Some of us are born with, or acquire through experience, a voice that is tentative and evokes in others the tendency to ignore what we say.

Habits such as talking too quietly, or too quickly, or going up at the ends of sentences, or sounding too breathy, or too stereotypically “blue collar”—all these, and other vocal habits, can cause listeners to dismiss our ideas.

This is most obviously a problem for professional people whose job demands that they communicate their expertise, compete for promotion, and sell themselves and their ideas both inside their organizations, and out in the marketplace.

What can be done to help them?

1. Make them aware of the problem.  We are reluctant to do this because the voice is such a deeply personal part of us.  To criticize the voice of another, we think to ourselves, would be hurtful to them.  Quite the contrary, if done in a supportive manner.  Broadcasters and actors were not born with the voices we hear on  radio and TV.  They work with voice and speech teachers to improve the appeal of their on-air presence.  Since we in the business world are always “on” at work, why should we not do what we can to improve our chances to climb to the top?
2. The voice is a wind instrument.  In order to play it well, we must know how to breathe to support the sound, and how to use our tongues and lips to make crisp, intelligible sounds, just as the fingers of a flautist move to stop the air to make specific notes..  These behaviors are easily learned with practice.  A good voice and speech teacher can be found at any university with a drama department.  He or she can help improve the credibility of a voice, and reduce the effect of any accent that might be getting in the way.
3. Finally, someone who seeks to improve his or her vocal presence should expect that it will take some time.  One does not learn how to play a wind instrument in a day. But with effort, one can improve the expressive range, the strength, and the resonance of a voice, and discover an ancient truth: that we are judged by how we speak.

I say the truth is ancient because I recently discovered this quote from The Book of Sirach, written in Hebrew in the 2^nd Century BCE.

When a sieve is shaken, the husks appear;

So do a man’s faults when he speaks.

As the test of what the potter molds is in the furnace,

So in his conversation is the test of a man.

The fruit of a tree shows the care it has had;

So too does a man’s speech disclose the bent of his mind.

Praise no man before he speaks,

For it is then that men are tested.

Sims Wyeth is an executive speech coach in Montclair, NJ specializing in presentation skills and public speaking training in order to give accomplished people the knowledge and skill they need to become accomplished speakers. Learn more public speaking tips at www.SimsWyeth.com.

Here in New Jersey, scientists grow on trees and work in laboratories, developing and testing molecules for bio-tech and pharmaceutical companies.

Every day, they leave the known world to explore microscopic molecular places and witness scenes that quite possibly no human being has seen before.  They are the Lewises and Clarks of medicine.

Like grizzled pioneers, they take their daily journey into the unknown for granted, and don’t express much awe and wonder about what they see.  Many are like airline pilots, whose aeronautical culture demands a steady tone of voice, even when tumbling toward the ground at 600 miles per hour.

But when scientists speak to senior business people, who are unfamiliar with their area of expertise, the wrong approach to communication can cause significant business problems, chief among them lost business opportunity.

George Bernard Shaw said it best, “The biggest problem with communication is the illusion that it has been accomplished.”

For example, in 1981, in a small conference room belonging to a large consumer products company, a team of research scientists lost a mousse.  Five years later, they found it in their files and launched it as the fourth product in a new category of hairstyling products.  After years of struggle, they managed to reach only a 15% market share.

Had they launched their invention five years earlier, they would have been the first to market, and probably would have owned the lion’s share of the market.  But they delayed because, according to one executive, the leaders of R&D were simply unable to present the concept cogently to the rest of the company.

What happened?  Was the idea of a foamy hair gel so new that anyone outside R&D couldn’t grasp it?  Or was there something about the way the researchers communicated that left the rest of the company scratching its head?

The causes for such a rupture between departments are often hard to define, but experience reveals that communication could be the culprit.  One of the reasons is that the ranks of business are filled with people from different tribes.  For the purposes of this blog, let’s call the sales and marketing functions the Tribe of Belief (TOB), and the R&D functions the Tribe of Skepticism (TOS).

In training, aptitude, psychology, predisposition, language and thinking, Skeptics have special tendencies and approaches.  So do the Believers.

How wide is this tribal rift?  Consider how the two groups use language.

