WEBVTT

00:00:21.626 --> 00:00:25.335
One of the hottest topics
in courses and books nowadays,

00:00:25.336 --> 00:00:27.417
with regard to leadership communication,

00:00:27.418 --> 00:00:29.958
is the concept of executive presence.

00:00:29.959 --> 00:00:32.673
What does it mean? How do you define it?

00:00:32.674 --> 00:00:34.336
And can it be taught or learned?

00:00:35.436 --> 00:00:40.666
The Center for Talent Innovation
identified three main pillars of it:

00:00:40.667 --> 00:00:43.833
appearance, communication
skills, and gravitas.

00:00:43.834 --> 00:00:47.278
Gravitas means things like
"Do your words have teeth?",

00:00:48.242 --> 00:00:51.483
"Are you able to make
the tough decisions and stick with them?"

00:00:52.375 --> 00:00:54.386
One of the missing pieces

00:00:54.387 --> 00:01:00.168
when you think about what's integrated
really between the lines of broad concepts

00:01:00.169 --> 00:01:03.833
like communication skills and gravitas

00:01:03.834 --> 00:01:06.708
is vocal executive presence, as I call it.

00:01:06.709 --> 00:01:08.311
It's the missing link.

00:01:08.312 --> 00:01:11.750
How do you sound when you're making
those tough decisions?

00:01:11.751 --> 00:01:15.960
Does your delivery reinforce your message
and establish the image that you want?

00:01:16.278 --> 00:01:17.619
Or does it undermine it?

00:01:19.459 --> 00:01:23.418
What happens if I'm trying to diffuse
a tense situation and I say:

00:01:23.419 --> 00:01:27.103
"OK, everybody just calm down now,
we need to reevaluate the situation."

00:01:28.918 --> 00:01:32.041
At worst, I'm just adding
fuel to the fire,

00:01:32.042 --> 00:01:35.992
and at best, you may later on
gently suggest that I switched to decaf.

00:01:38.834 --> 00:01:40.666
It's about how we connect.

00:01:40.667 --> 00:01:43.041
I end up working a lot with people

00:01:43.042 --> 00:01:46.960
who are preparing for presentations
and for press conferences,

00:01:46.961 --> 00:01:48.981
and they make statements like:

00:01:48.982 --> 00:01:50.732
"We're very passionate

00:01:50.733 --> 00:01:54.809
about helping children and improving
the quality of our schools."

00:01:54.810 --> 00:01:58.966
And I think to myself:"Really?
Because you could've fooled me."

00:01:59.899 --> 00:02:04.284
There's a claim of passion,
but there's no evidence thereof.

00:02:05.209 --> 00:02:06.668
The problem is a disconnect

00:02:06.669 --> 00:02:10.604
between the choice of words
and their execution, their delivery.

00:02:10.606 --> 00:02:13.236
And this creates a problem of credibility.

00:02:13.906 --> 00:02:19.416
Now, there's a historic and seminal study
that looked at feelings and attitudes

00:02:19.417 --> 00:02:23.291
as a result of the consistency
or inconsistency

00:02:23.292 --> 00:02:26.371
in verbal and nonverbal messaging cues.

00:02:26.372 --> 00:02:27.715
And what they found was

00:02:27.716 --> 00:02:30.125
that when they ask people
to evaluate speakers

00:02:30.126 --> 00:02:34.583
as far as whether or not they thought
the speaker sounded sincere,

00:02:34.584 --> 00:02:40.249
38% of that evaluation was based
on the tonality of the speaker's voice.

00:02:40.250 --> 00:02:45.380
Tonality being things like the ups
and the downs in your intonation patterns.

00:02:46.164 --> 00:02:50.529
In contrast, only 7% of those decisions

00:02:50.576 --> 00:02:53.802
were based on the speakers' words
that they chose,

00:02:53.803 --> 00:02:57.815
and the remaining 55%
were looking at non-verbal cues,

00:02:57.816 --> 00:03:03.666
were based on non-verbal cues
like your posture, your eye contact, etc.

00:03:03.667 --> 00:03:04.898
Now, this is a study.

