Monthly Message Design Office Hours with Tamsen Webster | October

No, there we go. Hey everyone, it's Tamsen Webster. I am the founder of the Message Design Institute and we are experimenting for the first time with a live office hours streamed straight to you. So first of all, if you're new here or this is— if you're new to me, this is an open space for for message design. What's message design? I define it as the strategic development of communications designed to inspire internally motivated action. Basically a fancy way of saying, how do we create communications that drive internally motivated change? Um, if you are here for the first time, I would love to know that you are. So pop into the comments where you're coming from, etc. Also, if you've got a specific message design question, something that isn't working, something you'd like some hints on, also pop that into the comments. I am here, but I also have my absolute right hand, Jen Hines, in the background who is keeping an eye on everything as well. So where I would love to start today as folks are kind of coming in is starting with a quick warm-up of sorts and starting where all great messages— based on my work, at least— where all great messages start with something that your audience already wants. Now, the reason why this is important is because the whole philosophy of my work and what we do here at the Message Design Institute is based on two key principles. Number one, that any action anyone takes, particularly again and again over time, is based on an argument, a rationale that they can tell themselves, a story they can tell themselves over and over again that works. Another way to think about that is every decision has a story, or as I said in my most recent book, every action ends an internal argument. So that's principle number 1. Principle number 2 behind all of our work here is that the actions we agree with— so if we're trying to get people to buy in or sustain an action, the actions that make the most sense to us, that are the most comfortable stories stories that we have to tell are based on the beliefs and the stories that we already have and the stories we already tell. So the philosophy here is that we combine, uh, that we combine this idea of that internal story with beliefs that people already have, most important of which is that they are already looking for something. So most messages start with a key question, a core question, something that they're looking for already. And one of the ways that this splits from a lot of traditional approaches to message design is that this is not— I don't like to frame it as a problem per se. And why not? Because problems crafted as somebody's got a problem. Two things. Number one, oftentimes we slide into assuming people have a problem that we're actually not sure that they have. Number 2, we presume we know what their problem is more than or better than they do. And I counter that with a third point, which is to anybody who is actively trying to answer a question, that open question, that unanswered question is problem enough. So hello, Jeanette, thanks for joining. And hello, Jessica. Oh, hey, from the What Alliance, lovely to see you here. So I basically, the way that this works going forward and the way that it's worked when we've done it privately as well is if you've got a message design question, let's say you've got something that you've been struggling with in one domain of yours or another. I'm here to answer that question so we can bring you up on stage if you want to join. We can have a comment, chat back and forth in the comments either way. So specific question or for specific situation, we can go there. Oh, thanks Jen for pointing out that if you've got a question, let me know. So let's go back to this idea in the meantime about this core question. One of the ways that I like to define it is that it is a kind of persistent irritant that your ideal audience is is, is currently trying to answer. So just to give some examples from recent clients, I've worked on messages recently that have covered everything from how do I get more energy to one I was working on just earlier this week, which is how can we do customer experience right? All sorts of different things from different ideas. But ultimately, it's about what is the question that your ideal audience actively and knowingly has, uh, that you, you and your work exists to answer. Um, so, uh, if you've got any questions about that, happy to answer it. Um, I'm just also trying to like figure out like how much riffing I need to do because typically we've got people, um, joining in here, uh, and, uh, ready to go. But so far I think we're good so far, right, Jen? Just give me a thumbs up in the background if we're— any new questions from that. OK. Oh, Sharon, hey. So, oh, Sharon's struggling with her elevator pitch. OK, great. I'm happy to— I do have a framework that I like to do. And then Jeanette is saying that she often gets too creative about how she phrases her idea and wonder what I can say about that. Well, to some extent, we can answer both questions with, with one answer. So, by the way, just as a real-life example of how to find some of these core questions, both of these would work, could function as the core of the core question of some kind of future, future message, right? For me, So note to Jen in the background. So for instance, you know, I'm sure, you know, how can I find an elevator pitch that feels comfortable to use? Or, you know, what's the best way to structure an elevator pitch that could qualify as a core question? Because this is a great example of an actual audience member having that question. It means that it's something that they haven't found a good question or a good answer, excuse me, yet. Jeanette, also this idea of Typically, you know, when people have a, have a question like that, there is, and you can tell with Jeanette, she's got this recognition already that, that maybe she's talking about her idea in a way that her audience isn't quite getting it. So we could use her language exactly, we could reframe it. But ultimately, to both of you, both of these questions are why I developed my models in the first place. While you'll sometimes see evidence of it, more often than I would love to admit, I have— I often actually struggle with what to say and how to say it. And it was certainly a lifelong struggle for me. It's part of why I've developed the frameworks that I have, because for whatever reason, unless it's a topic I know really well, I, when someone asks me a question out of the blue, tend to freeze and in that moment tend not to answer in ways that are clear or understandable to other people. So at the same time, I don't love scripts. I don't love having a memorized way that I say things. A, because for me, how I'm wired, that actually just adds more stress for me. But B, I was reading this wonderful book recently called The Ancient Art of Thinking for Yourself. Uh, and one of the things about that they were talking about was actually this idea of our perception of truth. And there's something that people— we can detect as humans, um, when someone is using words that aren't actually coming into their mind in that moment. And it gets in our— it gets in the way of people's, um, belief that you're speaking the truth. It gets in the way of trust. Okay. All of this is— it comes down to very, very big run-up. There's me illustrating my issue right there, uh, with the corest of the core frameworks I think can help people really clarify, help each of you clarify, A, your idea so that it's in language other people understand, and B, gives you an initial framework for always thinking about how to do this. So, um, Sharon, I'm going to start with with your question or with the elevator pitch piece. Because where I think the most important thing to give people right away when someone says, so what's your big idea? What are you here all about? Is to provide them with something I call a core claim. And this goes beyond just stating something like, I've got the best X or Y. And expands it to say that the most effective way to begin, not just an elevator pitch, but in my, my view, any kind of conversational presentation, particularly where stakes are on the line, is with an if-then statement, meaning it's not just your answer, but it's also the, the question that it answers. So, for instance, if someone says to me, Hey, Tamsen, what's your big idea? I would say, well, my big idea is about helping people build buy-in. So that's the if, that's what they want. If you want to build buy-in, my question, my idea is all about helping people build buy-in by helping them build the stories people will tell themselves about their idea. I actually did this in the opening line of my first book, Find Your Red Thread. I said, You know, this book could have been one sentence. The best way to make your big ideas irresistible, if, is to build the story people will tell themselves about it, the then. And then from there, the next quickest way and the next most effective way to keep in a very tight elevator pitch is to give a quick explanation of why. And in fact, I did that at the top of today. So I would say, I believe the best way to make your big idea is irresistible is to build the stories people will tell themselves about it because— so now we have an I-T, an if-then, and a B— because every decision has a story. That's why the stories are there, right? And the stories that we live day in and day out, the stories we agree with, are based on beliefs we already have. So that's why To make an idea irresistible, we build a story based on what people already believe, which becomes a story they'll tell themselves. So for me, that framework, the ITBA, the ITBA as I've been calling it, is a great way to mentally frame what it is that you are doing and why. If you want help doing that, you can find that on— Jen, I'm gonna ask you to pop up that link or throw it in the chat. You can find that on our, on our kind of store on Message Design Institute. That's a free worksheet that I give out for people on how to build that compact case: if, then, because, and. But that's a great place to start. Now, for Jeanette and for simplifying things, it's a great— like, that structure is a great way for making sure that you're not going into too much depth because none of those pieces, the if, the then, the because, and the and, should use words or concepts that people don't know and importantly, don't already agree with. Now, they may not agree and may have never heard your combining those two things. So people may never heard this idea of building buy-in by building a story people will tell themselves. But individually, the idea of every decision having a story and the stories we agree with being based on beliefs we already have. Each of those things separately generally is something that people will agree with. And if they don't, they're probably not my ideal client. So that's, that's kind of an overview place that I will start. And I'm going to back up and see what some other questions have come in. So if that— if you need more, let me know in the chat and we'll go there. So, Jeanette, someone told you the other day that you sounded like a service provider, not a thought leader. And so I'm reshaping my— oh, We're going to bring you upstage, Jeanette. Fabulous. All right, Jeanette, you ready? All right, here she is.

