Booher BanterBusiness Communication Consultant

Okay, I give up. I thought I could withstand the temptation to get involved in the latest American soap opera unfolding in the Florida court over Anna Nicole Smith’s body.  But alas, I have succumbed to the daily dose of sordid details dumped into my living room each evening.  At least I’ll try to tackle this tangled web from a different perspective than your average reporter:

Here’s my contribution to the saga:  Words have incredible power—to heal or hurt, to motivate or demoralize, to persuade or prevent action.

For instance, with the recent media explosion over Anna Nicole’s death, controversial viewpoints flood the airwaves and grocery store check-out lines with opinions about everything from the DNA doubtfuls, to the mother-daughter relationship, to Howard Stern’s character, to Anna Nicole’s mental stability. 

One TV reporter interviewed passers-by about why the story has held such fascination for Americans.  Here are a few of the comments:

"Anna Nicole is such a tragic figure."

"I can’t help but worry about that 5-month-old baby."

"Anna’s had such a terrible childhood. You have to feel sorry for someone who has been through what she has suffered."

"What a romp through life!  It’s just fascinating to see how people like that live."

"They’re all money-grabbers.  It’s funny."

From an Aussie:  "Oh, you Americans.  Your media will drag this story out for weeks."

Anna Nicole’s attorney, Ron Rale, paints Anna far more favorably than most:  "’Poor Anna Nicole’….’She’s been the underdog. She’s been besieged … and she’s been trying her best and nobody should have to endure what she’s endured.’”  (MSNBC.com)

If you listen to him, she’s a helpless victim.

One of the "Derby Dads," Howard K. Stern, remembers her as, "’my best friend, my lover…. My whole world’…."  (CNN.com)

Suddenly, Anna Nicole seems like a sweet, supportive woman.

Yet her own mother has stated on the witness stand that "drugs soured the relationship" with her daughter. Asked about her one regret in her relationship with Anna Nicole, her mother responded, "… that I couldn’t get her off drugs."  So this helpless victim and supportive woman turns yet another face to the world: hopeless drug addict.

Still another "word" from Neil Steinberg of the Chicago Sun-Times.  He piques our interest with this reflective question: "She had a will?  That seems so out of character.  How much of a wild party woman could she really have been if she had a will?"  (See article here.)

Finally, a frustrated blogger sees Anna Nicole as "this clown who has been given everything …" but who managed to "fail so brilliantly at simply existing."  (Read the full posting.)

Were an alien from outer space considering all these descriptive phrases, Anna Nicole might well seem like someone with a multiple personality disorder. Her entire identity and one’s outlook on the situation changes based simply on word choice.

Likewise, every day as we go about our routine activities, we absorb concepts, ideas, and attitudes that shape opinions we will later spout off as our own.  In your own career, what kinds of words are you using to represent yourself, your company, your product or service?

Telling new employees that you’re "proud" to have them is not the same thing as telling them that you are "pleased" to have them.  Expressing "confusion" over a report is not the same as expressing "consternation."  Encouraging your employees toward "greater success" is not the same as encouraging "better quality."

To belabor a point:  Just as your thoughts become words, your words shape the thought of others.  Choose them carefully before your next job interview, executive presentation, or marriage proposal.

Share and Enjoy

Posted at 11:53am in Communication—Oral | Permalink | Add Comment » |

I hope all of you in the training industry are planning to attend the Training 2007 Conference and Expo in Orlando, FL, next week.

I am presenting two sessions on Monday, Feb. 26:

• Creating Executive Presence: Thinking on Your Feet in the C-Suite (9:15 a.m.-10:30 a.m.)
• Ten Strategies for Building Personal and Organizational Credibility (2:45 p.m.-3:45 p.m.)

Click here for more details on these sessions.

By the way, my second session (Ten Strategies…) is based on my new book to be released in June by McGraw-Hill, titled The Voice of Authority:  10 Communication Strategies Every Leader Needs to Know.  I’ll post a blog to let you know exactly when the book is available for those interested in this topic.

Other notable speakers at the Training 2007 Conference include Don Kirkpatrick, Bob Pike, Marc Rosenberg, William Byham, Sivasailam Thiagarajan, Ann Herrmann-Nehdi, Joe Pellegrini, William Horton, Elaine Biech, Saul Carliner, Jean Barbazette, Sharon Bowman, Darryl Sink, and Patti Shank.

This is one of the top annual events for training professionals, and registration was still open at the time of this posting on Wednesday, Feb. 21. (Click here for the registration link.)

Hope to see you there.

Share and Enjoy

Posted at 10:55am in General Communication | Permalink | Add Comment » |

I was quoted in the World News Chronicle about the hassles inherent to traveling the globe as a speaker.  It looks like I’m not the only one, according to my other colleagues quoted in Ann Dowling’s article (click the title to read Sink or Swim as a Public Speaker).

