30 Days At A Time | Personal Development through 30 Day Challenges

Welcome: Free Pursuits Readers!

Today, I had a post featured on Free Pursuits. Head over and check it out.

If you’re new to my blog, have a look around. I think you’ll enjoy a few of my favorite articles.

I hope you enjoy my blog, and welcome!

Influence in Action: A March Madness Case Study

Late last year, I read an incredible book called Nudge that described ways in which people’s decisions can be influenced by designing the way in which the dilemma are presented to them. They call an individual who creates such a decision framework a “choice architect” and offer a number of anecdotes that illustrate how choice architecture can be used to influence decisions. Their guiding philosophy is called “libertarian paternalism,” and is characterized by the idea that people should be allowed to make their own decisions, but given that choice architecture will affect those decisions anyway, it is best to structure the presentation in ways that will nudge people to make choices that are likely in their best interests. I don’t want to get into a defense of libertarian paternalism here, as they cover that in the book, but I do want to offer an example of influencing an outcome by asking a question in a specific way.

Last year, I had a debate with my coworkers about the proper way to score a March Madness pool. This resulted in me researching the historical outcomes of March Madness and finding a scoring system that accurately reflected those outcomes (I’ll share it at the end of this article). In this way, it would no longer be possible to “game the system.” Of course, the conventional scoring system is deeply rooted, so it would take some significant influence to get others to agree to my new system (At the end of this article, I’ll give some ideas on how to fill out your bracket to game the system with conventional scoring, so stay tuned).

This year, the pool of my friends will be using this scoring system, a decision that was put up for a vote, which I won in a landslide. So how did I do it? Simple choice architecture.

First, because of my math background and general nerdyness (which I hope readers of this blog have come to find endearing), when it comes to things like this, I have a position of authority. As I will discuss in a coming post, authority, or the appearance of authority, is among the most successful influence strategies available. For now, take my word for it.

However, my perceived authority is merely a foot-in-the-door. In order to win the vote, I still need to structure the choice in a way that leads people to decide in my favor. Given that the “ballot” was presented in email form, I had to decide how to ask the question. On a paper ballot, the option presented first is more likely to be chosen, but in email the opposite is true. When someone reads an email, they remember the most recent item they read more prominently, especially if it is given special emphasis. Thus, when I asked the question about scoring, I listed my preferred scoring system second.

Now, you may be wondering, how can I be certain that my choice architecture was responsible for the victory? Perhaps my system just seemed really good (which it is). Well, to control for that, I did a sort of A/B test (that is, I used the opposite architecture elsewhere to compare the results). My system, you see, is actually comprised of two parts. There is a round weight component and a seed weight component. I wanted to be sure to win the round weight component, but I wasn’t concerned about the seed weight. Therefore, I chose to list my desired round weight second and my desired seed weight first, that way I could see if people were jumping at the system or simply the choice architecture.

The results were not shocking. In both cases, the option listed second was selected. In fact, for two other factors about which I was completely indifferent (entry fee and number of entries per person), the option listed second was chosen as well.

Now, the sample size is small, and this experiment was by no means scientific, but the results are still interesting. If these nudges interest you, I really urge you to check out the book. It’s a great read, interesting and enlightening, with implications for decision makers everywhere.

The rest of this article will be nerdy analysis of March Madness, so if you don’t care about those things, thanks for reading. If you do, or if you want a (small) edge in your pool this year, read on.

A Comparison of Scoring Systems

There are two components to March Madness scoring, round weight and seed weight. Here are the common ways these are handled.

Round Weight

The justification for round weighting is that later rounds are more difficult to pick correctly for multiple reasons. 1) a team can lose in an earlier rounds, and 2) the games tend to be more evenly matched as the worse teams are eliminated and the best remain. Thus, it makes sense to offer more points for later round picks.

