Transcript
Dave Bricker (00:06)
Want to expand your speaking and storytelling skills and grow your influence business? This is Speakipedia Media brought to you by speakepedia.com. I’m your host, Dave Bricker, bringing you straight talk and smart strategies from visionary speakers and thought leaders. My guest is part message designer, part English to English translator, and part magpie who helps leaders craft their case for large scale change.
She’s worked with major organizations such as Harvard Medical School, Fidelity Investments, and Clavio. She’s a judge and mentor for the Harvard Innovation Labs, a professional advisor at the Martin Trust Center for MIT Entrepreneurship, and has spent over 10 years as the idea strategist for one of only nine legacy-level TEDx events in the world. She was named to the Thinkers 50 Radar in 2022, and she’s the author of
Find your red thread, make your big ideas irresistible, and say what they can’t unhear, the nine principles of lasting change. Tamsen Webster, try that again. Tamsen Webster, thank you for joining me on the Speakipedia Podcast.
Tamsen Webster (01:18)
Ha!
is my pleasure Dave. Hello, hello and hello fellow speakers out there.
Dave Bricker (01:29)
Thanks, Tamsen. So the headline on your website says, I change how people see. Unpack that a little bit.
Tamsen Webster (01:37)
Yes. Well, so much of why we do what we do is based on how we, the lens through which we view the world, the perspectives that we use, the meanings that we use, the paradigms, the mental models. And there is good science actually that says if we want to change what people do, we have to actually change that how they see the world first. And so that’s really what I’ve spent.
25 years studying and working on and putting into practice both for my clients and for speakers. Really, how is it that we can help people shift how they see the world so that they can change what they do in it?
Dave Bricker (02:18)
love that. And of course, beliefs die so hard. A belief is a tenacious thing, even if it’s a belief in something that has absolutely no foundation in fact. So changing how people see is a very important challenge these days.
Tamsen Webster (02:23)
Yes!
It is. And I think one of the things you bring up is one of the reasons why it can be. But the reason why it can be so hard is that we in fact try to change beliefs rather than the combination of beliefs and goals and values that really create that perspective, that point of view that we have, our philosophy of the world. And so what I have found to be successful and really what this book is all about is
instead of trying to change people’s beliefs, actually just change what beliefs are being used in any particular situation so that we are allowing people to remain who they are. We’re not trying to change their identity, even if we’re trying to change their behavior. And we’re working more on helping a new behavior feel more comfortable because it’s based on beliefs that people already have.
Dave Bricker (03:35)
I like that because a challenged belief is usually one that gets held to more tightly. So I get-
Tamsen Webster (03:40)
Yeah, I mean, it’s just natural. Yeah, that’s psychology, right? If someone tries to challenge your beliefs, you’re like, no, I’m going to hold on to it even more. One of my big philosophies from the stage is that I want to have a lasting impact. I wish that six months. You know, we did evaluation sheets six months later because I want something I say to really stick in people’s minds.
So that even if they don’t change right away, it does start to change how they think about something And a lot of that comes from the power of using the beliefs they have in a new way
Dave Bricker (04:15)
I agree with you there. So Tamsen, you credit your 13 years as a Weight Watchers leader for teaching you everything you know about people speaking and change.
Tamsen Webster (04:27)
when I was a Weight Watchers leader, you had to have been a Weight Watcher member in order to do that. And so I became a Weight Watcher leader because, I had had success on it. I wanted to pay it forward. And because if I didn’t become a leader, then the meeting I attended was going to close down because I didn’t have anybody who would lead it. So I decided to step in and,
I am so grateful I did. So evenings, weekends, early mornings for 13 years, I led groups of anywhere from five to 150 people facilitating meetings about various topics that would ideally help them achieve their health goals, whatever those would be. So I did the math once and it turns out that that was over 3000 presentations.
And when you are working with people around something that tends to be so emotionally fraught and the difficulties with achieving health goals can be very, very tied to people’s deeply held beliefs or fears. You learn a lot pretty quickly about what does and doesn’t work to help people achieve what they’re looking for.
in a timeframe that works for them. so what I found was that just felt, since so many of those lessons were against things that I had been taught from a marketing, sales, and other forms of persuasive messaging, I started to use the lessons I learned in that meeting room in my professional life and brought that into my…
marketing work, my message design work, my change communications work, and lo and behold, wouldn’t you know it, it ends up being a lot more effective. And I think that’s because nothing happens at the organizational level, at the market level, or even at the society level, if it doesn’t happen at the individual level first. And so that’s really where I’ve spent my time figuring all that out.
Dave Bricker (06:35)
Yeah. The other thing that’s packed in there is all of those presentations. I mean, I was a teacher for 14 years and nobody ever said, guess what? You’re a professional speaker. And I think if you’re giving all of those presentations, just I’m just doing my job. I’m not a professional speaker. And yet so many of us are indeed professional speakers, but because we’re not necessarily up on a keynote stage or speaking at the big conference.
