Creating Memorable Short-List Presentations

As I coach more presentations, I’m convinced that it takes more to win in the interview beyond the requisite experience, team members, and technical competence. Winning a presentation in this competitive environment requires that teams be memorable. In fact, in most short-list situations, all of the teams can usually be considered qualified and able to succeed on the project. As a result, being memorable in the presentation makes a real difference in close competitions. Teams can be memorable through compelling content, eye-catching visuals, and well-choreographed delivery.

Being memorable by itself isn’t the goal – particularly if the memory isn’t a good one. Pulling my skirt off in an interview was certainly memorable, but not in a good way (no, I did not do this on purpose, and no, we did not win the job). Teams want to be positively memorable for the right reasons – reasons that drive the client to select them for the work.  Fortunately, there are numerous opportunities to be memorable in the three main elements of a presentation:  content, visuals, and delivery.

Content that is focused on the client and organized into clear “packages” is more memorable. Speakers who package their content and emphasize the differentiator in each of the packages tend to be more memorable. And, if the content packages are organized into a logical structure, selectors can more easily recall both the differentiators and the sequence of arguments. There are a variety of reasons why this strategy results in more memorable content:  Organizing content into a logical sequence fits the way the human brain selects, organizes, and interprets data. When listeners can understand the logic of an argument, they listen better and may be able to better internalize key messages (like differentiators). And, using a logical structure of content “packages” lends itself to creative repetition of content throughout the presentation. Finally, if speakers “signpost” content as it flows through a logical structure as in “First, I’m going to cover X, then Y, then Z”, listeners are able to “relax” into the content and really absorb the main messages.

From a visuals standpoint, teams should move beyond PowerPoint to truly be memorable. Sometimes this means low tech solutions; sometimes it means raising the bar on presentation technology.  In the past month, I’ve seen both utilized to create very effective team presentations. One team used presentation banners and sat on stools to create a more conversational environment with their audience. Another used a writeable site plan to interact with selectors. One more team used the largest touch screen I’ve ever seen to interact with their system during the presentation. In none of these interviews did speakers rely on flashy photography with superimposed bullets on PowerPoint. In all of these interviews, speakers used visuals as “frosting” to their presentations vs. letting the visuals take over the presentation. These days, creative teams are pulling out the crayons and white board markers. They’re making models out of non-traditional materials. And, they’re using technology in innovative ways – pushing the limits of what we thought we could do within limited time and space parameters.  From my perspective, this has been fun and engaging; it seems visuals are finally working for my teams in ways I always hoped they could.

Team delivery can also be memorable in how individual speakers speak, how transitions are made between speakers, and how groups of team members move around the space. Memorable presentations are well choreographed without being overly staged. In the most recent presentations, I’ve had a large number of speakers cycle through eight chairs, individual speakers speaking from stools, and project managers acting as emcees for their teams. All of these teams understood the value of rehearsal and took the time to get each other comfortable with movement and sound before the interview. Each team was able to anticipate visuals, handle the unexpected, and assist struggling team members because they’d worked through choreography and rehearsal together. Crafting memorable delivery is actually quite simple – come up with a good idea and then rehearse it until it becomes second nature.

Finally, I think the most memorable interviews have been the most fun. Team members were so comfortable with each other that they supported one another throughout all stages of the presentation and they laughed together when things didn’t work out as expected. At the end of memorable interviews, team members come away knowing they gave their absolutely best performance, leaving nothing back.

The Benefits of In-House Training on Tight Budgets

(Re-post from June 2010)

With ever shrinking budgets, how do we continue to do training in our organizations? And, how do firms even find the time to train the professionals who so desperately need training? These are questions those of us in the training profession must address if we hope to stay relevant in this chaotic marketplace. While some firms are still purchasing aggressive programs designed to develop their next generation of leaders, most firms have minimized training budgets and/or cut their commitment to staff development.