The conventional scoring system scores points based on an exponential growth model. In the first round, correct picks are worth 1 point. In the second round they are worth 2, then 4, 8, 16, and 32. If every game in the tournament was a perfect 50/50 proposition, this scoring system would perfectly reflect reality. Every bracket would have an identical expected value at the beginning, and every team would have a perfect 1/64 chance of winning (disregarding the play-in game). However, that is not the way the world works. Rarely are early round games a 50/50 proposition. In fact, a #16 seed has never defeated a #1 seed, and #2 seeds have only lost 4 times in tournament history.

I won’t go into the exact probabilities here, as you can look them up online if you wish, however, my round weight method more closely resembles the real world probabilities. It is based on the Fibonacci sequence beginning at the 3^rd term. In this system, the first round is worth 2 points, the second worth 3 points, and each successive round is worth 5, 8, 13, and 21 points respectively. In this case, it is 10.5x more valuable to choose the champion than it is to choose a first round winner, which is much closer to the real probability than the conventional 32x. There are usually fewer than 10 teams in the tournament who have a perceived legitimate chance to win it all, as a quick “wisdom of crowds” glance at the futures markets confirms.

Seed Weight

In addition to round weights, it is often considered advantageous to offer a reward for correctly choosing underdogs, because it is riskier to pick lower seeded teams. The conventional solution is to add the seed number of the team to the round weight, however, this creates a number of dominant strategies.

Outline your own seed weight method

Finally, here are some strategies for filling out your bracket that will increase your chances of winning your pool (I have won my pool twice in last five years, finishing second one other time, which means I am both incredibly lucky, and that gaming the system in these ways works. Also, I hate the Florida Gators, which eliminated my chances of winning for two years, as I cannot, in good conscience, ever pick them to win anything). These strategies may only work for conventional scoring systems, which is probably what you’re dealing with anyway.

First, put all the #1 and #2 seeds through to the second round, and all of the #1 seeds through to the sweet 16. Year to year, these picks will rarely ever lose, and when they do, they will not hurt you very much, since no one will have that random #8 seed in the final four.

Second, if there is any seed weight at all, no matter what the specifics are, choose all of the #9 and #10 seeds in the first round. If the seed weight is to add the seed number, choose all of the #11 seeds in the first round.

Third, don’t try to pick a #12 over #5 upset just because people say there is always a #12 over #5 upset. If the seed weight scheme favors it, choose all #12 seeds unless there is a #5 you believe will make the sweet 16. If there is no seed weight, choose all #5 seeds unless you believe the #12 has a chance to make the sweet 16.

Fourth, shooting percentage and defensive shooting percentage are the only statistics that correlate well with tournament wins. When in doubt, look at these stats.

Fifth, choose your champion before looking at the rest of the bracket. Don’t worry about them having a “tough road to the final.” Whoever you think is the best team, put on the champion line.

Sixth, choose the winner of each region. Again, ignore the rest of the bracket. Choose your final four and write them in.

After following these guidelines, the number of games you actually pick is pretty small. By following these guidelines, you pretty much only need to root for your final 4 teams and let the math take care of the rest. When your final four and champion teams are correct, you win, unless someone else is using these guidelines as well. When I have won, it has been because I picked the champ. When I came in second, it was because my team lost in the final (to Florida). In each case, the team I picked as the champion was the most common champion chosen, so my win came from earlier round success, which these guidelines influence most heavily.

If you don’t know who to pick as the champion and final four, check out the futures markets. They are the most accurate predictors out there.

Good luck. Unless you’re in my pool.

What is Manipulation?

“Manipulation” is a word that gets thrown around a lot. It has a decidedly negative connotation, and not without reason. No one wants to be manipulated. In fact, the more effective a manipulation technique is, the less moral most people consider it to be.

In the future, I’m going to be offering a number of ideas on how to influence and persuade people. Unfortunately, the very same techniques I will be advocating can be used for manipulation. Therefore, it seems prudent to define the difference.