Tamsen Webster (06:46)
Right. Yeah.
Dave Bricker (07:05)
We just write that off.
Tamsen Webster (07:07)
I mean, we are, I forget whose phrase it is. It’s not mine. So if I could remember the credit, I would give it. But I definitely consider myself a professional who speaks. Because even in the years that I was a Weight Watchers leader, I had started to speak on stages. It first started with conference association stages, not as a keynote, but as breakout speaker and as somebody who was doing the work and then wanted to share that information with my.
fellow colleagues. And then when I hopped over to the agency side of the fence, it just it’s an unparalleled way to generate leads not to sell from the stage. That’s not never been my never, but never been my approach. But my husband and I came up with this term free noting, like keynoting, but free. And for us, it’s really about that. I mean, trust me, I do still like to get paid for keynotes.
But there is a real value in understanding how you can free note in such a way that you profit from speaking for free. And so we even did a short run podcast on that, a limited run podcast on that for a bit. I’ve always loved being able to work one to many like that because I feel like it’s a way to help more people more quickly.
Dave Bricker (08:29)
what is the red thread?
Tamsen Webster (08:32)
So the red thread is the name, well, the name I’ve given to the stories we tell ourselves that explain why we believe the world works the way that it does. It’s borrowed from an idiom that a fair number of Northern Europeans use, Swedish, those kinds of things, those kinds of people, and they use it to mean what’s the…
you know, what’s the through line? What’s the thing that connects this? What makes this make sense? What’s the logical progression of ideas? And its root is in that red thread, because there’s lots of different red threads out there culturally. But this particular red thread is founded in the myth of Theseus and the Minotaur and the Minotaur’s labyrinth. And I don’t know how anybody knew the thread was red, but it has over time.
come to be read, the thread is what a woman Ariadne gave Theseus to help trace his path through the labyrinth, through the maze, so that after defeating the Minotaur that was threatening their society and their city, he could find his way back out. And since not only did the idiom, but also its…
root in that myth, mimic the process that I’ve used to work with people to find that connection and find that story that people will tell themselves about the idea. The red thread seemed like the perfect name.
Dave Bricker (09:59)
Love that. So as a fellow storyteller, it’s just, it’s yet another path up the same mountain. And I’m always amazed at how, many there are. so one of your focuses is on change. And that strikes me as one of those topics that everybody thinks they know about because we’ve all experienced change. Right. So
Tamsen Webster (10:10)
absolutely.
Mm.
Dave Bricker (10:26)
What are the nuances of that?
Tamsen Webster (10:29)
There’s where do we start? mean, I think that there’s a lot of people in change a lot of people in I mean, it’s it’s the nuances are what kind of what level of change are you talking about? Where are you focused? I have always considered my specialization to be change communications So how do you how do you talk to people in such a way so that you are inspiring? internally motivated action
It’s a lesson I learned from Weight watchers. It doesn’t matter like what you try to offer people on the outside. If they’re not internally driven to act, then they won’t keep acting. And the thing is that, I mean, I think that the biggest nuance that I like to pay attention to is that we oftentimes mistake action for change. And I create a very sharp line between those two.
You can’t have change without action, but you can certainly have action without change. And to me, change is a much more desirable outcome. Whether you are looking at it for ethical reasons or economic reasons or efficiency reasons, the more that somebody not just does something once, but keeps doing it and keeps doing it because they…
want to, they are motivated to do it from inside, not because there’s some payoff that’s facing them or some loss that they’re going to risk for not doing it. And I just, wasn’t seeing a lot of advice. I don’t see a lot of advice out there on how to actually get that long-term change to happen. And I certainly wasn’t seeing it as it applied to speaking on stages because I think there’s a lot of focus with speakers on
getting people to feel things and getting people to do things, but not on getting people to continue to feel in such a way that they will continue to do. And that’s really what part of what I wanted to address and fill the gap on.
Dave Bricker (12:30)
And the world moves ever faster. And it is an important topic. think about, if you’d asked me about AI two years ago, I would have just said, not interested. I don’t care. And it’s become a big part of my work and what I talk about and trying to keep the human factor, the HI involved in the AI, all of this stuff.
Tamsen Webster (12:41)
Yeah. Yeah.
Dave Bricker (12:54)
And I think about how COVID brought rapid change and there’s so much change. And for the people who can’t change, they’re just being left behind at an astonishing rate.