Some organizations are finding that though they value training, their limited staff don’t have time to take two days away to attend a training program. So, what do we do?  One thing is clear: Firms should never walk away from a commitment to training. I say this not as someone who sells training but, as a leader of a staff who believes the more time I spend educating my team, the more productive and stable they’ll be, and the more relevant my company will remain.

I believe there are some tangible solutions to correct the current training vacuum. Training can take a variety of forms. Rather than investing in the two-day offsite training that costs thousands of dollars, firms should consider shorter, more targeted programs to address specific needs. They should consider using in-house training resources particularly for repeated courses. Nothing hones a professional’s skills better than having to teach a class.

We’re finding that as demand for packaged training programs has waned, design services that enable clients to bring in-house training to employees have increased. We have also found, with our own training video, that the best value we can deliver to customers is to provide an accompanying training guide so firms can use the video as part of an in-house training program. In fact, we think this model of training is so effective that technical firms ought to consider designing their own in-house training programs with linked instructor and participant guides.

Designing specific in-house training can be both extremely cost-effective and can maintain consistency across learners. The cost of creating a credible in-house training video has gone way down in the last several years.  Creating a training video is now more accessible even to moderately sized firms in our industry. Once created, the training program can be used again and again within the company. We just completed a video for one of our clients at a 5^thof the cost that a similar video would have cost several years ago.

Quite simply, making employee training a priority makes companies better. With effective training and information, employees perform better and customers ultimately receive better products and better service. Firms across the nation need to evaluate how training is currently being done and take steps to streamline and prioritize their in-house programs.

The Often Misused and Maligned Semicolon

I’ve spent the last week helping write and edit a missive about wastewater treatment – otherwise known as “The Greatest Proposal EVER Written” in the wastewater treatment category.  I’m going to wake up screaming about various “terms of art” such as anaerobic digestion.  Stay tuned. 

While I love being a part of high-profile design pursuits, working in wastewater puts everything in perspective. And, despite words to the contrary, working with engineers is often a real treat.  I really do mean that.

BUT, given the piles of editing I’ve done, and have yet to do, I thought I’d write a short educational piece for my dedicated readers about the often misused and maligned semicolon.  Plus, if this blog post can effectively educate the public about proper grammar and can keep me from having to change one more semicolon into a comma or vice-versa, I’ll be a happy editor.

Semicolons have three uses. You can check this out on the web if you need more clarification – Wikipedia is a good source. Even though information on Wikipedia can be altered by anyone on a daily basis (this is more relevant for celebrity biographies), the grammar gurus of the world make sure the punctuation articles on the site are up to date and correct.  And, for the truly cultured among you, The Elements of Style by Strunk and White is still the definitive source for all things written. I stand with my mother on this one.

1. Semicolons are used to separate independent clauses (e.g., clauses that could stand alone, but prefer being together as in “Writing wastewater proposals is fun; I’d like to do it more often”).
2.  Semicolons are used to separate independent clauses containing transitional phrases (e.g., logical movement from one clause to another) as in “This proposal will change the way our clients think about wastewater treatment; clearly, this will result in our being selected for this project!”
3.   Here’s the hard one, the ‘Triple Sow Cow’ of punctuation:  Semicolons can be used to separate items in a list that includes items that require internal punctuation as in “We must complete every section of the qualifications section chronologically:  the executive summary, which summarizes our overall qualifications; the team overview, which includes short descriptions of each member firm; and the resumes, which are only one page each. 

Note, unless the list contains internal punctuation, you don’t need the semicolon as in “We must complete every section of the qualifications section chronologically: the executive summary, the team overview, and the resumes.  Just because a sentence contains a colon before the list does not mean you need semicolons between items.

So, there you have it; semicolons are easy and so fun to use!  Semicolons separate linked sentences; they communicate a strong link between thoughts.  Semicolons communicate transition from one thought to another; as a result, you can use them to make a point stronger.  And, semicolons can be used to separate punctuated items in a list after a colon: a, b, c; 1, 2, 3; and x, y, z. 

