Insights on the Journey

Two significant public presentations were made yesterday: one by Steve Jobs and one by President Barack Obama. The audience responses were quite different to the two presentations and provide food for thought for how people are responding when you speak.

Yesterday morning (Pacific time), Steve Jobs addressed an audience in San Francisco where he announced Apple’s new iPad. The audience consisted largely of media representatives, some of whom were very much pro-Apple, and many others from the PC world. Yesterday evening, President Obama addressed an audience in Washington DC, where he announced his new initiatives for 2010. The audience consisted largely of members of the House of Representatives and the Senate, most of whom were from his party, many others from the other party.

Both men began with a brief review of their accomplishments, and then announced their next plans. Both were unable to announce much that was immediate—there was a delay before the meat of what they were saying would become tangible.

Sounds pretty similar, doesn’t it? And yet the audience reactions were wildly different. During Jobs’ presentation there were frequent spontaneous cheers and genuine applause. During Obama’s presentation there were obligatory-feeling interruptions for applause that felt phony.

Why?

It’s not my purpose to get political here, so please don’t misunderstand my point—I promise it’s relevant to your own influence.

Build Credibility
The differences started when the two were reviewing their accomplishments. Jobs did it subtly, setting the stage for a new category of electronic device by alluding to how great the iPhone is in the smartphone market and the Macbook is in the laptop market–indirectly, and largely through screen imagery. The audience already felt better about whatever Jobs was going to say because he established (without hyperbole or fanfare) that he has successfully accomplished significant things in the past.

Obama, on the other hand, had to admit that what he said he was going to accomplish hasn’t happened. There is no new healthcare bill, there is no cap-and-trade regulation on carbon, and millions are still without jobs. He blamed previous administrations for creating the problems, but that doesn’t change the fact that he’d said in the past he would be able to accomplish these things.

Explain Clearly and Enthusiastically
You could feel the deep personal level of excitement in Jobs’ voice as he talked about what the iPad would do. He was presenting something unique and exciting, and he knew it. He explained simply how it would be of benefit to his audience, and everyone came away with clear mental images of what value this would or wouldn’t have to them personally. My reading of various media coverage leads to the feeling that those who are Apple lovers came away extremely excited, while those who are not came away impressed with the new product but uncertain of the its final impact and market share. They are in agreement on the facts of Jobs’ announcement, even though they disagree on its impact.  {Full disclosure: I occasionally write for Mac|Life online, and did a story for them on the iPad announcement.}

Obama made numerous grandiose-sounding statements, but I felt more like he was trying to convince me than that he was already convinced himself. It wasn’t clear what was really behind many of the things he said, as evidenced by the fact that the media disagrees not just on its impact but even on the factual content. My reading of various media coverage leads to the feeling that Obama supporters came away somewhat hopeful, and his detractors came away feeling he demonstrated reasons for disappointment.

Credibility + Clarity = Optimism
People believe that Jobs can accomplish what he claimed the iPad will do when it is delivered. They understand what it will or won’t mean for their lives. Many are now excited about its availability in two to three months. Those who aren’t interested still have a new vision of what the future will look like, with a sense of progress.

People are not overly confident that Obama will be able to accomplish what he proposed, nor are they sure what it would mean for their lives if he did. There isn’t a sense of excitement and optimism about what the future will look like because of his words.

So?
First, let me repeat that I’m not trying to be political here. I understand that the situations are different in many ways. This isn’t about our President, it’s about you and me and our influence in the world. I think yesterday’s examples lead to some thought-provoking things for us.

Does my message have credibility? How do you respond to a pastor who preaches the importance of evangelism, but has never brought a newcomer to church? Or a youth leader who proposes taking the group on a trip three states away when there was a serious problem at their church lock-in? Or a children’s worker that screams at kids about the importance of getting along politely? Credibility is built slowly, block by block—but can be destroyed in an instant.

Does my message have clarity? Speak at an appropriate level for your audience. If you’re a professor addressing seminary students, it makes sense to sound that way. If you’re not, it doesn’t. Are your words designed to impress people with you or with your message? Do they know what “sanctification” is? Or even simpler, do they know what “sin” is? More importantly, do they know how your message applies to them and their lives?

Does my message leave people hopeful? The Christian message is the greatest hope for all humanity. Not just the hope of eternal salvation, but the hope of a meaningful, fulfilled life on earth. The hope of forgiveness. The hope of redemption. The hope that the God of all creation loves us even when we feel—and others treat us as—unlovely. Why would we ever leave people feeling any other way?

Whoever our audience is, whether it’s in a formal presentation or a casual conversation, we can learn a lot from Steve Jobs and President Obama.

This entry was posted on Thursday, January 28th, 2010 at 2:57 pm and is filed under leadership. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.