The difference between manipulation and influence

What does it mean to manipulate someone? According to dictionary.com, to manipulate is to “manage or influence skillfully, especially in an unfair manner.” There are two pieces to that definition: skill and unfairness.

Skill

Skill alone does not manipulation make. Often, it takes a good deal of skill merely to sniff out and thwart the manipulation of others. In fact, simply by deliberately using any influence and persuasion technique properly, you demonstrate some skill. So the key must lie in the second piece.

Unfairness

What does it mean to influence someone unfairly? Unfortunately, this question must be answered individually. However, there are several circumstances to consider.

Keeping your intentions hidden – Some people might argue that it is manipulative to keep your own intentions hidden from the target of your influence. For example, if you want the employees of a company to join a union so that you can collect dues money, drown out political dissent, and leverage more influence with the government, but pretend to only care about their interests, many people would consider that manipulation. However, others would argue that the employees should know better, and are responsible to make a good decision on their own. As I’ve said before, I do believe there is a right answer to this question, but I do not believe that we, as a society, always know it yet. Until that time, every person must make their own decision.

Influencing someone to take action that is harmful to them – I believe most people would agree that it is manipulative to convince people to take actions that harm them, though I am sure there are those who disagree. For example, pushing an adjustable rate mortgage for a $500,000 house with no down payment onto a family making $30,000 a year in order to bundle the mortgage with others like it, securitize them, and sell them to pension funds nearly destroying the US and world economies in the process is something that most people would agree is manipulative and morally reprehensible. Some people, on the other hand, think it is “God’s work.”

Profiting financially from the desired result – Some especially stringent opponents of manipulation might consider it manipulative to profit in any way through achieving your desired result, even if all other parties benefit as well. In their minds, all sales people are evil. Unfortunately, these people do exist. They are easy to spot, though. They use words like bourgeois and vegan in place of evil and good. Luckily, most of them died out after nearly destroying the country in the 1960s, while others persist in an attempt to bankrupt the states of California and Massachusetts. Fucking hippies.

Inserting satire into an article without warning – Please. No one hurt any hippies you may know. It was a joke. It is true, however, that some people would consider making jokes that, if interpreted seriously, could have negative consequences manipulative.

The great dark side/light side debate

If Star Wars references aren’t your thing, stop reading my blog and go back to your stupid adolescent fairyland with flying brooms and stupid names. (Harry? Hermine? Dumbledor? More like “not worth my time”… nerds).

For the rest of you, before using any of the influence and persuasion techniques that I write about next week, make sure you take time to consider your motives. I can’t dictate right and wrong to you, but make sure that you remain consistent with your own morality.

Now, let’s see how many angry comments this article can inspire.

Alone in a World of Wingnuts

Shockingly, Avatar was not named as the best picture at last night’s Academy Awards. I say “shockingly” not because the film deserved to win, but because as the most expensive anti-American propaganda piece ever made, with values in line with the Hollywood ethos, it seemed a clear favorite. I did not watch most of the awards show, as doing so was simply too depressing. I also did not sleep well, ruminating on feelings of imminent doom that, at this point, seem more real than ever. Increasingly, I find myself surrounded by radicals, fighting every day to maintain some perspective, but cannot find a redeeming light in the sea of disgusting threats that seem increasingly imminent.

Avatar is only the beginning. As a thinly-veiled allegory about the Iraq War in which the slaughter of American soldiers is applauded, the film achieves a new moral low. As usual, Americans are depicted through vicious stereotypes. There are the Marines, a group of blood-thirsty animals bent on slaughtering the innocent, and a corporation, willing to commit any atrocity to pad the bottom line. These stereotypes are nothing new in Hollywood, but when the cheers start to rain down from the audience as American soldiers bleed and die (even in America!) it inspires a new level of concern for the future of our country.