In all seriousness, let’s make a commitment to stop playing “fast and loose” with punctuation.  It behooves all of us who write for a living, and that means most of us, to learn how to use punctuation appropriately.  We should also use punctuation consistently.  Punctuation conventions, like language, change over time, but the need for consistent use is constant.  Know the rules, follow the rules, and be creative in your content, not in your use of punctuation.

As for me, I’m back to writing about wastewater; thank you for the break.  If appropriately inspired, we can tackle the appropriate use of a comma next time. :) 

Send a "Valentine" to your Clients

As we collectively lick our fingers from the Valentine's Day chocolates we received on the 14th (or bought for ourselves for half price on the 15th), I’d like to send out my own little message of “love” to clients and colleagues.  Because this is a blog about relationships and communication in the A/E/C industry, I’ll stick to writing about love from a purely professional perspective.  In this season of love, I’m drawn to think about what makes some clients love us and some think of consultants instead as commodities – interchangeable and eminently replaceable.

As many of you know, my team and I spend a lot of time calling our clients’ clients. We ask about the quality of relationships and the perceptions these individuals have of our clients, their work, and their firms.  After more than 3000 interviews in the A/E/C industry – and through my own experience working as part of project teams – I’m pleased to report that while being on schedule, below budget, and meeting scope are essential elements of client satisfaction, they are actually far less predictive of long-term client relationship health than we might assume.  Schedule, budget, scope, and quality performance are expected parts of project delivery and don’t seem to differentiate firms or teams across the industry. 

In fact, one of the more surprising things we’ve found in our research is that sometimes clients can love us even when our projects aren’t going as well as we – or they – would have hoped.  And, sometimes clients can feel ambivalent or worse about us when projects are actually quite successful. This doesn’t seem to make sense.  Or does it?

In love relationships, there’s a lot to be said for shared values and world view.  After the initial chemistry has sparked interest, most couples find they have to have something in common to forge a lasting relationship.  The same goes for client relationships: the best predictor of a long term, positive client relationship is choosing the right client – people and organizations who share your view of the world, the market, and the services you provide.  If you want clients who treat you as trusted partners, choose clients who tend to have these types of relationships with other consultants and contractors.  If a potential client treats your peers as commodities, chances are you’ll be the “flavor of the month” once selected.  If a potential client consistently engages in litigation to get what they want, think carefully about why your firm will be different before diving in to a working relationship.

That said, it’s not enough to choose the right client – you also have to treat the client right.  Just like in long-term romantic relationships, it’s not about the grand gestures (though those are nice). It is instead about the daily commitment. What nice things can we do for our clients, balancing giving services away with staying profitable?  We can help a client get ready for an important meeting.  We can come in after hours without complaint to fix a problem.  We can prepare a draft agenda for a meeting to get the discussion rolling.  Think of small gestures that communicate “affection” vs. grand gestures that embarrass and overwhelm.

Good relationships start with good communication.  Firms interested in long-term client relationships start those relationships by asking the client, “How can I make you successful on this project?”  They ask what the client’s fears for the work are, and take the time to understand the client’s aspirations and hopes for the work.  They focus outward on the client instead of inward on their own firm’s success.   Firms who can master this will reap the benefits in long-term profitable work.

Successful firms only surprise clients with good news (or birthday cake); they don’t ever surprise the client with bad news. They especially don’t ever surprise the client publicly in a meeting with bad news. And, they never surprise the client with bad news, in a meeting, with a bill for services.  Clients want information, options, solutions, and assistance.  Just as romantic relationships can weather almost any storm together with the right balance of communication and care, client relationships are capable of the same thing. Our clients want and need trusted partners who are with them through thick and thin.  They want partners who will be their advocates in good times and bad. And, they want friends who share their desire to make projects and communities successful.

