P.R.E.P. for a presentation

Before you can organize your thoughts, you need to assess what your listener needs and then find out how experienced he or she is with the subject matter. When you know that, you can figure out how much of your presentation needs to focus on general education — bringing the other person up to speed, as they say.
After you have taken care of these preliminary matters, you are ready to organize your thoughts. You can organize your thoughts in many ways, but the important thing is to do it. Here are my favorite three ways to organize a presentation.
The first way to get organized is by using the P.R.E.P technique. Use the approach: point, reason, example, point. It works because it’s so logical; you won’t leave anyone in the dust. Here’s an example:

• My point is: Exercise is energizing.The reason is: It gets your heart rate up.
• My example is: After at least 20 to 30 minutes of increased heart rate, you are more energized when you come out of the gym than when you went in.
• So, my point is: Exercise is energizing.

The P.R.E.P. approach can definitely help you organize your material. Now, read the paragraphs about P.R.E.P. again. Note how I explained this concept using the P.R.E.P. approach. Mark the appropriate sentences with the letters P.R.E.P. for each of the corresponding ideas. This formula works with any presentation, from a five-minute informal chat, to a thirty-minute formal speech using many examples. The P.R.E.P. approach is a great way to get organized and be clear.

What Being Clear Means

In many ways, clear communication is the other side of effective listening. Just as you cannot listen too well, there is no such thing as being too clear. You can be too blunt, too fast, and too slow. You can’t be too clear. Being clear does not mean that you reveal your position at the earliest opportunity or that you lay out your limits as an opening salvo. Being clear simply means that when you speak, write, or otherwise communicate, your listener understands your intended message. Sounds simple enough. Why aren’t more people successful at it?
If you have any doubt about what being clear means, watch Patton, the wonderful biopic starring George C. Scott as Gen. George Patton. The opening scene is an unforgettable example of clarity. He is exhorting the troops to battle. In fact, he is whipping them up with an unforgettable call to duty. It’s not just the words — as clear as they are. Scott reinforces his words with his tone, his stance, and the huge American flag behind him. Everything in the scene is consistent with his message. It couldn’t be clearer. Although General Patton’s personality often got in his way, he was never accused of not being clear. The reason more people are not good communicators is that most people communicate from this point of view: What do I want to tell my listener? How am I going to appear? What are they going to think of me? Not effective. Your point of view must be from the listener’s side of the communication. Ask yourself these questions: What does my listener need to know? What information does my listener need to make a decision? What is my listener’s knowledge of the subject? First, you must be clear with yourself about what information you’re trying to get across. Then you must know who the listener is, what filters are in place, and how to get through those filters so you can be understood.

Pre-buyer’s remorse

If you experience buyer’s remorse before you even buy, stop everything. Ask yourself why you have reservations. What is the reason you don’t want to buy this boat? Is it that you’ll never use it? Or that you may move soon? Or perhaps because it’s not as big as your neighbor’s boat? Sometimes, you can resolve these reservations; other times, you can’t. Don’t go forward with a deal if your inner voice tells you not to.
Try to develop your ability to listen to your inner voice. It is the most important voice you can possibly hear. No one knows you better than you do. People who learn to hear their inner voice — unfiltered by reason or rationale — are always happier with their decisions (and thus less likely to experience buyer’s remorse) than those who are not able to do so.

Questionable deals

If your inner voice tells you that you don’t want to make a deal, stop the negotiation. Relax. Examine that message. Either your subconscious will send you a more detailed message, or your conscious mind will work it out logically. Heed any strong messages that a given course of action is wise or unwise. Mold your conduct to that message. You don’t have to stand up in the middle of a meeting and announce to the assembly that your inner voice is telling you that the discussions are over. In fact, you may decide to keep the source of your decision to yourself. You should heed the message and begin to concentrate on closing the discussion. Wrap up the deal. Use the message without necessarily announcing it to the room.

