Next level communicators understand the how is almost as important as the what.
Next level communicators understand the how is almost as important as the what.
Whenever I put a talk together there are two big boxes which contain all of my preparation. The first is what I call the content box, where I am consumed with what I am going to say. Questions like, “What is the message of this particular text? What does this specific word mean? Why is this theological theme important in light of the narrative,” and more, occupy about sixty percent of my preparation. But just because I’ve answered these questions, and have constructed rich content doesn’t mean I have finished preparing the message. In fact, over the years I have concluded that just because I have put together some good content doesn’t mean I’ve constructed a great message.
The second box is the communication box. Here I’m fixated on how I am going to articulate the content, and while the content box is the most important, it shouldn’t be the most important by much, because I don’t care how rich your message is, if your presentation is boring, lacks creativity, is poorly worded and doesn’t engage the imagination and hearts of the people, the chances of your content reaching them is slim. Over the years I have become so struck with this element of speaking, that I reserve forty percent of my preparation time just thinking through illustrations, introductions, conclusions, the right phrasing for my central theme and argument, and more.
As I sit down to put a message together, here are some of my thoughts with this second box of communication:
Are my illustrations good? Here’s the measuring stick for a good illustration: The people get the point before you give the point, and the point of the illustration always ties directly to the point you just made in your explanation.
Are my illustrations varied? Not everyone in the audience likes sports, and history. So I need to ask if I included illustrations that women will resonate with, along with people of different generations? Did I use props to engage people who are more visually oriented? Did I use an illustration which engaged the imagination? If you only illustrate from what you’re interested in, then don’t be surprised if you only attract people who are like you.
Did I use too many illustrations? Remember, creativity is to be used to enhance the content, never to replace the content. It’s like salt to steak. Too much ruins the meat; just the right amount enhances it.
Did I capture the central argument of my talk in a short, pithy statement? For example, some months ago I spoke about grief, and instead of saying grief is a feeling of hopelessness, I said, “Grief is love that has no place to go” (not original to me). That stuck with people. Or, the other week I talked about hope, and I said that hope is, “Earth’s uncertainties tied to heaven’s reality”. Both of those messages built around these organizing statements, and set the table for people to really grab a hold of the message.
Were my main points framed as application statements or questions? When I first began to communicate in what my kids like to refer to as the “Nineteens,” everything was about alliteration. If you had three points, they should all have the same letter. But culture has shifted now. Postmodernism created a dynamic where people no longer wanted the orator with flowery rhetoric. Now they want something more pragmatic, and one of the ways you can connect with your audience is to frame your points as application questions or statements.
Did I use a quote from a reputable secular source? As a preacher, I want to always be aware of people in the audience who are not followers of Jesus Christ. So getting them to connect with my message is especially challenging, and one of the ways I can build a bridge to them is to quote from secular sources they may find credible, like the New York Times, or some author, or entertainer. Paul did this when he was with the Greek philosophers on Mars Hill in Acts 17.
Have I thought through the pace of the message? Pace is the rate at which we talk, and the communicator's pace is like the score to a movie, it should be varied. Charles Spurgeon, one of the greatest communicators to ever live, said this about the importance of pace: “A very useful help in securing attention is a pause. Pull up short every now and then, and the passengers on your coach will wake up…Keep on, on, on, on, on with commonplace matter and monotonous tone, and you are rocking the cradle, and deeper slumbers will result; give the cradle a jerk, and sleep will flee” (Lectures to My Students, page 143).
Have I kept the message simple, not shallow? The way I try to achieve this is by using the explanation/illustration/application method, where every point in my outline I first spend time explaining the point, then an illustration, then applications. This little schematic allows me to obtain simplicity and depth all at once.
What I’m reading:
One Lost Soul: Richard Nixon’s Search for Salvation, by Daniel Sillman (I see this being in my top 10 come the end of this year).