00:03:04.899 --> 00:03:07.908
We have to be careful
because many people love to misquote it.

00:03:07.909 --> 00:03:10.270
And you'll hear people
make grand statements

00:03:10.271 --> 00:03:13.383
like: "Well, you know,
55% of all communication is non-verbal."

00:03:14.117 --> 00:03:17.680
That's not remotely accurate and it's not
what the study was talking about,

00:03:17.681 --> 00:03:20.020
but what we can take from this study,

00:03:20.021 --> 00:03:22.070
and a lot of subsequent
research in the area

00:03:22.071 --> 00:03:24.037
is the importance of sounding credible.

00:03:24.626 --> 00:03:26.751
Now, I'd like you to think about this

00:03:26.752 --> 00:03:31.248
in the context of how you personally
prepare for some sort of presentation.

00:03:31.959 --> 00:03:35.335
Do you spend 38% of your time
working on the delivery?

00:03:36.684 --> 00:03:38.172
If you're like most people,

00:03:38.252 --> 00:03:41.277
you probably spend the vast majority,
if not all of your time,

00:03:41.278 --> 00:03:46.153
working on the content: your outline,
your script, your PowerPoint slides,

00:03:46.154 --> 00:03:49.209
making sure you got cool graphics
and some snazzy animations,

00:03:49.210 --> 00:03:52.833
crunching your data
to put into your spreadsheets.

00:03:52.834 --> 00:03:54.825
But then, after all that work,

00:03:54.826 --> 00:03:58.794
we sort of wing the delivery
hoping it will be good enough.

00:03:58.795 --> 00:04:01.991
And in the end,
that's just comparatively weak,

00:04:01.992 --> 00:04:05.833
and it can undermine
both your immediate goals and objectives,

00:04:05.834 --> 00:04:08.798
as well as your long-term
image and reputation.

00:04:09.631 --> 00:04:12.905
The fact is, if you want
to be seen as a leader,

00:04:13.004 --> 00:04:14.552
you have to sound like one.

00:04:15.343 --> 00:04:17.942
You have to demonstrate
vocal executive presence.

00:04:19.906 --> 00:04:24.161
Now, a part of vocal executive presence

00:04:24.162 --> 00:04:28.372
is the ability to read an audience
and identify the kind of person

00:04:28.373 --> 00:04:31.996
from whom they would be most open
to receiving your message,

00:04:31.997 --> 00:04:35.720
and then figure out
what that kind of person would sound like.

00:04:38.059 --> 00:04:41.794
Now, to an extent, we're all born
with the voice that we have,

00:04:41.795 --> 00:04:44.877
but we do have a lot of control
over how we use it.

00:04:44.878 --> 00:04:47.126
Margaret Thatcher is
a great example thereof.

00:04:47.127 --> 00:04:49.625
She was the first woman
in British Parliament,

00:04:49.626 --> 00:04:52.709
and she was overtly mocked
by a lot of her opponents

00:04:52.710 --> 00:04:56.987
with phrases like: "Me thinks
the Lady does screech too much"

00:04:56.988 --> 00:05:00.188
because when she was passionate
in her arguing certain points,

00:05:00.189 --> 00:05:03.055
her voice would go higher
and become rather shrill.

00:05:03.056 --> 00:05:05.625
So when she decided
to run for Prime Minister,

00:05:05.626 --> 00:05:08.534
she worked with a tutor
from the National Theater

00:05:08.535 --> 00:05:12.901
who helped her to lower her pitch
in order to sound more authoritative.

00:05:12.902 --> 00:05:14.546
And this is really important

00:05:14.547 --> 00:05:18.468
because the voice has both cognitive
and emotional effects on the listener.

00:05:19.344 --> 00:05:20.908
Let's start with the cognitive.

00:05:22.132 --> 00:05:26.875
We talked about tonality, that 38%,
the highs and the lows in your voice.

00:05:26.876 --> 00:05:28.654
And if we use this strategically,

00:05:28.655 --> 00:05:30.979
we can actually help the listener to focus

00:05:30.980 --> 00:05:33.709
on the most important words
and parts of the message

00:05:33.710 --> 00:05:36.036
which makes for a lighter processing mode

00:05:36.037 --> 00:05:39.387
and helps them understand and potentially
remember what we're saying.