Tamsen Webster (13:08)
Yeah, well, I mean, think one of the things that’s important to understand is that we are all changing all the time every day. And so when we talk about change being hard or people not being able to change, it’s usually not a wholesale thing, right? There’s usually a change that we wish they were making and that they are not. And those are the ones that
are interesting to people because if you are a leader and you’re charged with getting people to change or you’re a speaker and you want to inspire that change, then it’s important to understand where that resistance to change really comes from. And I think a lot of times people talk about it in terms of loss, prospect theory that people, they’re operated, they’re motivated from not wanting to lose things.
But I think that the larger categorization for that is that the resistance to change is actually a resistance to risk. other words, change aversion is risk aversion. So yes, risk of loss, yes, risk of pain, but it’s also risk of not fulfilling potential. It’s a risk of, you know, not enjoying something, of getting the results, but not, liking how they feel. And so if we can really understand what’s required to help someone
feel less at risk because of a change, then it helps them generally be in a much different frame of mind about it. And that comes back to what we talking about earlier, Dave, about really resisting what feels like a natural path of just trying to get them to change what they believe. But that’s usually not the way to go. It really does come in to say, like,
how can we tie a new behavior to a pre existing desire or goal that somebody already has like something that you know, a direction that they’re already traveling, how can we make a change fit that? And how can we make the reasoning for that change be reasoning that that person intuitively recognizes as accurate, true and
the reason why it would likely deliver on the thing that you’re saying it is. And while that’s a fairly short explanation, just about every word in there, I could probably write a book on about what all of that means. But fundamentally, this whole idea of building buy-in comes back to the idea of a red thread. We need to build a story that people will tell themselves. But if we want to make sure that it’s a story that people agree with, that they believe enough in to act on it,
We need to build that story with elements that the audience already agrees with. And that sometimes like blows people’s mind because I’m trying to be new. I’m trying to be different. I’m like, if you put the things together, right, you will be. But again, if you’re trying to get people in a position where they are more likely to understand your idea, more likely to be moved to act and to keep acting.
It really does come down to constructing that story with elements they already agree with.
Dave Bricker (16:27)
And that resonates completely with me because so often I’ll work with speakers who come in and they’re telling their big story about their cancer diagnosis or their climb up Mount Everest or whatever it may be, but
Tamsen Webster (16:42)
All valuable, all significant. yeah. And.
Dave Bricker (16:45)
I wouldn’t diminish it. I you’re not going to find me on Mount Everest, but it’s about them. And they haven’t crossed that bridge using that as a metaphor for the mountains that the audience needs to climb, the marathons that the audience needs to run, the adversity that the audience needs to deal with. And yes, it’s so important to tell your story about the audience.
Tamsen Webster (17:13)
Yeah. mean, so, and I love how you frame that Dave, because, you one of the things that, that we say behind the curtains of, of Tedx organizing is that, you know, particularly even with Tedx talks, but I think this applies no matter what, that the real important thing that we’re trying to do is make sure there’s an idea that is larger than the context that created it.
Meaning, okay, you climbed Everest, congratulations, thank goodness you have recovered and gotten past cancer. And I’m sorry, but there’s one more task for you, which is what is the idea in that that anyone can apply regardless of whether or not they will ever have to face cancer or ever choose to climb Mount Everest? And the reason why that’s so important, Dave, is because
when it comes to acting and continuing to act, I have found that three things have to be true. Number one, people have to believe that what you’re saying is possible in principle. And so that’s where saying, hey, you can climb Mount Everest. Some people are going like, well, I see that you did. So clearly it’s possible in principle to do this. But the next thing is in order for them to act is that they have to feel like it’s possible in practice.
Right? So if there’s not something that can, that can translate from whatever your own personal story is to something that they can do, because they’ve got a different background, they’ve got different, they’ve got a different life, they’re in a different place than you are most likely, then they’re not going to act. So we have to figure out that piece. And then the third thing is that people believe it’s worth it. And this is where so often
we come back to that idea of anchoring a new behavior to something that somebody already wants. Because a lot of times what we’re doing when we taught persuasive messaging or even taught speaking and speech construction is that we’re told to get people to kind of like realize what the real problem is and get them to want to solve that instead. Except this may be the first time they’ve heard it.
Right? And so, and if their whole time that they’ve lived up until the moment of seeing you is that they have been pursuing something else, it’s very unlikely. I don’t care how good of a speaker you are. It’s very unlikely that person is going to wholesale shift to something else. Now, if we can make the case that that real problem is the problem they have to solve in order to get the thing that they already want.
Well, now you’ve taken what you’ve done and now you’ve made it even more attractive to them because it’s worth it. Like this new thing that they weren’t sure of, but now that you’ve made the case where it’s impossible, where it’s possible in practice, it’s possible in principle, and you’ve tied it to something that was already worth it for them, then you found a really magic combination that thankfully, like most magic tricks, actually just means understanding the method and then it can still feel like magic even if it’s not.
