who used to routinely deliver at 89.5 words per minute. Some of that was his deliberate, southern speech. But he also liked to ad-lib. I learned to build those factors in and adjust my copy. If I didn’t, he would exceed his time limit, and that has the potential to antagonize an audience.

When a speaker goes beyond their allotted time on a conference agenda, it not only frustrates the audience it makes it harder for them to hear the speaker’s message, especially the close. They’ve already built in a “the speaker will stop here” mindset and when the speaker goes past that – when they’ve violated that audience expectation – the audience tends to tune them out. (Going over your time slot is also a great way to make conference organizers upset, in case you were ever hoping to be invited back!)

Another CEO – also a great leader – was once clocked at 250 words per minute. Suddenly the amount of copy I had written for one leader was severly inadequate for the other. The good writer listens to the speeches, both past and present, and adjusts accordingly.

Likewise, speakers who are speaking a non-native language typically do – and should – speak a little slower than usual. Not only do the sentences tend to be shorter with more breaks between them, but the audience needs time to catch up as they adjust to any accent.

The 135 Rule lasts as long as the first practice. It’s great for a first draft but might need to be adjusted once the speaker delivers the speech out loud. Delivering the speech verbally – as opposed to simply silently reading it on paper or computer screen – is critical because we all read at a different pace than we deliver. Every now and then I’ll have a speaker say something like “I thought this speech was supposed to be 20 minutes but it took me only 15 to read through it.” It turns out they’ve read it on screen instead of delivering it.

So if you can be in the room – with a stopwatch – when the speaker practices, do it. Or at least ask them to time themselves. Have them go from beginning to end at least once. You’ll not only learn more about the speaker’s style and cadances, you’ll get great insight into how quickly they deliver. And the next draft won’t rely on the 135 Rule.

And if you have to make a choice of either writing too little copy or too much, remember this: Not one audience member ever got angry because a speaker gave them a little time back. It’s a small gift to be sure. But one they’ll appreciate and convey – with warm feelings – onto the speaker.

Here’s something new for 2012 on www.TheSpeechwriter.com: the five-question interview. Throughout the year, I’ll run a series of short interviews with leaders in the fields of speechwriting and executive thought leadership. Some you may have heard of; others perhaps not. But all of them will be people I’ve been fortunate enough to run across and who I believe can add to our understanding of speechwriting and executive communications. So welcome to the inaugural interview with executive visibility maven Terry Catchpole.

The image of a speechwriter whose only job is to write speeches is a bit old-fashioned. Yes, some still make a living doing that as a sole endeavor. But the role has changed over the years. It has expanded and grown as organizations have begun to understand that sometimes it’s not just what you say, but also where you say it and how that fits into a larger communications plan. And with that recognition has come new opportunities for speechwriters to widen their ability to help their organizations and their speakers. There are as many corporate types, for examples, with titles like “executive communications” and “thought leadership” on their business cards. And we’re working on not only individual speeches but thought leadership programs that maximize leaders’ time and energy in very deliberate and focused ways.

With that in mind, I’ve asked one of the leading experts in executive visibility to provide his thoughts on what it takes to more fully develop this other role. Terry Catchpole is Executive Chairman of The Catchpole Group in Boston. For 25 years, Catchpole has been working with companies (full disclosure: he works with Dow) to help them elevate their speakers’ profiles and to more fully develop their thought leadership programs. Although their specialty is sustainability, they are experts in helping organizations that are eager to expand the presence of their leaders.

1Q: Based on your experience, as well as on feedback from clients, how important is it for companies to have an executive visibility speaking program in place for its c-level executives?

1A: The short answer is that it depends on the executives, as some are just not comfortable in a public speaking role and do not feel that it is important for them in delivering value to stakeholders. For most companies and most executives, however, it  is a very important part of their overall corporate communications plan to have a well-considered strategy for having senior executives articulate a series of messages that map to their overall business objectives and for effectively delivering these messages to key target constituencies – customers, partners, investors, and, in some instances, the general public.

2Q: Many organizations have not even considered having an executive visibility speaking program. How would you recommend that they launch such a program?

2A: The best place to start is by identifying the messages that the company wants to communicate to its target constituencies. These “messages” cannot be warmed-over boilerplate about how terrific the companies’ products or services may be. They should be new, compelling, and relevant insights into their market – genuine “thought leadership,” in other words, not lagging-edge cliches trying to pass as such. Next they need to identify the best executive speakers to address facets of the messages set – the CFO or CMO will have a different perspective to share from the CEO, for example. Finally, identify their target stakeholder audiences and the forums where they can be found in attendance – deep due diligence in the conference world.

3Q: What is the most common mistake that companies make in launching an executive visibility speaking program?

3A: There are several. One, alluded to above, is thinking that your marketing copy passes for a thought leadership message, and failing to bring original insight with which you want to establish your executives’ stature as business leaders. Another is failure to cast a wide net in amassing a universe of conferences and other platforms from which your executives might speak and then to perform careful analysis as to the pros and cons of each – you can never have too many forum options or spend too much time researching and analyzing them.  Finally, perhaps the biggest mistake, is failure to respect the role of a conference organizer in understanding his or her attendees and what it is they want to hear from conference speakers – it might not be what you think they should hear or want to tell them. It is very important to be respectful of conference managers’ understanding of their attendees and be flexible in tailoring your messages to be synchronous with their agenda program plans.

4Q: Are there any big trends that you are seeing in trying to place client speakers at conferences and other speaking venues?

4A: Probably the most important development with executive leadership forums is the trend away from the traditional standalone, PowerPoint-driven keynote. What we are seeing instead are highly informal, unscripted sessions featuring three or four c-level speakers interacting with each other, the moderator, and audience members. Or a one-on-one “fireside chat” session with a CEO interacting with a moderator-interviewer, who could be a prominent business journalist or industry analyst.  The solo keynote is a dinosaur that, while never perhaps to be extinct, is seen less and less.

5Q: If you could provide just one piece of adv ice to an organization that is considering launching an executive visibility speaking program, what would it be?

5A: It may be fudging the question a bit, but I would say the one tip would be, “Respect the process” – but under that I would have sub-categories, including:  respect the fact that your “thought leadership” messages should be comprised of “thoughts” that are genuinely “leading” the dialog in your market, and are not lame and stale; respect the fact that conference managers do a lot of research on what their attendees want to hear, and be willing to work with them in providing content that adds value to their attendees’ experience; and respect the fact that your CEO will not always be invited to give a solo keynote presentation and should be prepared to consider participating in informal, interactive sessions with multiple participants  - all of whom should be of comparable stature in terms of title and company, of course.