00:05:39.388 --> 00:05:41.551
And this can have a persuasive influence.

00:05:43.708 --> 00:05:45.458
When we listen to speech,

00:05:45.459 --> 00:05:48.668
we process it in what are called
tone units or chunks.

00:05:48.669 --> 00:05:53.708
And we start first by fixating
on the intonation pattern

00:05:53.709 --> 00:05:57.978
and anchoring what we listen to
to where those highest peaks are.

00:05:59.083 --> 00:06:00.442
And then, if necessary,

00:06:00.443 --> 00:06:05.708
we allow our imagination to fill in
whatever is in those lower sound valleys.

00:06:05.709 --> 00:06:09.249
An example of this is in song lyrics.

00:06:09.250 --> 00:06:10.719
We've all had this situation

00:06:10.720 --> 00:06:13.343
where we've been singing along
to our favorite song

00:06:13.344 --> 00:06:17.963
and suddenly, we realize that, or perhaps
somebody else not so gently points out,

00:06:17.964 --> 00:06:20.620
that we've been singing the words wrong.

00:06:20.835 --> 00:06:21.994
You've ever been there?

00:06:22.805 --> 00:06:24.065
A lot of nodding.

00:06:24.755 --> 00:06:26.144
There's a classic song,

00:06:26.240 --> 00:06:28.460
"What a wonderful world"
by Louis Armstrong.

00:06:29.023 --> 00:06:30.600
I think everybody knows this one.

00:06:30.689 --> 00:06:32.759
And in it there's a line that talks about:

00:06:32.784 --> 00:06:36.014
"the bright blessed day
and the dark sacred night."

00:06:36.528 --> 00:06:39.579
But when I was a kid
I thought the line was:

00:06:39.580 --> 00:06:42.955
"the bright blessed day
and the dogs say good night."

00:06:42.956 --> 00:06:44.331
(Laughter)

00:06:44.332 --> 00:06:46.710
Now, does this make any sense whatsoever?

00:06:46.711 --> 00:06:50.251
No, but I accepted it,
in part because, first and foremost,

00:06:50.252 --> 00:06:55.625
it matches those intonation patterns
and it also matches at those pitch peaks,

00:06:55.626 --> 00:06:58.501
the vowels, these syllables
that are up at the top.

00:06:58.502 --> 00:07:00.662
And then, in the parts
that were less salient,

00:07:00.663 --> 00:07:03.875
that were less emphasized,
in those pitch valleys,

00:07:03.876 --> 00:07:05.574
I let myself make up the rest.

00:07:06.626 --> 00:07:10.209
This also reflects why effective speakers,
when they're speaking,

00:07:10.210 --> 00:07:13.887
will emphasize the most important words
with higher pitch.

00:07:14.876 --> 00:07:17.227
Now, tonality, if we use it strategically,

00:07:17.228 --> 00:07:20.374
can have a good influence
on our very first impressions

00:07:20.375 --> 00:07:23.316
in attempting to establish
ourselves as leaders

00:07:23.317 --> 00:07:25.038
from the moment we meet somebody.

00:07:25.673 --> 00:07:27.291
It's really important, of course,

00:07:27.292 --> 00:07:31.333
to make a good, strong,
memorable first impression.

00:07:31.334 --> 00:07:33.645
But this is difficult
when a lot of people feel

00:07:33.646 --> 00:07:36.393
like they're not even good at
remembering people's names.

00:07:36.394 --> 00:07:37.837
You ever feel like that?

00:07:37.838 --> 00:07:41.087
Well, I'm going to absolve you
of about half of that blame.

00:07:41.619 --> 00:07:45.048
And that's because when most people
introduce themselves to you,

00:07:45.049 --> 00:07:47.576
they pronounce their own names wrong.

00:07:49.103 --> 00:07:50.985
OK, well, technically maybe not wrong,

00:07:50.986 --> 00:07:55.535
but they pronounce them in a way that uses
a rhythm and an intonation pattern

00:07:55.536 --> 00:07:59.238
that does make it more difficult for you
to understand what they're saying.