Contrast the American brutes with the peaceful, one-with-nature Na’vi, a sort of hyper-evolved species that takes tree-hugging a step further and literally fucks nature. (We are told that Earth is becoming barren, probably because no radical emissions agreement was reached at Copenhagen). Forgive me for my lack of flora-centric spiritualism, but if this society is utopia, I’ll pass.

The nomination of Avatar for best picture was a political statement. Special effects awards are one thing, though, frankly, I did not find the effects to be vastly groundbreaking, but special effects never have been grounds for a best picture nomination on their own. The movie’s writing is atrocious. From uncreative naming (unobtanium?) to plot holes large enough to drive a gunship through, it is clear that the $400 million dollar price tag was too short to hire a competent writing staff. Clearly, the nomination was based on one thing: the moral message of the film’s propaganda. Our troops are brave volunteers risking their lives to protect our values from a deranged and morally bankrupt enemy. They are not blood-thirsty brutes slaughtering innocents for oil no matter how vehemently James Cameron says so. This film is a slap in the face to anyone who has ever served in our military or even supported their cause, and Hollywood should be ashamed to promote it.

The timing of this celebration of Anti-American sentiment (and no, the fact that The Hurt Locker, a seemingly patriotic film mired in controversy for exploiting an active member of our military, won does not diminish the sentiment) coincides nicely with what at least appears to be the end of the long, drawn-out debate on our national health insurance system, which will likely constitute the largest expansion of government since the New Deal. Indeed, it seems the farthest corner of the left wing in this country is taking over. However, that is only the beginning of the problem.

Look right, and the situation becomes even more frightening. To compensate for the Democratic leftward march, the Republicans have moved right. Possibly the least trustworthy politician in American history, Sarah Palin, now looks like a possible presidential candidate for the GGGOP (the non-Gays, God, and Guns Only Party). The Republicans continue to cannibalize their own ranks for any hint of centrism, a move that only reinforces the left-wing positions of their opponents. Instead of a march towards the center, there is a great race to the wings, with the nuts controlling both parties.

The situation is terrifying. Power seems to be divided between two irrational extremes. This country, home of the Horatio Alger story, where even the president himself is an example of the from-nothing-to-everything motif that has separated us from the rest of the world, is at risk of preventing that defining characteristic from existing in the future. Already, one generation, whether mine or the next, will face the insurmountable financial burden of an entitlement society with ever-increasing costs and ever-decreasing income sources. Now, with a precedent for punishing financial prudence, the incentive to “do the right thing” is diminished at a time when “doing the right thing” (i.e. maintaining a positive savings rate) might be the last bastion of hope for our nation’s economy. Iceland and Greece have discovered that modern infrastructure and a place in the “developed world” is poor protection against rioting when the state goes belly up. I fear that in my lifetime, America will have to learn that same lesson from experience.

Perhaps when that day comes, our citizens will overrun the military in one of history’s greatest coups. Perhaps people around the country and around the world will watch and cheer as American servicemen are slaughtered. Perhaps Avatar’s vision will be realized.

I hope with all my heart it isn’t.

But, in the mean time, I’m learning self-defense.

How to Spot Insecurity and Tell Right from Wrong

After graduating from college, I spent the summer working at a country club. Now, this particular country club was not one of those “you have to be filthy stinking rich to join” country clubs. In fact, my own family could afford a membership (though they are no longer members). A lot of upper-middle class families and even some decidedly middle-middle class families patronized the club, and as a result, we, the staff, dealt with an unusually high number of A-holes.

Now, country club members are notorious for being a bit snooty, but at this club things were different. The “I’m in the club and therefore above you” mindset that stereotypes most clubs was not there. In its place was a unique insecurity. Because the members were not the super-rich, nor were they the old money types that are used to being rich, everything they did needed to reinforce the notion that they were successful. Their insecurity caused many of them to be arrogant and downright nasty (Note: it was the minority of the members who fell into this category. Most were very nice and gracious people. Still, the blowhards were hard to ignore, and certainly numbered far greater than they do in the at-large population). Of course, the nastiest people tended to be the ones with the cheapest memberships. They were the most insecure about their status. So what’s the takeaway?