Dave Bricker (20:23)
Love that. So what is the relationship between change and messaging? How are those intertwined?
Tamsen Webster (20:33)
So I see them intertwined as the, well, I will first quote one of my favorite authors, Agatha Christie, who says that words are only the outer clothing of ideas. And so if we apply that to change, oftentimes, whether we are trying to inspire change in somebody else or we are trying to inspire it within ourselves, it comes down to
the stories that we literally are telling, the language that we’re using, the words that we’re using, the case that we’re making, the reasons that we’re providing, that whole frame of reference, that philosophy of the change. And in order to capture that, again, for ourselves or for others, that requires words. And so the way that I generically would define a message is a message is how you talk about an idea.
to a particular person, inclusive of yourself, to achieve a certain outcome. So if that outcome is a change, and oftentimes it is, then these are intimately connected because the words are how you take something abstract and you make it concrete. And so to me, you cannot get to change without a message, but whether or not you have a message that actually creates change,
is where I spend most of my time figuring out how to help other people or helping other helping people help other people create change.
Dave Bricker (22:04)
Cracking the communication code, I join you in that. It occupies a great deal of my time, but it’s a fun playground. If you’re just joining us, you’re tuned into Speakipedia Media for aspiring and professional speakers and thought leaders who want to change hearts, minds, and fortunes. My guest today is speaker, author, and change expert, Tamsen Webster.
Tamsen Webster (22:15)
It is.
Dave Bricker (22:32)
Too many people try to communicate by imitating the ineffective messages they see every day. We get all of those emails, says, pick me, buy from me, do you need me emails? So what are they missing?
Tamsen Webster (22:50)
Well, so many things. In fact, I’ve got nine principles in my new book that talk about what they miss. so let me pick my top three. Top three. It’s an incomplete message. So I’ll come back to that incomplete message. Number two, there is there is it’s asking people to change who they are rather than what they do. And I would say the third one is that they’re skipping over
the very first kind of step zero of the message and that’s making sure that people understand. So kind of the first one that is an incomplete message. I think there’s a lot of messages out there that say
We solve this problem, so hire us. But they don’t say how they solve it. There’s a lot of mess, so that’s incomplete because it’s a problem. Basically, it’s message based on a problem, but there’s no solution. Second, sometimes we see a solution with no problem. You really should do this, use my thing. And we haven’t actually connected it to a problem or my preference, a question that somebody’s already asking, that they’re not going to stop asking anytime soon.
So that’s an incomplete message as well. So, but even if we do problem and solution, do this to get that, right? Like that’s the message. If you hire me, if you do this thing, if you make this change, you’ll get this outcome. I would still argue that that’s enough to get somebody interested, but it’s not enough to get someone to act and keep acting. Because that doesn’t get someone to agree in principle. All that is is a claim.
that if you do X, you’ll get Y. If you hire me, you’ll get this. If you make my change, you’ll get this outcome that you’re looking for. You’ll solve this problem. So a complete message, whether that’s delivered, and you need to decide how and where you deliver it. You don’t always need all the pieces all the time, but you certainly do if you’re giving a talk, is what is the case that supports that claim? And that’s where I come back to those elements that somebody already agrees with, because
We want to make sure that there’s a question that they already have. That’s agreement number one. Agreement number two and three are with principles that support your change. So let’s say every decision has a story, principle number two. And the actions that people agree with are based on beliefs they already have, principle number three. And therefore, if we’re trying to build buy-in, we need to, here’s the fourth thing that they would have to agree with.
put those two together. We need to build a story based on elements that people already agree with. So to me, a complete message has all of those things. So that what I’d say is like, that’s the first place I start when I’m looking at somebody’s message, working with a client or working with a speaker saying, do you have all those parts? And do those parts fit together for the audience that you’re looking for, for the outcome that you’re looking for?
Dave Bricker (25:57)
And it’s interesting because in copywriting and persuasive messaging, there are certain words that we call stink words, words that we don’t want to put in a persuasive message. Sadly, one of them is learn because too many people have had very negative experiences with school and learning, which I grieve over that because I love learning. right, right. But the another one is work.
Tamsen Webster (26:19)
You were teacher, you said? Yeah, yeah.
Hmm.
Dave Bricker (26:27)
Another one is need. And so many of these messages, to the point you’re making about it’s got to be a problem we agree with, really start with some version of, you know what your problem is, you need this. And we immediately recoil because somebody is telling us what we need and intuitively we feel condescended to. They do not lead us to the conclusion that we might need something.
Tamsen Webster (26:39)
Yeah, that’s right.