00:08:00.627 --> 00:08:03.725
And, by the way, I absolve you
of only half of that responsibility

00:08:03.726 --> 00:08:05.369
because the other half of the time

00:08:05.370 --> 00:08:08.287
you're the one introducing yourself
to somebody else.

00:08:08.288 --> 00:08:11.875
So, if I want to know
that I'm introducing myself

00:08:11.876 --> 00:08:15.248
and helping the listener
to really understand my name,

00:08:15.249 --> 00:08:16.998
and by understanding,

00:08:16.999 --> 00:08:20.043
then they can hopefully remember it,
and thereby remember me,

00:08:20.044 --> 00:08:22.791
I want to start by letting my voice go up,

00:08:22.792 --> 00:08:27.167
up like this, on your first name,
as if to say, "I'm not finished yet,"

00:08:27.168 --> 00:08:30.166
and then at the top,
we'll have a little break,

00:08:30.167 --> 00:08:35.500
that little pause that will allow for
a sound break to indicate word boundary,

00:08:35.501 --> 00:08:39.543
and then, at our last name,
we want to go down, let the pitch fall,

00:08:39.544 --> 00:08:41.650
as if to say, "And now I'm done,"

00:08:41.650 --> 00:08:44.159
like you're putting
a little local period at the end.

00:08:44.898 --> 00:08:47.875
So instead of blurring your way
through your introduction,

00:08:47.876 --> 00:08:50.794
like, "Hi, my name is Laura Sicola,"
and bla-bla-blah,

00:08:50.795 --> 00:08:54.042
I want to focus and help
my listener to understand,

00:08:54.043 --> 00:08:58.360
and so I'll do my best to say to them,
"Hi, my name is Laura Sicola."

00:08:59.328 --> 00:09:02.882
And you'll be amazed at the difference
this strategic tonality can make

00:09:02.883 --> 00:09:04.565
even in something this small.

00:09:06.083 --> 00:09:09.673
Now, of course, if we're haphazard
in our use of intonation,

00:09:09.674 --> 00:09:11.990
and putting it in the wrong place,

00:09:11.991 --> 00:09:14.596
we can have the exact opposite effect.

00:09:14.597 --> 00:09:17.833
We can distract the listener's attention
from what's most important,

00:09:17.834 --> 00:09:21.030
and make it harder for them
to process what we're saying.

00:09:21.725 --> 00:09:26.122
And one of the most common and,
in my opinion, annoying examples of this,

00:09:26.123 --> 00:09:29.267
that's becoming more and more
prevalent in society nowadays,

00:09:29.268 --> 00:09:31.336
is a phenomenon called "up-speak,"

00:09:31.337 --> 00:09:36.124
otherwise known as up-talk
or, more technically, high-rise terminal.

00:09:36.125 --> 00:09:38.699
And that's the pattern
where people are talking,

00:09:38.700 --> 00:09:40.929
and they keep adding
these question-like tones

00:09:40.930 --> 00:09:43.288
at the ends of all
of their phrases and sentences,

00:09:43.289 --> 00:09:45.105
"You know?", like they're implying

00:09:45.106 --> 00:09:46.908
a bunch of little "OKs" and "rights,"

00:09:46.933 --> 00:09:48.138
one after another,

00:09:48.139 --> 00:09:50.450
like there's some sort
of deep-seated insecurity

00:09:50.451 --> 00:09:52.658
and pathological need
for constant validation?

00:09:52.659 --> 00:09:54.348
(Laughter)

00:09:54.349 --> 00:09:55.499
You know?

00:09:58.909 --> 00:10:02.981
The problem with talking like that
is that what ends up becoming emphasized

00:10:02.982 --> 00:10:06.299
is just whatever randomly falls
at the end of the phrase.

00:10:06.790 --> 00:10:09.579
It doesn't help anyone
to process what you're saying.

00:10:09.580 --> 00:10:14.041
And that monotonous lilting upswing
time and again can be rather hypnotic

00:10:14.042 --> 00:10:16.255
and so, after a while,
we don't really know

00:10:16.256 --> 00:10:19.659
if the audience is listening to
anything we're saying, much less what.

