Up Front Communication

Helping people and businesses through the art of communication

Analysing the interview: Justin Trudeau

The other day I was working with a client, and I gave him a section from a political commentary article to read aloud.  He glanced over the article, which was about Justin Trudeau and the recent Liberal Party leadership race.  We briefly chatted about Trudeau’s famous father and the current buzz around the newly elected Liberal Party leader.  My client said that he wasn’t too sure about Justin Trudeau;  I replied “I don’t think Trudeau is too sure about Trudeau.”

After we were done for the evening, I thought more about what I had said and why I said it.  After all, I actually know very little about the man, not having following his political career with much interest.  This man has many factors in his favour when it comes to establishing a high-office political career.  He is well-practiced: the Liberal Party has been grooming him for this for some time and he is already familiar with the glare of the media lens.  He is a young, fresh face for a new generation of voters.  He is tall, handsome, well-educated, and well-spoken with honed presentation skills – these give him the sort of charisma politicians need to sway voters.

My opinion was formed based on an interview between Peter Mansbridge and Trudeau which I watched the night before. There was something odd about that interview, something that made me feel that Trudeau is as yet too green in his career to be able to make a reasonable stab at the position of Prime Minister.  The feeling of unease came almost entirely from the way Trudeau spoke during the interview.

As I am a big fan of analysing performances to figure out why they have the effect they do, I will give you the analysis of the interview and how it affected my opinion of him.

In the interview in question (you can watch it here), I saw a young man  – a young man who is being called out by his opponents as lacking in experience and judgement – take on an air of erudite casualness that seemed more appropriate for the owner of a social media start-up than for a potential Prime Minister.  He sits far back in the club chair, which brings down the energy of the room and the viewers.  His shirt sleeves are rolled up, reinforcing an image that is more “Google-employee” than “party leader”.  I suspect the look was intended to radiate calm confidence, but for me the confidence came across as forced.  Casualness is not the same as confidence, and it looked as though he was trying just a little too hard, which made me wonder just how confident he really is.

Next was the manner in which he spoke.  He has a pleasant voice and uses gestures well.  I thought he spoke particularly well during the pre-interview segment, in which Trudeau and Mansbridge conversed while walking down an Ottawa street.  It could be that the physical activity of walking helped focus Trudeau’s energy.  During the sit-down interview portion, however, there was a marked change in the speech style.  His energy seemed to get the better of him and his rate of speech kept increasing as the interview went on.  He clearly called on his stage training in terms of breathing, but eventually the pace caught up with him.  By the end of the interview, I found his breathing distracting.  Additionally, his tone began to lilt upwards more and more often as the interview progressed.  The sincere passion that his voice had at the start was replaced with notes of dismissive incredulity.  Combine these two changes with eyebrows that were usually knit upwards, and I was left with the impression of a breathy, wide-eyed man making his first foray into local politics.  This does not exactly inspire confidence in this particular voter.

Initially, I was prepared to like what he had to say in the interview.  Unfortunately, by the end of it, I felt as though Trudeau himself was uncertain of what his new position of Liberal Party Leader meant to him.

I’m not writing off Trudeau as a politician just yet.  He is green, and it is possible he will grow to be a responsible official with sound judgement and leadership qualities.  It is impossible to determine his strengths and weaknesses based off of one interview given early in his leadership career.  That being said, however, it is worth noting how my reservations were developed.  If we understand why other people leave the impressions they do, it better enables us to figure out how we can give the impression we actually want.

 

What is your opinion of the interview?

Communicating Intimately #4: Intimate cues

Throw your audience a bone.

Really. Give them a clue, a hint, an indication that you are opening yourself up to an intimate exchange.  All the heartfelt intentions in the world won’t tell the audience you are open to them unless you give them some form of physical cue.

Note what I said there:  physical cue, not verbal cue.  This distinction is important.  We humans are very sensitive to the silent messages given through our facial and bodily expressions.  Words are secondary; telling someone repeatedly that you are interested or open will not result in intimacy if your face doesn’t match those words.  Actually, if your physical expression doesn’t match your verbal expression, the person you want to communicate intimately with will likely start to distrust you.  Incongruence tends to set off our alarm bells.

What sort of expressions help create intimacy?

1) Those that indicate interest in the person or people you are communicating with: focused gaze, slightly widened eyes, and a slight forward lean or cocked head are all cues of interest.

2) Those that indicate sincerity: emphasis with movement and physical energy with slight body tension show that we are investing energy in what we are saying.  That investment usually indicates sincerity; we mean what we say, otherwise we wouldn’t put so much effort into it.

3) Those that indicate vulnerability: an “open” position (chest unprotected by arms, books, etc.), shoulders down, head in neutral and throat exposed (as opposed to the chin tucked in, protecting the neck), hands visible, palms frequently displayed.  Intimacy exists when we allow ourselves to be vulnerable.  Physically demonstrating vulnerability instead of defensiveness invites people to be comfortable with us.