That’s right. And so two things on that. One is there’s another thing that can be activated, and that is a feeling of a loss of control. Right? When someone says, well, you know what you need? you need this. I mean, I totally agree that that oftentimes comes off as condescending, but it also can be perceived by people consciously or not as you’re telling me what to do. And that also we have to be very careful of because the natural reaction to someone
to that perception that we’ve lost control of the situation is to grab it back. Even if that means saying no to something that otherwise we would have said yes to, which is a fascinating thing. So I think that’s a key thing. The second thing I want to bring up, though, and I think that this is important is that I resist saying that there are words we should never use because it depends on who you’re talking to. Now, if your audience is a group of people who love to learn,
and that is who you’re for and your whole approach is based in that, then I would actually encourage you to use the word learn because it’s gonna keep the people who don’t really agree and who don’t really want and don’t really align with how you do things, it’s gonna filter them out. The same thing about work. Some people are totally willing to work and some people do understand that what they need right now is a particular thing.
So it really is about aligning with what level of awareness that your ideal audience currently has and really knowing who that ideal audience is and what their mindset is. Because that I think is, you know, to add to the list of things that we sometimes miss. I think we try to appeal to everyone in the audience and by doing so we end up resonating with very, very few.
And I think that’s a problem.
Dave Bricker (28:54)
Absolutely. it’s for anything that’s completely rule driven, like they say, never say never. Right. Well, once in a while, that’s great. Sometimes you can say never, sometimes you can say always. Any of these words have their place. if, yes.
Tamsen Webster (29:00)
Never say never. Yep.
Just make it a choice. think that’s the point is like, yeah, don’t do it unknowingly, right? Without like avoid, should say, avoid doing it without choosing to do it without with intention. And I think that’s important, right? Because if your point, Dave, like if you’re, if you are talking to people who would be resistant to any kind of learning, you know, and I, and I get it. I mean, I, you know, I started a doctoral program this summer and it’s an adult learning. And, and, and, know, the first thing I come at it, you know, as a 25 year,
branding and message designers like y’all have a branding problem. But I mean, to me, this is where kind of message design is actually a business friendly term for teaching. Because it’s you know, most people feel like they need a message and they they need to understand how to get people to understand things. You and I both know that that’s teaching and education. But
I mean, means understanding how people learn. I think that’s the, know, again, it’s just about understanding where you’re coming from and making sure that there is alignment between who you want and how you’re talking to them.
Dave Bricker (30:18)
Right. And making again that conscious choice about why we want to use the word learn instead of discover or explore in that particular context.
Tamsen Webster (30:27)
Right. Yeah. I mean, because if you are, I mean, you could even argue, Dave, I think that learn maybe not always, but maybe the kind of word you’d want to use in a breakout session or in a very professional or workplace development oriented company and discover, right, maybe a better
term and for certain places for like a keynote presentation because it’s though I’m seeing this change actively since COVID but keynotes are not as focused on actionable takeaways oftentimes but again I’m seeing that change daily towards companies really want actionable keynotes. But again it’s about how are you talking to a particular audience to achieve a particular outcome and so
that’s not divorced from the context of the environment that you’re in and where you are, like where you are on the program and the agenda and whether or not you’re the keynote stage or in the breakout session, whatever. All of it is worth thinking about.
Dave Bricker (31:41)
Yes, and I’m sure you and I could go on for hours about what goes into a keynote versus a workshop and what language do we use, because that’s our playground. But let’s stick for the moment with this messaging concept, because you talk about a three-step process for creating effective messages. So how does that work?
Tamsen Webster (32:02)
So I use the analogy of a house where there’s a foundation, there’s a frame, and then there’s finishing work. And I would say a lot of times we jump straight to the finishing work where we’re trying to paint walls that don’t exist or hang chandeliers on ceilings that aren’t really there. And it’s not that those things aren’t important, they are.
because just as in a house or apartment or your home, it’s those details that make it yours, that make it feel really, it makes it feel very cozy for somebody else, your audience sees it and goes, yes, I feel at home here. But if we do that, and once they feel what they’re gonna feel in the room, and they’re all fired up, then a couple days pass, and their prefrontal cortex takes over, and they start to think about what you did.
and what you said, not just how they felt about it. If it doesn’t really stand, like then we’ve got a problem. So that’s where the framing piece comes in. I put into finishing this idea of like, that’s where the, you your delivery comes and which stories you tell and how do you tell them and you’re blocking and your slides and like all your phrases that pay and all of that. And the framing for me is,
is the various forms of structure. And what I mean by that is, does it have all the core pieces that your audience needs and able to understand what that full message is, what that claim is that you’re making and what the case is for it? Or do you have the connective tissue that works from one step to the other? I mean, my approach to the red thread is basically using a story structure for the whole keynote.