00:10:21.365 --> 00:10:23.310
By the way, I should also point out

00:10:23.311 --> 00:10:26.730
that this is not just
a "Valley Girl" kind of phenomenon,

00:10:26.731 --> 00:10:28.881
like a lot of people seem to attribute it.

00:10:28.882 --> 00:10:31.765
More and more nowadays,
this vocal crime against humanity

00:10:31.766 --> 00:10:35.151
is being perpetrated
by men and women, old and young,

00:10:35.152 --> 00:10:37.363
highly educated and lesser educated.

00:10:37.392 --> 00:10:40.053
So, congratulations guys,
you've closed the gender gap.

00:10:40.078 --> 00:10:41.271
Way to lead!

00:10:41.296 --> 00:10:42.374
(Laughter)

00:10:43.748 --> 00:10:47.740
So from there, one of the other issues

00:10:47.765 --> 00:10:50.928
is that when people,
of course, hear up-speak,

00:10:50.929 --> 00:10:55.124
they tend to have a very negative
and even visceral response.

00:10:55.125 --> 00:10:59.082
It's not only the antithesis
of vocal authority.

00:10:59.083 --> 00:11:02.923
It's almost like the vocal equivalent
of hair-twirling, you know?

00:11:04.501 --> 00:11:06.751
So, when people have
that visceral response,

00:11:06.752 --> 00:11:11.158
this will bring us to now talk about
the emotional effects of voice.

00:11:12.918 --> 00:11:16.843
Let's start by thinking about some people
who have really distinct voices.

00:11:18.132 --> 00:11:19.917
We'll start with James Earl Jones,

00:11:19.918 --> 00:11:23.033
perhaps best known
as the iconic voice of Darth Vader.

00:11:23.586 --> 00:11:28.532
Now, in my opinion, with that deep,
rich, bass voice that he has,

00:11:28.533 --> 00:11:31.725
he could read the ingredients
of the back of a bottle of shampoo

00:11:31.726 --> 00:11:33.286
and it would sound like poetry.

00:11:34.334 --> 00:11:36.955
But he probably
would not have been as successful

00:11:36.956 --> 00:11:40.292
if he had tried to play
the role of Elmo on Sesame Street.

00:11:40.293 --> 00:11:41.609
(Laughter)

00:11:43.959 --> 00:11:47.249
What about someone like Fran Drescher

00:11:47.250 --> 00:11:53.472
with that completely unmistakable, whiny,
nasal voice right out of Queens, NY?

00:11:54.000 --> 00:11:56.249
She was great on TV as The Nanny,

00:11:56.250 --> 00:11:59.821
but she probably would have been
less successful as Darth Vader.

00:12:00.858 --> 00:12:04.043
Can you imagine her standing over
Luke Skywalker saying,

00:12:04.044 --> 00:12:06.661
"Luke, I am your father!"

00:12:06.662 --> 00:12:09.012
(Laughter)

00:12:10.239 --> 00:12:12.326
It's just so doesn't work!

00:12:14.125 --> 00:12:17.124
Now that's a great voice for comic relief,

00:12:17.125 --> 00:12:20.542
but it's not necessarily
the voice you want to encounter

00:12:20.543 --> 00:12:22.807
when you're looking
for a funeral director.

00:12:24.037 --> 00:12:25.689
It's all about context.

00:12:25.709 --> 00:12:30.567
In the funeral context you're looking for
someone who sounds sympathetic,

00:12:30.568 --> 00:12:34.229
who sounds compassionate,
who sounds like you can trust them

00:12:34.230 --> 00:12:38.730
to take care of you and your family during
your time of greatest emotional need.

00:12:40.230 --> 00:12:41.436
And the problem is

00:12:41.499 --> 00:12:45.500
that when we find someone
who has a voice that we find unpleasant

00:12:45.501 --> 00:12:49.441
or somehow seems
to lack the characteristics

00:12:49.442 --> 00:12:53.401
of the kind of person we're looking for,
- doesn't sound like that kind of person -

00:12:53.402 --> 00:12:54.913
we can tune them out.