Shady characters

Although hardly anyone states it so bluntly, one thing you want to know about the other party in a negotiation is whether you can trust the information that person gives you. What is this person’s reputation for honesty and accuracy? If you are trying to negotiate efficiently, you must find out the general trustworthiness of the assertions from the other side.
Sometimes you hear that someone is not dishonest, just ignorant, inefficient, or inexperienced. These qualities may sound better than dishonesty, but they have the same consequence to you. As a negotiator, you can’t afford to blindly accept anything that such a person says to you.
A different but highly related issue is whether you can trust the client represented by the person with whom you are negotiating. Even if you trust the negotiator, you may feel that you need to be extra-careful in dealing with the party on the other side of the negotiating table.
The best advice I can offer is not to do business with a person you don’t trust. No lawyer in the world can protect you from someone determined to do you in, cheat you, or steal from you. No cop or security system in the world can protect your house from a sufficiently determined thief. President Kennedy once prophetically observed, “There is no Secret Service agent who can guarantee a president’s life, if someone is willing to give their own life in exchange.”
Sometimes you are forced to do business with someone you don’t trust. In such a case, be sure to focus on the parts of the contract that will protect you if something goes wrong. Decide where a lawsuit would be filed and in which courts. Your lawyer can be a big help here. Make provisions for when and how you can check the books for accuracy. In such a case, you must prepare a much more detailed contract than you normally would. Having clauses that protect you is always important in case you come to honest differences that you did not anticipate. Such clauses are the special province of an experienced attorney. For example, if someone is to pay you money under a contract, you want a fast and certain way to collect in case of default. The negotiator who does not consider this aspect of the deal is not doing a good job. Negotiating for big payments is futile if the payments are, as a practical matter, uncollectible. You may want to insist that all funds under negotiation be held in a special account until the contract is finalized. If you want to include clauses to protect yourself but can’t get the other party to agree, you must decide whether you want to do business with this person. Listen carefully to why the other party is not willing to provide certain mechanisms that put your mind at ease about payment. If that person insists on maintaining an unfair out, think twice before entering into the agreement. Be clear in expressing the importance of these provisions and why you must have them.
If everything else seems good about a deal, walking away based on these points can be difficult. The other side knows that and will often turn the issue into a trust test: “If you trust me, you’ll make this deal with me.” Look such a person right in the eye and say, “I trust you well enough to enter this deal. But I don’t know what good or bad fortune is going to visit you over the next year while I need steady payments. You may quit the company (or sell your business). You may get killed. I just don’t know what the future holds.”

Hearing two voices? You’re not crazy

Be assured that you don’t have two different inner voices inside you. You only have one of these phenomenal subconscious centers. When people talk about conflicting voices within themselves, they are frequently experiencing their conscious mind testing the solution provided by the subconscious mind. Almost without exception, the solution provided by the subconscious part of the mind survives this testing, but the solution provided by the conscious part of the mind is easier to rationalize and explain. The conscious thought process can be reduced to words. Much of the “testing” of what is provided by your subconscious is your memory of voices from your childhood, mostly from your mother or father. Your inner voice tells you to go forth. A parental voice, indelibly etched in your memory, says, “Don’t do that. That is dangerous. You will fail.” As adults, we need to recognize the play of memory messages. If you are hearing those old parental warnings, look skyward and say, “It’s okay. I can do it. And if I fail, that’s okay, too. I need to try — for me.”
If the owner of that parental voice is still alive, look skyward anyway. Don’t act out this conversation with the real person. The last thing you need is a protracted discussion with a dubious critic at just the time you need to gather up your courage and embark on a new adventure. Inner critics aren’t all bad. Having an inner critic is good when you need that kind of feedback. Decide between your inner voice and your inner critic and do what is right for you.

Brainstorming

Brainstorming is a great way to bring your inner voice to the surface. During brainstorming, you let all the ideas flow without editing or judging. You write down or say every idea that pops in your head — no matter how crazy it may be. This creative-thinking technique works because it helps to free you from fixed ideas. The intent is to get every possible idea out on the table. You can try brainstorming on your own — with a notepad and pen — but brainstorming almost always works better with a group because you can build on each other’s ideas.
After the idea fountain has run completely dry, stop. Give everyone a final opportunity to add something to the list. Be sure that everyone has articulated every idea that they could possibly have. Then take a little break to let people shift gears from the free-wheeling creative session to the practical job of narrowing the list to a manageable number of ideas. When you are ready, look through your list of ideas and choose the ones that you believe will best yield results during the negotiation process. This is best done by the same group that came up with the list in the first place. That way everyone is heard. No one has sour grapes later when his or her ideas don’t show up on the final list. And most importantly to the welfare of the group, an idea can be fleshed out and explained if the brief expression of the idea wasn’t clear to everyone. Sometimes a good idea doesn’t seem so good until it carries a bit of an explanation.
Take a look at Oliver Stone’s JFK. The film is one big brainstorming session. The film follows New Orleans D.A. Jim Garrison (played by Kevin Costner) and his obsessive investigation into the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. It’s like a collage of all the books and articles, documentaries and television shows, scholarly debates and conspiracy theories since 1963. We know the events by heart: the grassy knoll, the hobos in dress shoes, the parade route, Lee Harvey Oswald, Clay Shaw, the three shots, the eyewitness testimony, the gunpowder tests, Jack Ruby, the wrong shadows on the photograph, the Zapruder film, and on and on. Garrison and his team attempt to put all the pieces of the puzzle together to build a case against Clay Shaw, a respected businessman who is linked to various conspirators. Brainstorming sessions abound between Garrison and his team. It all builds up to the final courtroom scene. Consider the pivotal scene in which Garrison and his investigators sit in a restaurant, brainstorming facts and opinions for the trial. The scene is intercut with shots of the alleged fabrication of the infamous Time-Life photo of Oswald holding a rifle. The rules of brainstorming are clearly demonstrated in this scene. Everyone contributes; some ideas are shot down, while others are praised. As the group breaks up in frustration, the trajectory of the other sequence lands the photo on the cover of Life magazine. Was the photo fabricated? Who knows?