A rich man doesn’t have to tell you he’s rich

In the example above, I’m talking about money and status. However, “rich” is just one condition where this proverb holds true. Perhaps a much more pervasive example, one that we’ve all experienced, is having someone try to defend a mistaken idea. Just like the over-the-top behavior of those country club members shed light on their insecurity, belligerence is a good signal that someone is either unsure or downright wrong.

The sun is going to rise tomorrow. If you didn’t believe me when I told you that, I might laugh at your amusing display of ignorance, but I wouldn’t waste any more energy trying to convince you that you were wrong.

Now think of a time when you didn’t believe someone. Did they shrug off your disbelief because they were secure in their own beliefs? Or did they rant and rave and try to convince you that they were right? A secure person will convey information. An insecure one will try to convince you using appeals to emotion, personal attacks, and logical fallacies. This phenomenon is most apparent when people take radical, polarized positions. Where there is a heated debate, both parties are probably wrong.

Noticing your own insecurities and backing down

The other day, I got into a debate with a total stranger on facebook (of course) and I found myself getting emotionally involved. When emotions start to show up, that’s the first sign of insecurity. Instead of escalating the debate, I decided to retreat to the place where I was confident. Sure, my opponents’ emotions and insecurities were showing through, but what’s the point of continuing a debate in which both parties are wrong. I certainly wasn’t going to win! It wasn’t worth the effort. I did, however, save myself some energy. It’s ok to be wrong, and being wrong does not make your opponent right.

Black and white vs. Shades of grey

I really do believe that universal truth exists. In other words, I think that the answer to every question exists. The answers really are black and white. However, I also believe that we currently lack the knowledge to find many universal truths, and so we deal with the varying shades of grey.

I have little doubt that there is a perfect political and economic system, we just haven’t discovered it yet. So right now, we deal with our flawed system because it is better than any other in human history. We debate the shades of grey without certainty (which is why politics is so ugly). Yet, one day, we will know those answers. Modern debates over emotionally charged political issues will eventually be resolved (and maybe even reversed a few times), but ultimately we’ll find the right answer. How will we know when we’ve found the right answer? There will be no emotional investment; no need to convince the non-believers.

Final thought

We all have beliefs that are downright wrong. I am no different from anyone else in that regard. However, by taking note of our own emotions (and those of others) we can identify the things that we merely believe and separate them from the things that we know.

I believe you had an emotional reaction to at least one point in this post. What was it? Why did it strike a nerve? Are you strong enough to admit when you’ve been wrong in the past, or to acknowledge that you’ll be wrong in the future?

February Update/Review

The end of February is almost upon us, so it’s time to review my 30 day challenge goals.

Physical - After sustaining my third injury in 3 attempts at endurance training, I decided to shift gears, but have been consistent and committed to my new program. More to come next month, so stay tuned.

Mental - My reading rate has definitely increased. I still have some work to do in this department, mostly to increase comprehension and eek out a little more speed. I tested over 800 words per minute last weekend. Now I’m focused on using a Rapid Serial Visual Presentation (RSVP) plug-in for firefox to read online text. Time will tell how that works.

Financial - This one will come down to the day, but right now, things look good. It’s a good thing too, because the IRS is robbing me blind come April (I’m a little ahead of the game on that one, but let’s just say, because of our dumb tax code, if I made less money, I’d make more money).

Social - Redid the blog theme. Set up a newsletter (sign up! you’ll miss the best stuff). Wrote a couple guests posts that will go up soon. All around success.

Developmental - I spent a lot of time learning .NET programming. These skills should prove useful when I start a new job soon. I’d go into details, but frankly, I think I’d bore myself writing it and I’d bore you reading it.