00:12:54.918 --> 00:12:56.642
We can sort of shut down,

00:12:56.643 --> 00:12:59.295
and we don't even want
to hear the rest of the message,

00:12:59.296 --> 00:13:01.619
no matter how important
the information is.

00:13:01.620 --> 00:13:06.135
Subconsciously, we really want
the messenger's voice to fit the message.

00:13:07.028 --> 00:13:10.160
Now, does that mean that
vocal executive presence is about acting?

00:13:10.161 --> 00:13:12.668
No, on the contrary,
it's the exact opposite.

00:13:12.669 --> 00:13:15.959
You have to be authentic.
You have to be yourself.

00:13:15.967 --> 00:13:17.875
But the key is to recognize

00:13:17.876 --> 00:13:22.160
which parts of your personality need
to shine through in a particular moment

00:13:22.161 --> 00:13:25.429
and how to transmit that
through your voice and speech style.

00:13:26.818 --> 00:13:28.883
Now, you're listening to me here today

00:13:28.884 --> 00:13:33.098
in part because the way I am presenting
to you makes sense to you

00:13:33.099 --> 00:13:36.860
and will match your expectations for
what a TED talk speaker should sound like.

00:13:37.773 --> 00:13:42.079
But I can't use this same speech style
when I'm talking to my 3-year old nephew.

00:13:43.845 --> 00:13:47.625
He'd wonder what happened to aunt Laura
because I don't sound like fun any more,

00:13:47.650 --> 00:13:49.618
and he'd probably stop playing with me.

00:13:49.718 --> 00:13:51.844
But at the same time,
I can't come here today

00:13:51.844 --> 00:13:54.321
and talk to you in the same way
that I talk to him.

00:13:55.015 --> 00:13:56.910
Can you imagine if I started by saying:

00:13:56.911 --> 00:13:58.689
"Everybody, I've got a great idea!

00:13:58.714 --> 00:14:00.954
Let's talk about vocal
executive presence!"

00:14:00.954 --> 00:14:01.954
(Laughter)

00:14:02.158 --> 00:14:05.263
You'd be like, "Are you kidding me?
Who is this nut?

00:14:05.264 --> 00:14:09.333
What can she possibly know
about leadership or executive anything?

00:14:09.334 --> 00:14:11.625
And, for that matter, who invited her?"

00:14:11.626 --> 00:14:13.404
And by the way, it was them.

00:14:13.429 --> 00:14:14.562
(Laughter)

00:14:15.824 --> 00:14:19.435
I call it "working your prismatic voice."

00:14:21.099 --> 00:14:23.583
In the end, I'm not acting.

00:14:23.584 --> 00:14:25.543
It's just a matter of recognizing

00:14:25.544 --> 00:14:30.766
and being aware of the two audiences'
different needs and expectations.

00:14:30.767 --> 00:14:33.501
And then identifying
which parts of my personality

00:14:33.502 --> 00:14:35.835
I want to let come through and how,

00:14:35.836 --> 00:14:38.139
in order to ensure
your openness to my message.

00:14:39.389 --> 00:14:43.875
And with regard to the big notion,
the metaphor, the prismatic voice,

00:14:43.876 --> 00:14:48.818
in many ways, in the same way
white light would pass through a prism

00:14:48.819 --> 00:14:53.131
and break in all the colors of the rainbow
that make up that white light,

00:14:53.132 --> 00:14:55.458
when the white light of your personality

00:14:55.459 --> 00:14:58.374
passes through the prism
of some situational context,

00:14:58.375 --> 00:15:01.386
you need to look at all of the colors
that are available,

00:15:01.387 --> 00:15:03.687
all the different parts
of your personality,

00:15:03.688 --> 00:15:08.041
and decide which one you need
to highlight in the moment and how,

00:15:08.042 --> 00:15:11.700
in order to be most effective
and appropriate for that moment.

00:15:12.667 --> 00:15:15.418
And if you can figure out
how to do that successfully,

00:15:15.419 --> 00:15:19.676
then you can create your own, unique,
and authentic sound of leadership.

00:15:20.252 --> 00:15:21.646
Thank you.

00:15:21.647 --> 00:15:24.081
(Applause)