
We’re often told by experts (for which read “well-meaning friends who’ve read it somewhere online”) that we should start our presentations with a big bang to grab the audience’s attention. A powerful story is often cited as one of the best ways of doing this.
Alternatives are a challenging, shocking fact or a provocative question.
Here’s the deal. It’s pointless to the point of being a myth. And while I’m ranting, it’s also counter-productive.
Let’s deal with those things one at a time.
Starting with stories is unnecessary
People are only in your presentation in the first place because they’ve got an investment in the content of some kind. Admittedly, there are going to be some people who are there only for the free tea and biscuits but as they’re going to tune out the very first opportunity they get I’m don’t really count them as being in your audience. They’re just people who happen to be in the room.
So with that in mind, by definition, the people in your audience are already interested.
And if they’re already interested, at least to some extent, they don’t need to be ‘won over’ by the exciting story at the start. What they want is for you to get to the content. Admittedly, the content might be a story, but that’s a different point – what I’m warning you against is the automatic assumption of the need to start with a story.
Cast your mind back to the last big presentation you went to. Did it have a big StoryStart? How much time did it take to get to the point?
Starting with stories is counter-productive
This falls into two bits, stay with me here.
A StoryStart annoys people who want to get straight to the information. That’s not a small percentage of the population, looking at psycho-graphics. And on top of that, see the ‘unnecessary’ point above. That’s just putting salt on a raw wound. Many people see stories as pointless fluff. They’re wrong, in that stories have proven uses, but for this kind of person, you have to earn the right to tell a story. Forcing one down their metaphorical throat is about as welcome as the unwanted kiss from your least favourite uncle.
The only thing I can think of that’s worse is the ‘autobiography start’ where the speaker spends the first four minutes of a 20 minute slot telling people who they got there. No one cares. All that guff should be in the bio that’s circulated before the meeting. What? You don’t circulate a bio before the meeting? No, no one does, really, which kind of proves my point. The bio isn’t necessary.
The other way a StoryStart annoys people is that a significant proportion of any audience is likely to be somewhat shy, quiet, introverted or reclusive. The best way to engage those folks is a gradual, warm build-up, not a bang-in-your-face moment.
An unwanted big bang StoryStart is about as welcome as forced interaction for these people. Because stories have an emotional component/effect, it feels intrusive (and therefore artificial) to these people. Ask yourself how you’d feel being forced to observe the intimate moments of a couple you barely knew.
A presentation isn’t an action movie where jumping in and starting with the action is pretty standard.
The counter-point
Of course nothing is ever as straight-forward as we’d like it to be, or as simple as I’ve made it sound. Common sense judgement is required!
And don’t forget I’m not saying never start with a story. I’m saying that if you start with a story, do it intentionally and not on autopilot.
A recent example
Here’s a short video of a very “conversational” start I used at a recent conference. Notice how I riff off the introduction and get into what is in effect a story, but doesn’t feel like one to the audience. I move quickly into a story which the video cuts off, but I’ve already got people on my side by not doing the Big Bang!