———————————————-

So that wraps up February. Some fun stuff coming in March, including a new weekly feature. Now’s a better time than any to sign up for the newsletter, follow the RSS feed, or just make my blog your homepage, because why would you want to have any other home page? Exactly.

How to Abandon a Sinking Ship

I’m not big on quotations. A friend of mine once said, “Quotes are for people who don’t have the brains or the balls to say what they need to say.” (See what I did there?) That said, there is one aspect of life that is best dealt with through quotations: failure.

I’ve missed more than 9000 shots in my career. I’ve lost almost 300 games. 26 times, I’ve been trusted to take the game winning shot and missed. I’ve failed over and over and over again in my life. And that is why I succeed. -Michael Jordan

The greatest barrier to success is the fear of failure. -Sven Goran Eriksson

I could pull up a few more, but you get the point.

Avoiding failure is not the goal; dealing with failure is. If you plan to accomplish anything even remotely notable, you must risk failure. If you plan to accomplish something remarkable, you will face failure. In the face of failure, there are two questions that need to be answered.

#1 – How do I deal with this failure?

Volumes have been written about coping with failure, but the best advice I can give is to remember that failure is just a synonym for feedback. Understand why the idea failed, and apply the lesson to your next endeavor. But this question is not the focus of today’s article, the second one is.

#2 – When Should I Pull the Plug?

Accomplishing big goals means overcoming many obstacles. However, sometimes an idea just isn’t going to work out. You can struggle mightily against that fact for a long time, sinking time, energy, money, and other resources into it, only to realize that you were doomed to fail from the beginning. The question is how to identify the difference between the obstacles that can be overcome and the indications that an endeavor is doomed to fail. Of course, situations will vary so wildly that there is no way that I, or anyone else, could give you a hard rule to follow in these situations (best guess: follow your gut), but there are ways to minimize your investment in those doomed-to-fail endeavors even if you can’t always differentiate them from the struggles that lead to remarkable accomplishment.

Thrash Early

In this great talk on “shipping,” Seth Godin discusses the “thrashing process.” Thrashing is, effectively, ironing out the details of what the final product or accomplishment will look like. When you thrash at the end, which is the tendency, problems arise and each fix seems to cause another problem. By thrashing at the beginning – that is, defining exactly what the end result will be including considering contingencies that may arise in the process – you ensure that the end goal is achievable and well understood. This process makes success more likely, as those ideas that are doomed to fail are often exposed in the thrashing process.

Do the Hardest Thing First

In the same vein, it helps to take care of the big things first. Sometimes, thrashing is the hardest part, sometimes it isn’t. By identifying the hardest parts of the endeavor and attacking them first, you can avoid sinking a lot of time and effort into smaller issues that are meaningless if the big things don’t work out. For example, if you are designing a new product, do the market research first before worrying about how the design should look or what advertising techniques you’ll use. Discovering that no one wants to buy your product is a lot less painful if you haven’t already introduced it to the market.

Fail Big

If you are timid in your approach because you fear failure, your endeavors will slowly swallow up all of your energy. If your idea is going to fail, make sure it fails big. That doesn’t mean that it has to make you lose your shirt. It means set an ambitious goal and go for it so that if you fail, it will be obvious that you’ve failed. In my days as a musician, it wasn’t uncommon to hear someone start playing at the wrong time. In that situation, my directors always stressed that it was better to play the note confidently than to play meekly because you were unsure. If you’re going to mess up, own it! People will respect you more and you’ll get reliable feedback. There is a time to dip your toe in and test the waters – it’s when you’re 7. Dive in!

Ask Why

If you’re thinking about pulling the plug, but still aren’t sure, ask yourself why you want to continue. Is it because you’ve already invested too much? In poker, there’s a saying: “Don’t throw good money after bad money.” It means that when your best reason for staying in the hand is that you’ve already put a lot of money in the pot, you fold. The money you have is still good. Don’t throw it after the bad money you already lost.

So You’ve Decided to Pull the Plug – What Now?