So not just having stories, but actually structuring the keynote like a story. the sections are actually pieces of that story that you’re telling. But even if you’ve got this beautifully constructed talk and you’ve got a really lovely balance of illustration types, know, so you’ve not just have data and research, but you’ve got stories and you’ve got interaction and you’ve got these phrases that pay. If all of that is fundamentally
all in support of something that your audience either doesn’t care about, doesn’t understand, or doesn’t agree with, doesn’t matter. And so that’s for me where the foundation piece comes in. And that’s where that core claim and that core case come in, because that means that from the very beginning, before we’ve even grabbed a story to tell, before we’ve even drafted a description, we are thinking about
fundamentally, what is the claim I making in this keynote? And that is, okay, what is my answer to this urgent important question my ideal audience is actively and knowingly asking right now? And how can I make a case for it? Simple, strong case based on elements they already agree with, based on beliefs they already have. So that we’re tuning in that foundation phrase or making sure that agreement is built in from the beginning.
In that framing core story phrase, we’re making sure that we’ve built an understanding because that and engagement because that story structure is how we make sense of information. So we put it in that order and research shows that people automatically understand things better just by being put into that into that structure. And then, right, then we’re ready to finish it off. Then we’re ready to put all those extra pieces and paint the walls and hang the curtains and all of that on it.
and really make it our own. And so that to me is those three stages. And by and large, most people skip the first two and I would say 99 % of people skip the first one.
Dave Bricker (36:00)
And I see it all the time. And this segs beautifully. You talked about it a little bit, but you say storytelling is the best vehicle for understanding, a sentiment I completely agree with on a religious level. And unpack that a little bit. Why storytelling?
Tamsen Webster (36:10)
Yeah. Yes.
Well, is, so stories themselves are great. bring, they carry, they do a lot of work for us in any given situation when we’re telling a story, let’s say, like, let me go back and tell a story from when I was at Weight Watchers, because they’re allowing us to use people’s own experiences. They’re just pulling a lot more information than you could use with just straight words, or if you’re just.
talking about the concepts, it really brings things to life. as much as, know, that counter intuitively, it makes a lot of the concepts that you’re talking about more concrete. I want to make sure that it’s clear that I associate storytelling with story structure and structure is important. And part of the reason why stories have all of that is because, again, this goes back to, you know, cognitive functioning of our brains.
that happens pre prefrontal cortex, where our brains are literally figuring out how things are related to each other, creating these cause and effect relationships, which are in essence our stories because they’re not necessarily what’s happened, but they are our interpretations of what’s happened. And these these cause and effect relationships, these quote unquote stories, they are what our brains go to when we’re trying to understand things. So
The thing is that each of us constructs those cause and effect relationship, those kind of brain stories in exactly the same way. There’s certain components that we have to hear in order to pay attention, in order to understand. And they have to be of a certain nature in order for us to agree with them. So again, there’s great research, really interesting research that shows that simply by putting something into the structure of a story, what we’re essentially doing is we’re uploading that information right into the story processes of somebody’s brain.
And which reduces friction. It reduces the chance that something gets lost in translation. And importantly, it doesn’t leave any holes in the story that they’re trying to build. And this is where an incomplete message can get you in trouble because our our need to make stories, to make sense of things is so strong and so compelling. Again, this is unconscious that we do this.
that if we are presented with information, let’s say in a keynote or a talk or whatever it might be, and we don’t hear all the pieces that fit into that story structure that our brains are looking for, we will fill in with pieces of our own, which means we might determine that if you just tell me problem and solution, I might come up with my own case about how those two are connected or worse, how they’re not connected.
Or you might completely put me in a position of misinterpreting what you’re saying because again, I haven’t heard something that I need so I may not feel that I need what you’re talking about. So this is why I’m so passionate about story structure is because it’s literally how we make sense of the world. And so if we want people to make sense of the information that we’re putting out there, we have to put it into that form in order if we really want to maximize how well they understand it.
Dave Bricker (39:43)
Yes, and you’re so speaking my language there because one of the things I find, for example, AI is so mediocre at storytelling. And the reason is it’s made inferences about story structure from this great landfill of data that it mines information from, but it doesn’t really know how to put an introduction together or an elevator pitch or a
Tamsen Webster (40:00)
UGH!
Dave Bricker (40:12)
an epic novel or a workshop, it will take that linear approach. Well, introduction, talk about ABC, conclusion. That’s not a story. to really dive deep into how does the brain or if you will, the mind, because too many people boil this down to hormones and things, which I think misses the point. But how do we
Tamsen Webster (40:32)
It’s true. Yeah.
Ha! It does, thank you, yep, it does.
Dave Bricker (40:42)
It’s not about cortisol and dopamine. That’s all it, right, right. But there are ways our mind processes information. And if we can organize that keynote into those buckets and then put it together, all of a sudden it’s incredibly effective. It reaches people and they’re not reaching for their phones in the middle of it.
Tamsen Webster (40:47)
Not just, not just about. Yeah.