On the one hand, those in the sales and marketing (the TOBs) are paid, like professional actors, to act “as if” they believe whole-heartedly in the value of their products. Their job is to induce belief, and raise belief to the level of action.

Believers are expected to invent arguments to support their point of view, to be persuasive, to take sides, to draw inferences from fact in order to drive home a point, (exaggeration is a staple of advertising) to appeal to their listeners’ psychological and emotional needs, and to demonstrate the truth of their ideas through the force of their conviction.  (Some Skeptics would call this “proof by violent assertion.”)

The TOSs seldom use language rhetorically.  Their faith is in the unalterable power of fact.  The truth of fact is more important to them than the truth of belief, the detail more important than the dubious “claim,” the content more important than the context.

For them, nothing is truth if it hasn’t been tested, measured, and proven. They distrust generalizations and “benefit statements.”  The notion of selling ideas troubles them; it seems manipulative and, well, unscientific.

The gulf between these two tribes is wide, and needs to be bridged. Without good communication between tribes, ideas and initiatives will not get the buy-in they deserve, individual leaders will lack credibility and influence, and research and development may go for naught.  Just ask the me-too mousse maker.

The easiest way to close this gap is to teach scientists cross-cultural communication.  They need to speak the language of sales and marketing to ensure their intellectual output can leap across the gap.  It would be harder to teach sales and marketing to speak the language of science.

Scientists need a basic education in the principles of persuasive speech.

Sims Wyeth is a private speech coach in Montclair, NJ specializing in executive speech coaching and public speaking training in order to give accomplished people the knowledge and skill they need to become accomplished speakers. Learn more public speaking tips at www.SimsWyeth.com.

Browsing the web recently, I ran into a video teaching the purpose and structure of 3-minute elevator speeches.

The advice was sound for structuring a formal talk, but I couldn’t conceive of an elevator speech lasting three minutes.

I could see an elevator dialogue being three minutes long, but not an elevator speech!

Three minutes in an elevator listening to someone trying to sell me on her business sounds like an eternity.  Three minutes at the water cooler would be half an eternity. And three minutes at a networking event would be long enough to make me look for the guy passing the little crab cakes. 

We all recognize the increasing value of brevity and concision, but three minutes does not feel brief and concise in an elevator, or any other social or public setting.  

I recommend an elevator dialogue that starts with an elevator question.

How about this for a starter after you’ve rubbed elbows with (and introduced yourself to) a VP of Marketing.  You ask each other questions, he finds out you’re an expert in the principles and practices of persuasion, and then you ask him if you can give him your value proposition.

“How long is it?” he’s bound to ask.  If you say three minutes, you’re dead in the water. 

You say, “Short,” and begin. 

“What is the value of your Brand Directors being able to make their plans clear and exciting to the organization?”

The answer should be, ” Uh…that’s important.”

You say, “Why is it important?”

And he says, “Because it saves time and money, reduces indecision, and gets the whole machine humming — it improves the vitality and energy of corporate life.”

Then you ask, “How are your Brand Director’s doing?”

He says, “Okay.”

“What if they were doing great?  What if you could take time and cost out of the marketing process, and at the same time electrify the brand teams?”

He might look at you a little skeptically at that point, but admire you for your enthusiasm.

“I’m not sure that’s possible,” he might say.

And you, taking the bull by the horns, say, “Listen.  Every day, information is sneaking off to make babies with other information.  The world is overrun with information, and it’s only getting worse.  The most valuable thing on this planet is a person who can create a sense of clarity and alignment out of the tsunami of information that demands our attention.  The ability to communicate well is a hard corporate asset masquerading as a soft skill.  It’s the ultimate competitive weapon.  And that weapon can only be developed through training.”

He looks at you, and says, “You really believe this, don’t you?”

You say, “Yes, I do.  I’d like to schedule an appointment with you to show you how my company can save you time, money, and frustration, and give you the one competitive advantage that is hard to replicate overnight.”

And more than likely, he’ll say, “Okay, give my assistant a call and get it on the books.”

How long was that?  A minute and 10 seconds.  And it wasn’t a monologue.  Yes, it had a speechy part, but it was based on asking questions, listening, and asking follow up questions.  And only once, when he tried to dismiss the argument, did you get on your high horse and get salesy. 

The world has hype-fatigue.  Engage in dialogue.  Don’t make speeches in elevators.