If you do decide it’s time to pull the plug on your endeavor, you have to get out and move on completely. Don’t ruminate on the failure and wonder how you could still make it work. Thinking about the failure will only detract from your next endeavor. Learn the lesson, make a mental note, and move on. There is no sense in carrying any baggage forward. You may need to take a break. You may need to dive right into something new. Whatever you do, you must get the failure off of your mind.

What if There Was A Magic Pill?

It’s been said so many times in so many contexts that it has become cliché. “There is no magic pill,” not for whatever you’re trying to do. Want more money? No magic pill. Want to lose weight? No magic pill. Want to get strong? No magic pill, unless you want to end up like Robert Paulson. It means not to expect fast results that exceed the amount of effort you put in.

There must be a community of magic pill chasers somewhere, because the magic pills are advertised every day. Need money? Take your car to cashpoint so they can take it from you when you still can’t pay. Owe the IRS? Call associated tax relief and they’ll help you rip off the less than 58% of Americans who actually pay taxes. Want to see your abs? Search google and pick a program, none of them will work, but maybe try putting down the cheetos and soda.

What are these people after? Results? What if there was a magic pill. What if I offered it to you? You could accomplish that one goal that’s frustrated you more than anything. Become rich, fit, happy, whatever. Would you take it?

I wouldn’t.

Now, I’m not saying that if someone showed up at my door with a check for $10 million that I’d tear it up (I’d probably invest it all and continue my life as is though). I’m just saying that if you told me that I could accomplish any of my goals without effort; just pop this pill and you have it. I would say no.

Would I like to be able to lift 600 pounds? Would I like to be able to run as fast as Usain Bolt, skate as fast as Shony Davis, and swim like Michael Phelps? Would I like to be able to read 10,000 words per minute? Of course! But first, I want to lift 400 pounds, run a 5 minute mile, swim like I used to, and read 600 words per minute. I don’t want to go from mediocre to best overnight. I want to earn it, and I want to enjoy the process: the ups and downs, the obstacles, the failures. Those are the things that make goals worth pursuing.

I’d love to be able to say that I ran the Kona Ironman in Hawaii someday, but I want feel sweat sting my eyes on my first 50 mile bike ride first. I want to lie on the floor with my heart racing after every workout. Race day is always anti-climactic to me. The day to day work is much more fun.

Maybe there are a lot of people who would take the magic pill. Maybe I’m the weird one. Then again, maybe not.

Would you take it?

Social Dynamics 102: Storytelling

What is the difference between a braggart, a bore, and a captivating storyteller? Truly, not much. By learning to tell stories effectively, you can avoid being seen as an overbearing narcissist or lulling your audience to sleep. Good storytelling has very little to do with the content of your stories (though I hope you find them exciting since they should be about you), and everything to do with the way they are presented. Here are some guidelines for good storytelling.

Start in the Middle

Never begin a story at the beginning. Beginnings are boring. All they tend to contain is contextual information that can be figured out later. If you must start at the beginning, make it short.

Engage the Senses

Metaphors and similes are your friend, especially when you can allow your listener to experience the same sensory perceptions that you felt in the moment of the story. Whether the night was “eerily silent, like an empty auditorium” or “dimly lit as if by candlelight,” adding small sensory cues will capture the listener’s attention.

And don’t neglect smell! Smell is the only sense that is linked directly to emotion. If you can make your audience experience the smells of your story, you will have them riveted.

Embed Your Value

Within your stories, subtly convey the qualities you want your audience to take away. Never state those qualities explicitly. Rather, allow your actions in the story or the description of your emotions to illustrate those qualities.

Use Open Loops

You probably know it as “going off on a tangent,” but open looping will make your stories both more interesting and more memorable. People tend to remember things that are embedded inside open loops, so by deliberately not finishing a thread of your story, you can increase the chances that people will remember the things that you want them to remember. Open looping feels awkward until you get used to it, especially for men. Most people are used to conveying whole thoughts before moving on to new ones rather than layering and weaving them together. Then again, most people are boring storytellers.