That’s right. And you and what I have found over and over again is that you can introduce incredibly sophisticated concepts, incredibly sophisticated ideas in very short amounts of time. So here I’m directly referencing my TEDx work simply by using that structure. And I don’t even mean like tell a story. I mean, just by using that structure. Because part of the whole reason I came up with
My approach to story structure in the first place, the red thread, was because I was working with a lot of research scientists that were fundamentally uncomfortable with telling a story. just, culturally, it’s not done, right? From, you know, when research scientists talk to other research scientists. Now, you and I might say, yes, but they’re still humans. They’re still going to respond. But those are one of those places where I’m not going to win the battle with them about, well, as you now suddenly need to be comfortable about telling a personal story on stage.
They’re not, and I don’t want to put them in that position. But they can be very comfortable with taking their information and putting it into the structure of a story where we do create some kind of hook. They’re used to that. That’s in academic papers that leads to a question that people have that actively that they know they want and that they aren’t going to want the answer to. We lead them through how into a problem in getting that that they didn’t know that they had before.
Then we need to make sure, and this is something so many people miss, we need to make sure there’s a second moment, that there’s actually a moment of truth. This goes all the way back to Aristotle, where there is no story of change that happens without that moment of truth. And so it isn’t just having a real problem. That’s fine. That disrupts your status quo. But there has to be a moment where you actually recognize the true nature of your circumstances so that your audience
the main character has a choice to make, which isn’t just, do I solve this problem or not? It’s do I solve the problem knowing what I know now? And then making a decision about what happens. And so, and one of things that I wanted to do with the red thread is make sure that those elements that I included, which they’re just recapping quickly, or a goal, a problem, a truth, a change, and then the actions required to put them in place applied no matter the
form of a story. So you’re probably very familiar as I’m sure your listeners are with how dominant hero’s journey story structures have become. But given my background, they’re not always appropriate. I mean, they’re not always appropriate because for a number of reasons. Number one, biggest one.
There’s not always a villain, right? Number two, like a defined villain, right? Like, that’s kind of a rule of the hero’s journey is you have to have a defined villain. Number two, not every problem can be solved completely by the hero. Like, that’s another rule of the hero’s journey. It’s not the mentor that solves the problem. It’s the hero that solves the problem. And third, the hero saves the day, right?
and meaning the hero solves the problem and solves it all on their own and is transformed in the process. So I think that even if you start to back up and go, huh, am I really saying that when I use this brand, this hero’s journey to kind of tell the story of my brand, that our clients are fundamentally transformed and that their problems are totally solved by…
working with us or by taking the action I’m saying in my my keynote? I don’t think so. But that’s my own opinion. Your mileage may vary.
Dave Bricker (44:54)
And again, that’s fine. And no, my mileage is the same. think Hero’s Journey is wonderful, but it has a lot of moving parts. And if you are putting together Star Wars or Wizard of Oz or some sort of an epic novel, it’s a great framework. It’s still missing some pieces in certain respects, and it has more pieces than are needed. If you’re creating a persuasive message, a pitch,
a TEDx talk, any kind of functional practical story. There are models that are much simpler and much more effective than Hero’s Journey. And finally, if you try to read The Hero with a Thousand Faces, the original Campbell, for a guy who understood so much about storytelling, that book is so obtuse, it’s cryptic to try to read it. I’m a pretty good reader, but I just couldn’t get through it.
I went to YouTube for the explanation because I just found it impossible to get through.
Tamsen Webster (45:58)
Yeah, it’s always amusing to me. I was talking about this with another friend of mine that’s in the message design space and he was noting how, you know, of pretty much every Ted X talk that we’ve seen on message clarity exceeds the time limit for Ted. And we’re like, I don’t think that’s how it should go. Like, I think, you know, again, you should be able to do it much more quickly. But I love your point here, Dave, is because I think a lot of times we make this a lot harder than it actually needs to be.
And so somewhere between the 12 to 13, depending on how you count them, steps of the hero’s journey and the opening three point close structure that is typical and typically recommended for talks. I don’t agree, by the way. Do not support that. Do not support the opening three points close. It is that there are there’s a wealth of other forms that are not only more interesting for your audience, frankly, and for you.
but they can do a lot more, right? Like they can be much, much more powerful. And there’s nothing that I love better than when somebody comes back to me after using my approaches to put together a talk or something like that. And I had someone just the other day come back and said, I kept getting these comments afterwards that I just, couldn’t look away. And it was just like, I was engaged from the first moment all the way through.
