Skip to main content

Talkers and Listeners

I'm off to TED Global 2011 in Edinburgh next week. Can't wait. If you've never watched any TED presentations, click on www.ted.com. Become an addict like me. Amazing people telling amazing and thought provoking stories - each lasting no more than about 20 minutes. 50 of them for 5 days.

One of the things Tedsters (that's what delegates are called... tacky?) have to do before arriving is to create the wording for their badges. All the usual stuff: Name, Job Title, Employer, Location, Picture etc, but also a section that starts "Talk to me about"... and then you have to list three things (with limited character length) that you want people to talk to you about. You are advised to be serious, amusing and controversial (or something like that). Pause for thought. There are 1,000 of the world's smartest thinkers at TED. How do I make sure I won't look stupid. But wait. I also want to look smart. But not so smart that I'll look stupid or at least hopelessly self-centred and perhaps even patronising. It's not easy being contrite and yet impressive.

But then the real anguish sets in. There are going to be two types of people at TED. Possibly stereotyped by the men on one hand and the women (who aren't trying to be men) on the other. In other words, those who list three things they hope people will ask them to talk about, and those who list things they want others to find interesting to speak to them about. Those who want to speak to impress (testosterone?), and those who want to listen to impress (oestrogen?). But then again, I suppose it all depends on who gets the first question in. If I've got Rugby listed as one of my topics (actually I do... and I'll probably be the only one who's listed that), and someone I meet has got Childbirth as one of theirs, the trick will be to say first 'so tell me about childbirth', before they can say 'England don't stand a chance in NZ this year'. But if I'd put Childbirth on mine, then although I know virtually nothing about it (except it hurts) our conversation won't be very long if it starts by the other person seeking to find out why it's on my badge. "I was hoping you'd expand my knowledge about it". This only works if the other person happens to be an expert in what's on my badge - and I suppose that's what this is about. Advertising to others what I want them to start talking to me about instead of assuming I know anything about it myself. Why would I want to speak about something I know - possibly as a world expert in it? What is the benefit to me other than to prove to another person how expert I am? Shallow, or what?

Naturally I only thought about this after I had already given my 3 subjects to be printed on my badge, and as expected I fulfilled the typical male stereotype of wanting to impress by listing the things I knew I could talk about. But actually, considering I'm going to a conference where about 50 people have been lined up to present stuff I don't know already, wouldn't it have been smarter to put headings on my badge that would genuinely add to my sum total knowledge rather than enable others to let me add to theirs - if they give a damn. Will all the men especially be wandering around hoping to find listeners instead of talkers? Will the sort of people who go to TED all want to talk first?

So I've made the typical and fundamental mistake of looking at my badge from my perspective, and not from the reader's. And I'm meant to be good at marketing.

Well at least it gives me a chance to break the ice by apologising for 'badge arrogance'. Maybe I should bring a label to cover my subjects with the words "Not me, you". Or would that be too ingratiating. Perhaps everyone wants to meet interesting people and its all about forcing the conversation around to the other person's badge topics. "Enough about me...". Oh the agony of it all.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Thanks for taking an interest.

Popular posts from this blog

To kill or not to kill.

Had an interesting discussion with a Muslim friend today about the ethics of killing. Could it ever be morally justifiable? Abrahamic scriptures, especially the old testament, are awash with murders and killings, some sanctioned by the prophets and assorted mouthpieces for god. Some killing is even mandatory. For example all Jews are instructed in the old Testament to kill everyone belonging to the 7 Canaanite tribes for example - Deut 20:17 , or to slaughter Amaleks, especially their children - Deut 25:19 . So accepting for a moment that these draconian instructions were written in times when tribal leaders had fewer options available to them with respect to managing miscreants and maintaining some sort of law and order, I suspect that most people today would agree that killing people is a bad thing and should not be condoned except under extraordinary circumstances. My friend and I then proceeded to try to list those circumstances. We started with self-defence or perhaps protecti...
1 comment
Read more

Phillips screws - yes I'm angry about them too

Don't get me wrong. They're a brilliant invention to assist automation and prevent screwdrivers from slipping off screw heads - damaging furniture, paintwork and fingers in the process. Interestingly they weren't invented by Mr Phillips at all, but by a John P Thompson who sold Mr P the idea after failing to commercialise it. Mr P, on the otherhand, quickly succeeded where Mr T had failed. Incredible isn't it. You don't just need a good idea, you need a great salesman and, more importantly, perfect timing to make a success out of something new. Actually, it would seem, he did two clever things (apart from buying the rights). He gave the invention to GM to trial. No-brainer #1. After it was adopted by the great GM, instead of trying to become their sole supplier of Phillips screws, he sold licenses to every other screw manufacturer in the world. A little of a lot is worth a great deal more than a lot of a little + vulnerability (watch out Apple!). My gromble is abo...
7 comments
Read more

Successful Entrepreneurs Don't Aim to Make Money

Of course all entrepreneurs want to make lots of money. Who doesn't? But the difference between entrepreneurs who do make money and those who don't, is that successful ones don't focus on making money. They focus on building their businesses. And that relies on having an attitude of pouring any money their businesses do make, back into them, rather than rubbing their hands and taking it out as soon as they can. True entrepreneurs are gamblers and thrifty by nature. Given the choice of a holiday of a lifetime versus the chance to create a great business, they'll always choose the business - and take it for granted that if the business does eventually make surplus money, they can have that holiday - although entrepreneurs can become so hooked, holidays become a guilty wrench away from the businesses they need to protect. I didn't have a single days holiday, or off sick, for 10 years after I started my first business. I probably could have afforded it (in fact my wif...
1 comment
Read more