As a multi-million-mile traveler, I’ve discovered that my best communication tool is asking the right questions at the right time of the most credible person:  For instance, getting answers to the following questions can get you to your destination and back more quickly with fewer hassles than the average harried road warrior.  You may find these questions useful yourself:

How many minutes (not miles) is the airport from X (your final destination) at Y time of day?

What are my back-up flight options? What about on other airlines?

Are there multiple methods to get to and from my destination in case the airport is shut down (trains, subways, hot air balloons)?

Are there financial penalties for switching flights in case of bad-weather delays?

If my luggage takes a detour to the Bermuda Triangle—leaving me standing alone at the empty baggage carousel in Kalamazoo—what’s the compensation limit and what kind of proof or documentation do I need to receive that compensation?

Post-9-11 stepped-up security measures, combined with fewer flights and more cancellations, make travel planning a bigger challenge than ever.  I was a bit apprehensive this past weekend knowing I had to be in Denver during potential snow flurries and get out on Monday to make my next engagement in Houston.

And my client contracts often specify certain travel restrictions (such as "the speaker agrees not to take the last flight of the day"), so if you consult, sell, speak, or ski until your heart’s content, make sure all these considerations—and questions—are factored into your travel arrangements and scripts. Stay safe out there.  And "Communicate With Confidence!®."

Share and Enjoy

Posted at 1:35pm in General Communication | Permalink | Add Comment » |

Yesterday I was on the Internet, investigating the top three high-tech firms that my marketing team had recommended to do some custom programming for us. As I skimmed the website of the number-three firm, it became apparent why they had earned their last-place ranking. 

Here’s a sampling from the first five paragraphs on their website:

"We specialize in development of Web and Intranet based Information management Systems which can be configured for your companies needs." (missing hyphen, capitalization errors, missing comma, plural instead of possessive form of company’s)

"In January of 2001 Craven launches XYZ a division devoted to developing custom software solutions for small-to-medium sized businesses."  (wrong verb tense, missing comma, misused hyphens)

"XYZ is an innovative high technology provider of Web-based, Intranet, e-Business, and e-Commerce solutions that allow business’s to become more productive and efficient with superior Return On Investment."  (missing hyphen, capitalization errors, possessive rather than plural form of businesses)

"We listen to you needs and take full advantage of your unique knowledge and skills, to develop custom software applications that are tuned to meet your business processes." (typo on your, comma error, illogical structure)

Sure, everyone makes errors.  Readers have been kind enough to point out a typo or misused word occasionally in my blog or on one of our websites.  But to create a website, draft a sales brochure, or write a client email with similar carelessness communicates to customers a message far beyond the words on the screen or the page.  The message?  Either incompetence or inattention to detail.  Neither inspires confidence in potential customers.

Image is the issue.

Share and Enjoy

Posted at 10:07am in Communication—Written | Permalink | Add Comment » |

Obama did it again.  On Senator Joe Biden’s big day—the day he was to focus on his official announcement about running for president—Obama stole the headlines by his response to the sputtering Senator’s explanations about his earlier remarks concerning his Democratic rivals.  In the article that hit the streets Wednesday, Biden is quoted by the New York Observer sizing up Senator Barack Obama this way:  "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that’s a storybook, man."

So when those comments hit the airwaves, as my granddad used to say, Senator Biden had "lots of ‘splaining to do."  And explain, he did.  Biden said his remarks were taken out of context and that he was referring to a phrase used by his mother:  "clean as a whistle, sharp as a tack."  He went on to apologize, "I deeply regret any offense my remark in the New York Observer might have caused anyone. That was not my intent and I expressed that to Senator Obama."

But here’s where Obama took over the limelight—and where many other politicians, CEOs, and public figures could pick up a few tips.

First, Obama gave Biden the benefit of the doubt about his intentions.  In an off-camera interview in the Senate hallway, he was quoted as saying he thinks Biden "didn’t intend to offend" anyone.

Second, he graciously accepted the offered apology.  When the media and others began to bombard him about his "reactions"—as they typically do when looking for controversy—Obama disappointed them.  Instead, he said about Biden’s apology phone call to him:  "I have no problem with Joe Biden…. I told him it [the call] wasn’t necessary.  We’ve got more important things to worry about. We have got Iraq.  We have got health care. We have got energy.  This is low on the list."

Finally, he set the record straight about the situation by correcting any inaccuracies.  Later Obama issued a written statement to clarify the situation about previous African-Americans running for president:  "I didn’t take Senator Biden’s comments personally, but obviously they were historically inaccurate. African-American presidential candidates like Jesse Jackson, Shirley Chisholm, Carol Moseley Braun and Al Sharpton gave a voice to many important issues through their campaigns, and no one would call them inarticulate."

The one, two, three punch:  1.  Avoid assuming any negative intentions.  2.  Graciously accept the offered apology.  3.  Set the record straight.  A gracious  response to apologies wins over sensitivity and demands every time.

Another case when less is more:  The smaller the pout, the bigger the man.

Share and Enjoy

Posted at 12:42pm in Communication—Oral | Permalink | 1 Comment |