When things go badly on a project, successful consultants and contractors will throw their metaphorical coats over the puddle – they pitch in to solve problems, they share the sacrifice of issues, and they stay late to get the job done.  This may sound “Pollyannaish”, but this is what proven experience with clients has taught us.  It’s not about the cost – that’s a symptom of a much more important problem.  The real issue is how the client feels they are being treated in both the good times and the bad.

When the project is over, firms who are successful in building and keeping long-term client relationships don’t go away. They don’t ignore the client until the next budget cycle or the next project pursuit.  Their principals check in on a regular basis, sharing information and advice, asking how the past project is performing, and occasionally providing some free advice.  They think like and act like their clients matter as more than a project.  These firms know that the secret to not being treated like a commodity is to not treat our clients as commodities.

So, in this season of love, that’s my message – care for your clients and prize your relationships with them.  I do believe that if more of us actively sought to “share the love” with our clients on a more regular basis – within the bounds of the appropriateness and professionalism – we, and our clients, would be happier and more successful with our work relationships.  Happy Valentines!

The Case for Clarity in Short-List Interviews

My daughter recently attended a play at the University of Washington, which she reported was one of the most confusing theatrical performances she’d ever seen.  The play was performed completely in Polish with English subtitles streamed across the top of the theater. She said it was extremely confusing, not just because of the content matter, but because she had to constantly take her attention away from what was happening on stage to understand what the actors were saying.  I wonder if selection committees for A/E/C short-list interviews often feel the same way.  I suspect they might.

After 25 years in the industry, I’m convinced we speak a different language, one for which we rarely provide helpful subtitles. And, when we do, they are often presented in such a way that disconnects our audience from the action happening on the project or in the interview.  Even when clients know the multitude of acronyms we use (I challenge each of you to go an entire day without using one!), most don’t understand what they really mean, though few would ask for clarification.  Even the team requirements of the procurement methods clients use are fraught with confusion for us and them.   For example, I suspect that the vast majority of clients who are currently experimenting with IPD (Integrated Project Delivery) don’t really understand the ramifications of either the contract or the working relationship – as evidenced by the many who like the concept but balk at negotiating an actual IPD contract. 

Do we think clients really understand how the entire realm of relationships changes when they move from DBB (Design Bid Build) to CMAR (Construction Manager at Risk)?  Clearly, some do and some don’t.  But, I think our industry needs to do a much better job explaining how teams work together differently under each procurement method beyond the contractual obligations and transference of risk. This is essential because within these relationships we see the real benefits of CMAR, CM/GC, IPD, Design Build, etc.

In two weeks, I’m working on one of the more refreshing interviews of my career. The client, understanding that his organization does not understand the costs and benefits of different procurement methods, has requested a very non-traditional short-list interview.  In the interview for a $300+ million project, the team must first educate and convince the owner as to the benefits of the Construction Manager at Risk procurement method and then convince him that the team is the best choice for the project.  I’m looking forward to this interview because we will really get to explore the core benefits of the procurement method and how by working together, the entire team – owner, designer, and construction manager – can reap the benefits in cost, schedule, quality, profitability, and relationship.

So, what do we take away for short-list interviews?  Beyond the obvious goal to explain our acronyms (if you didn’t get that, “Return to Go; do not collect $200”), I think we need to do a better job explaining the benefits and the requirements of the procurement methodologies used for projects.  This affords us the chance to position our teams as meeting not only the needs of the project, but being able to work with the owner to achieve the benefits of the procurement method.  For example, how can the owner and the design team get real benefit from the CM’s early engagement of subs?  Beyond just saying that we will engage subs early, teams should explain how this process works and the real benefit to the project and the team.  In shorter interviews in particular, I’d love to see teams spend more time explaining the details of what they can do for the project via the procurement method than trying to cover the entire breadth of typical topics (our history, our experience, our staffing, our management plan….).