Be Dramatic

If your tone and the rhythm of your speech are constant, you will bore your audience to death. Vary your volume, the speed of your speech, your facial expressions, your posture, and anything else that can help you dramatize your stories. Make the changes small and tasteful, but use huge changes to signify the important aspects of the story.

Ask Questions

Your stories don’t have to be interactive, but you should always include questions to keep your listener engaged. “Have you ever” questions are great for this purpose, as they don’t require a long response (or any at all), but get the listener thinking about their own life and remembering their own emotions.

Share Your Thoughts and Emotions

Good stories need to have characters the audience can identify with, and if you are the main character of your own story (and you should be), the audience needs to understand you. You need to engage the audience’s empathy, even if they might disagree with your actions, they still need to empathize. The best way to do that is to share your inner thoughts and emotions (within the story). Don’t just tell the audience what happened. Tell them how you felt about it, what you were thinking, and what alternatives you also considered.

Now, I want to share a story to convey these tactics. I’ll share it twice. First as I would tell it, and second as a horribly boring storyteller would tell it. Take note of the above tactics and how they enhance the story.

Little kids have this power over people that just can’t be explained. When I was coaching, I had a little 6 year old – his name was Jack, but we called him Jack-Jack like The Incredibles – and he was so hard to work with because he was so damn cute. This one time, he comes up to me and he tugs on my swim suit and looks up at me with his big puppy-dog eyes and says “Coach Dave, can I do a cannonball?” It’s so frustrating, because if I let him do it, then I have to let every other kid do one too, so I have to tell him no, but then he says “ok, can I do a jet-sky-rocket 15?” Now, I have never heard of a jet-sky-rocket 15, and I’m curious. What the hell is this kid going to do? So I tell him ok, but make it fast. So Jack-Jack climbs up on the blocks, which is quite a feat for a guy his size - he kind of looks like Gollum from Lord of the Rings – he sticks one foot out, holds his nose, puts his hand up in the air and jumps. And he makes this noise like a cat that’s mad at you for ignoring it. It was the cutest thing, but of course the older kids on the team saw it, and they started doing it. So two years later, I’m at a pool on the other side of town, and I see some 16 year old kid doing the jet-sky-rocket 15 and I just can’t believe it. Little freakin’ Jack-Jack invented that. I guess big things do come in small packages.

Is there an important takeaway from this story? No, but it’s interesting enough, and it conveys a few things subtly about me. Did you know I was a swim coach with a soft spot for little kids doing cute things and a weird obsession with short characters in movies? Exactly.

Now, here’s how I could have told it if I wanted to bore you to tears and make you ask “why are you telling me this story?”

A few years ago, I coached a youth swim team, and we had this one kid named Jack. He was a cute little 6 year old. So one day he comes up to me and asks if he can do a cannonball. It’s in the middle of practice, so I tell him no, so he asks if he can do a jet-sky-rocket 15. Fine, I have no idea what that is. So he jumps off the block with his foot out and his hand up and makes this weird noise, and some of the older kids see it and start doing it too. Then a couple years later I see someone do it at a different pool. Can you believe a 6 year old could start a trend that would reach that far?

BOOOORRRRRIIIIINNNNGGGG!!!!!!!

That story is under 300 words. I can tell it in about a minute (but I’d probably take 2 for dramatic effect). That’s a pretty good length. Generally 200-400 words is about right for early in a conversation. Later in a conversation, 800-1200 words is a good length.

Post your own stories to the comments and I’ll offer my thoughts on how you can improve them. Let me know who your target audience is and I’ll help you tailor it to them as well. Obviously, you would tell a story differently to a different audience.

And yes, some of you have heard that story before. Yes, it’s true. Yes, I scripted it. No, that doesn’t make it less genuine.