And while crafting and delivering relevant messages that mesh one’s goals with an audience’s objectives is challenging for even the most seasoned presenters, they are only part of the uphill journey to understanding. What often derails one’s best efforts in persuading a skeptical group is neglect in considering the influence of their personal values and beliefs. 

Backing this notion is recent brain research from the Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics and the Universities of Amsterdam and Utrecht. 

The study had participants read statements that clearly clashed with their personal values, as in the example of ‘I find euthanasia an acceptable practice’, read by orthodox Christians. (The word ‘unacceptable’ was used for non-Christians). The instant the word ‘acceptable’ was perceived by a participant of orthodox faith, brain measurements registered a strong reaction of disagreement—within one fifth of a second—before subjects even had the chance to fully appreciate what the message might be saying and form an opinion. According to the study’s authors, this resistance to a message-defining and values-opposite word also significantly influenced the analysis of meaning for the rest of the message. 

This is valuable information for anyone expressing a novel idea or controversial proposal, reminding them that instead of being able to remain objective, a listener’s brain will raise a red flag with lightning speed after a single disagreeing word, framing the content that follows in a correspondingly negative light.    

The need to incorporate an audience’s value and belief-systems into one’s message isn’t news to capable communicators. And the brain research on how quickly personal value systems are activated, framing an entire message, drives home the point that gathering intelligence on one’s audience’ personal value systems prior to presenting a message—especially to a skeptical audience—is a critical first step toward success. The next step being the careful selecting of words and crafting of sentences that aim to keep minds open rather than shut them down before one’s message has a chance to get through in its entirety.  

What are the words that create instant resistance in the brains of your audience?

Van Berkum, J. J. A., Holleman, B.C., Nieuwland, M., Otten, M., & Murre, J. Right or wrong? The brain’s fast response to morally objectionable statements. Psychological Science, Online July 2009

As Executive Coaches we help clients become effective storytellers to better connect with employees, clients and shareholders.

An American master in the art of storytelling was Ernest Hemingway. His best work, as he once said, was a story he wrote in just six words:

‘For sale: baby shoes, never worn.’

Whether you’re in business or the professions, you’ll benefit from learning how to tell a concise story that packs a meaningful punch.

Take the challenge and post your own six-word story here and our team at GuruMaker-School of Professional Speaking will choose the three best. Winners receive a free autographed copy of the new release EXECUTIVE PRESENCE: The Art of Commanding Respect Like a CEO (McGraw-Hill 2010). For more info on the book check out the table of contents and the endorsements on this site.

Good luck!

Take this article from Reuters I clicked on because of the headline and its implications.

Clinton wishes he had left White House “in a coffin”, is what it says. And the meaning this creates in most minds is what? That Bill Clinton lost the will to live once his time at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue was up. That he’d rather be dead than live as a regular citizen. That of course would be shocking if it were true, but alas, it isn’t. Because here’s what he really said, according to the Reuters article one paragraph into it:

“It’s good that we have a (term) limit. Otherwise I would have stayed until I was carried away in a coffin. Or defeated in an election.”

Oh, that’s it? Congratulations. Headline: 7, Content: 0. He simply liked being President so much that he could have done it forever. And he framed that sentiment in a humorous exaggeration. But that’s a lot less interesting than a post-presidential death-wish isn’t it?

How is this relevant to the presidents and chief executives of corporations who interact with the media to get their message out? It is if you consider that most people just skim headlines to manage a daily flood of information online and -off. That means most people only get the hyped meaning and not the real story behind an interview you gave or an unguarded comment you made to a reporter.

It’s not always avoidable, but vigilant awareness when speaking to the media can save savvy executives from misperceptions a crafty reporter’s headline can create.