Being able to give these physical signals on cue is an exceptionally useful communication skill.  Ultimately, your goal is to give these cues in a manner that is still natural to your own communication style.  Get to know your own expressions: when you are interested, how wide do you open your eyes?  When you are being emphatic, how do you move your hands?  Do you always raise your right eyebrow when you find something intriguing?  Stand in front of a mirror and chat with yourself out loud.  Rehash a recent conversation that you wish you could have again.  Deliver that witty reply you thought half an hour after the moment had passed.  Deliver your Oscar acceptance speech.  See what your face and body do.  Then, re-create those expressions and practice them.  Get to know how your face muscles work and how your hands feel.  Now apply those expressions to new material such as a book you are reading.  Read out loud and apply your personal expression style to the text.  If you can only manage to do this in the bathroom with the shower running, go for it.  That’s usually where I practice.

Remember: our bodies communicate so much.  Intimate communication is free exchange; let your body demonstrate your desire for that freedom.  Don’t tell your audience how you feel – show them.  Even better, show them how they should feel.  They’ll respond accordingly!

 

 

The Joy of Euphemisms

Layered meaning makes conversation so much more interesting.  While plain-speak is generally the best way to conduct most business – after all, one’s goal should never be to stymie your clients or colleagues – there are opportunities where you can have some fun in a conversation and imply the Things that Cannot Be Said Aloud.  Euphemisms and layered meaning enables you to say impolite things in a manner acceptable to polite company.  It reminds me of the snide jabs exchanged across society dinners you read about in Jane Austen’s books.

The beauty of euphemisms is that they are remarkably adaptable to your needs.  You can dial the clarity, drama, or comedy up or down as needed.  Furthermore, the fact that euphemisms require interpretation means that you can give veiled opinions and allow the other person to make of it what they will.  When you can’t call someone an “unbelievable douchebag,”  you can say they are “determined and honest.”  Someone who feels the same way as you about said douchebag will understand exactly what you are getting at.  Someone who for some unfathomable reason likes that douchebag will probably acknowledge your comment as a fair observation on that person’s personality.

 

Coming up with good euphemisms requires a good vocabulary, a good sense of timing, and solid control and deployment of appropriate facial expression.  Delivering a euphemism with a deadpan voice and expression can result in a very different implication from one delivered in falsetto with a clenched tooth smile.    Because it can be easy to slip from a well-delivered euphemism to outright sarcasm and nastiness, understanding the mood of your audience or conversant and whether or not it is a good time to use this conversational tool is paramount.  I usually keep heavy euphemism use to situations that are relatively casual or light in tone.  I’ve also deployed them specifically to break tension and acknowledge elephants in the room without actually putting a neon sign over said elephant.  Attempting this in circumstances that require absolute plain speak and clarity would not be appropriate, nor would it be suitable in extremely serious situations.

If you want to improve your use and timing of euphemisms, I strongly recommend paying attention to classic stories of manners such as those by Jane Austen, checking out Oscar Wilde’s work, and watching lots of skilled comedians (I particularly like Rick Mercer, Jon Stewart, and Ricky Gervais).  Practice your vocabulary-fu by taking straightforward statements and changing the words around so you express the same thing in a completely different manner.  Then, practice doing so with different vocal intonations and facial expressions – preferably in front of a mirror.  Like anything else, you will improve with practice.

Have fun with euphemisms.  They are remarkably fun communicative devices!

Listen closely

I’m frequently asked what the most important skill in speaking is.  It’s pretty simple: listening.  I’m not being trite or spouting cliches! To be a good speaker, you must be a good listener.  You need to listen with your ears, eyes, and brain  – and not always in that order.  Really skilled communicators, really dynamic and engaging speakers are the way they are because actively and intimately listen to and observe their intended audience.  By giving his audience – be it one or many – his full attention, a speaker is able to figure out what the audience needs to perceive, needs to feel, needs to hear in order to adopt the speaker’s line of thought.

In short, the speaker has to know what his audience wants and how to connect the audience’s wants with his own desired outcome.  But outside of asking someone flat-out (and hoping that they actually know what they want and are answering truthfully), how can we figure out what their needs and desires are?

Again, you achieve this by listening. I use the word ‘listening’ to encompass visual information as well as auditory information because really listening to someone involves more than just sensory hearing.  It involves shutting off your own internal monologue so that you can take in as much information as possible while being sensitive about what it tells you about the other person.

People provide a huge number of clues about themselves by their manner of dress, their body language, their words, their voice, and more.  Are they conservative or trendy dressers?  Do they sound nervous or confident?  Are they making steady eye contact or regularly looking away? What is their voice quality? What sort of words are they using?  Do they seem forthcoming with information, or are they being reluctant or cagey with their answers?  Are they focused or distracted?

This can be done with an entire audience, albeit in a slightly different way.  You can get a ‘feel’ for an audience if you allow yourself to take in their group behaviour.  Is there a lot of shuffling or chatting? Are people focused on you? Are they leaning forward and interested, or do they seem aloof? Are people laughing in the right places or responding when you call on them?  How are they connected to one another, what commonality has brought this group together?

Listen.  Listen closely and carefully.  As I said, this is pretty simple, but like many simple things it isn’t easy.  It takes close attention, focus, patience, and practice.  The rewards, however, are powerful.