There’s the thing, you don’t have to rely on gimmicks and cheap things, cheap emotional thrills when you’re doing that. Because by using a simplified story structure, by using those elements that are in every story form, no matter what kind of story it is, rags to riches, quest, hero’s journey, buddy movie, any of those things, horror, boy meets girl, person meets person.
there is always ups and downs built in and there’s always new things introduced that create that curiosity that could compel the narrative forward. And I would say that’s probably one of my favorite reasons to use story structure. And I think it’s one of the ones that people miss is that everybody always quotes Maya Angelou. Come back to that. Like they won’t remember what you did and what you said, but they’ll remember how you feel. I’m like, you know what though? They’re gonna…
I a heck of a lot more about what you said, right? If they feel something, but it’s like, it’s even better if you can combine like what if, right? You can make them feel awesome and give them something they can’t in here. But that’s the thing. If I have no other argument and I have plenty against the opening three point close is that it is narratively flat. There is no way to create emotional momentum in that structure structurally.
because it’s flat, it’s open, point 1, point 2, point 3, close. And so you have to rely on things like story or delivery or know, whiz bang things to get that done. But when you open, when you structure as a story, there’s built in going to be those ups and downs because if you start with people knowing they need to solve a problem, we’ve used the stink word, then they’re starting in a low place, right?
And when you introduce that there is actually something else in that’s getting in the way, depending on what that is and how they feel about it, it’s either going to drive them temporarily lower or it’s going to give them hope, right? That they’re like, that’s why I haven’t had done this. But then and here’s why the moment of truth is so important, but you say, that’s not all, right? Because if we just do this, we’re still either we’re not going to get all of it or we’ve opened up a new problem. So therefore,
this next thing, and then you pull it all together to say, here’s what that means. Here is the thing that when you do it now, because of that problem, because of that truth, it will in fact, in principle, solve or answer this question that you had. And then here’s how, and that’s the actions piece. So you see that there’s like, this is normal up and down. And what ends up happening is that it creates its own natural momentum towards the end.
because what it means is once you hit that change, then you’re just rolling to the end and you’re able to end on a much, much higher, more powerful note because you’ve been building there then by then having to kind of like suddenly jump there from your flat presentation up until that point.
Dave Bricker (50:32)
Right, and I think opening three point close does not work because it describes a lecturer rather than, right, it’s a lecture. We’re going to cover this information and lecturers deliver information, speakers deliver transformation. And unless we focus on that outcome, that change at the end, then we’re just covering the information and it’s going to be as you described, flat.
Tamsen Webster (50:39)
It’s us.
Yeah, and part of my deep curiosity is I agree that speakers deliver transformation, but transformation, it isn’t just about explanation, right? It is in fact about argumentation, which is somebody has to hear a story that’s stronger than the one they’re telling themselves right now in order to make that transformation. So I think a lot of times what happens
And again, I can’t fault people because this information is out there, but it’s really scattered, which is why I tried to put it all together in my latest book. That we don’t pay enough attention to how that process of change actually happens or what is it that people have to hear from a communication standpoint in order to facilitate that process of change. Because it isn’t just
change. isn’t just telling people to change. It isn’t just telling them that there’s a problem. It isn’t just telling them about the stakes. It isn’t just telling them about the benefits. It isn’t just telling them about your seven point model or whatever it might be. It isn’t just telling them your story. It’s about connecting all of those things together in a way that follows an internal logic, right? But because that logic is built on belief, right?
It resonates with both their minds and their hearts, not just in the room, but afterwards as well.
Dave Bricker (52:31)
So Tamsen, tell us a little bit about the Message Design Institute and how people can get a hold of you to engage with you more deeply on these topics.
Tamsen Webster (52:38)
Sure.
So I am literally the only Tamsen Webster spelled that way, T-A-M-S-E-N, in the world. So it’s pretty easy to find. And the Message Design Institute is an online resource center that I founded last year to really take these ideas of persuasive message design and give them to the people. So we’re still in our early days of it, but it’s…
I’m trying to fill that gap that’s out there about, you know, for ethical persuasion, for change communications, for all the things you need to know about people in order to make true transformational lasting change happen. So offer a variety of things. do a monthly free webinar on the fundamentals of message design. I do, of course, still do one-on-one collaborative work with folks to design messages. But sign up for our newsletter, which you can do right there on the site, and you’ll be the first to know about all of that.
Dave Bricker (53:40)
Well, Tamsen Webster, the one and only Tamsen Webster, you so much for appearing on the Speekypedia podcast today.
Tamsen Webster (53:44)
That’s right, literally. The
pleasure. Thanks so much. What a great conversation.
Dave Bricker (53:54)
Likewise, I agree. I’m Dave Bricker, inviting you to explore the world’s most comprehensive resource for speakers and storytellers at www.speakipedia.com. If you’re watching this on video, please love, subscribe, and share your comments. If you’re listening to the podcast, keep your hands on the wheel, stay safe, and I’ll see you on the next episode of Speakipedia Media.