The partnership required to make any of the delivery methods work can start in the interview – with clarity of expectations and a conversation about how to achieve the benefits of team members working together.  Savvy teams take the time to explain how they are going to achieve the promise of the procurement method vs. delivering a typical quals-based interview.  Clients are yearning for teamwork, partnership, protection from growth in their budgets and schedules – and they are turning to procurement methods many of them don’t fully understand to get there.  It behooves teams to not only deliver on the promises these procurement methods may offer, but to fully explain to owners how they will get there.  A winning interview presents not only the benefits, but the unique methodology to achieve them in a way that is clear, compelling, and game changing.

A Tale of Two Leaders

I’ve been coaching a lot in the past several months – both incredible wins and hard losses, but all hard fought.  My teams are working harder and the quality of interviews keeps rising.  I’m impressed with their energy and commitment to excellence. One of the things I’m noticing as I spend more time around presentation teams is the way in which company leaders interact with their presentation teams during the interview preparation and right before the team leaves for the interview.  I’m seeing some profound and, quite frankly, shocking differences.

Let me illustrate by way of two cases from two different teams.  Each team was working diligently to prepare for a very important, potentially game changing interview.  Each team also struggled to get through their content at some point in the preparation process, as is normal for most large, complex interviews.  As most of us in marketing and business development know, interviews seldom come together seamlessly. They generally go through a creative process that sometimes resembles the making of sausage (tastes great at the end, but really messy and difficult to create, even though it follows a logical production process).  Teams struggle as part of the creative process because they challenge ideas and they try new strategies to develop and deliver interviews that are different than the status quo.

In the first case, one of the owners of a large construction company walked into the room during one of the early creative meetings.  He went around the room to each team member, expressing gratitude for the team member’s contribution and offering the full support of the organization to the effort.  He introduced himself to me and thanked me – the hired coach – for agreeing to be a part of the pursuit.  He introduced himself to the outside team members and expressed his excitement for the firms to be able to collaborate.  After sitting through the meeting for a short time, he gracefully exited.  When the team was ready for a run-through – not the final one – he came back, and while sitting through through the rehearsal, provided some very insightful, but very supportive feedback.  He clearly moderated his comments to the skill level of each speaker and was very careful to support the work the team had done in the hours he was not in the room. 

In the second case, one of the owners of a design firm sat through a very short period of the first team meeting and spend much of that time expressing his perspective on the project.  He provided some very insightful comments, but left before team members could engage with him or ask questions.  He reminded the team how important the interview was and how he needed the team to bring home the project.  At one of the later rehearsals – again, not the final one – he sat through a portion of the presentation and proceeded to lambast the team for not performing to his standard.  He expressed disdain for the design of the presentation and told the team he thought it would not work well.  He picked apart the delivery skills of one of the younger team members.  Then, he left the room for another appointment.

Quite a difference.  In the first case, the team was treated respectfully and with gratitude for their efforts. Team members were trusted with the presentation and the content.  As a result, each team member worked his or her hardest to excel and had an easy time integrating the relevant feedback into the presentation, making it better. Team members left for the interview relaxed, confident, and knowing they had the full support of their leadership.

In the second case, the team was treated disrespectfully and with disdain.  Team members felt belittled and at a very late hour, began questioning their plan and content, even though the time for wholesale changes had clearly passed.  Team members spent the next hours fretting over the overall approach to the interview vs. coming together and feeling confident.  It was truly a disappointment that the leader of the firm did not ever see the overall approach to the interview before offering criticism. In one short interaction with the team, this individual created uncertainty and unease with a strategy that could have been fun and innovative.

So, what’s the take away?   The role of the company leader in the performance of a short-list team cannot be underestimated.  Leaders need to either engage in the entire process or trust their teams, entering the process strategically to support their teams and provide meaningful assistance.  In the first case, the company leader was not simply a figurehead.  He provided insightful and relevant comments that were easily integrated into the team’s performance, making it better.  In the second case, the leader provided global comments based on limited information that tore down the confidence of both individuals and the team as a whole.

That one team won and the other team lost is probably not due to the leaders and their engagement with the team.  But, the behavior of each, both separately and in juxtaposition to each other revealed volumes about the respective companies and how they will ultimately work together on real projects.  Leaders need to think about the power of their words as amplified by their role and their experience and tailor their content and their tone to the situation, the audience, and the timing.  Leaders can inspire confidence and incredible performance or they can tear down confidence and create fear and increased stage fright.  As with all things – leaders need to behave intentionally to drive the outcomes they want for their employees and their firms.  

Remembering the Importance of Connections

As many of us leave our holiday family reunions for another season (I’m flying home from ours as I write), it’s a good time to reflect on the importance of our "work family."  While sites liked LinkedIn do a great job of getting many of us back in touch with colleagues from around the Country and help us see the wide range of our work/social networks, they really aren’t a substitute for the real, interpersonal connections that build and nurture us in our working lives.

Researchers have long known the importance of social networks in professional and personal development.  Social networking websites, though a wonderful source of contact information, can’t provide the interaction, mentoring, problem solving, and perspective taking that are so necessary for growth and intellectual development.  Particularly in this economy, where companies can offer fewer training and development opportunities, interaction with and mentorship from other professionals are paramount.

I’m concerned that the moments many of us spend on social networking sites (I’ll admit to too much time on Facebook largely due to my Scramble addiction), may take away from the real interaction with others that is so necessary to develop worthwhile social networks that go beyond linked nodes on a network diagram.   In fact, even email, while a time saving (or some might argue a time sucking) advance, can take away from meaningful social interaction. Online connection can never effectively replace real life, face-to-face conversation.

Many years ago, my mentor, an incredible marketing professional named Dale McMichael, told me, “One must look after one’s friends.” And, Dale did.  Most times, when he flew through Seattle, he intentionally carved out time with me to find out how my business was doing and to teach me something new.  He once spent two days working with my team and me to figure out a plan for growing our business – I can say without a doubt, I’m doing what I do today because Dale believed in me and took the time to make our interaction meaningful.  He was a real mentor and a real friend. And, I know our relationship would not have been so valuable over email or social networking sites.  Dale gave me the gift of time – sharing his knowledge and his network, and being a ready ear for new ideas and difficult questions.  While Dale has been gone for many years, there isn’t a month that goes by that I don’t think of him in gratitude for what he taught me and the time he gave me in the busiest time of his own career.

So, in this New Year, I advocate for all of us to make a resolution to use our newly found linked networks to interact on a more meaningful, personal level.  Pick up the phone to connect with a colleague, help a younger employee build their skills by sharing your knowledge, and in the Northwest tradition, sit down for coffee to talk about work issues, needs, and concerns.  And, let’s share our networks with each other to find projects, learn more about the work we do, and help those who are not working find work.  The renewed connections we have as a result of social networking sites can be powerful and valuable, but only if we use them to really foster authentic connection and interaction.

For those of us lucky enough to be in supervisory positions, let’s share our networks with our protégé’s – take them along on client calls, talk about what we’re doing and why we’re doing it, ask their advice and counsel on important issues and project requirements, and introduce them to a broader network of professionals who can provide different perspectives and opportunities.  I know that this kind of mentoring isn’t something we can do online.  It takes time to have the intellectual and social discourse necessary for growth and development.  We all need to take the time to encourage questions, provide information, and be actively engaged in communicating with our teams.

This year, I’m making some resolutions: I’ll be writing more, talking more, interacting more, and spending more time communicating meaningfully. This doesn’t mean that my colleagues and friends won’t get the occasional 3am email, but it does mean that I hope to spend more time over coffee talking and less time holding conversations by email, LinkedIn, or Facebook.  I know this is going to be hard, particularly for those of us who spend more time sitting on an airplane than we do sitting at our desks. But, I have to believe that the payoff will be worthwhile by way of stronger networks, better relationships, and more connected team members.

I’m not advocating unplugging; I’m simply advocating a new kind of being plugged in. We can use social networking to get back in touch AND simultaneously focus on bringing back old-fashioned conversation to make those connections mean something.