Hello, I'm ready.

Yay. All right, so tell me more. It looks like someone said that you sounded like a service provider, not a thought leader.

Yes, and it actually was a good message because it made me realize that I focus so much on the tools and the frameworks that I share to create the change that I'm trying, you know, to help people create. And because I always have been sort of trying to be specific about how I help, not just saying, "Wait, this is what good looks like." You know, and as part of my own sort of sense of like, not just telling people you know, do this, but also actually helping them. So what I understand is my inner conflict around how I show up in the world versus how I actually serve the audience with what they need to hear. And this, this is an interesting little conflict.

Yeah. So I would say for me, one of the keys to keep in mind is something that psychologists and cognitive scientists call cognitive load, meaning what is it that someone can understand quickly? Because, and that's where going too quickly into terminology, frameworks, steps, things that people don't understand can get in your way super fast. And the, and that the reason for that are kind of multifold. Number one, if somebody doesn't understand something, there's this really interesting research on curiosity that shows that it's an upside-down U-curve. And I loved when I found this because it helped me and validated something that I thought I had seen, which was that contrary to a lot of what marketers or advertisers would have you believe, that when something doesn't make sense, we don't pursue it. We don't actually say, huh, I wonder what this means and let me go explore it more. No, no. If we don't understand what it is, What this research shows is that we are actually inclined to be negatively curious about it, meaning it actually repels people from it. And so this is part of what led into making sure that anything that we say at the front, or when we're first talking about something to someone for the first time, which for me is kind of like the place that I really focus a lot of my work, that, that we are we are working entirely within the scope of things they have heard before, even if not in that particular combination. Okay, it's one of the reasons why that core question is so important, and particularly for it to be phrased in language they understand, because that's— they're already looking for that, so they are already curious about that, right? So they're already curious about How do I make my idea clearer? They're already curious about how do I sound more like a thought leader than a service provider? And so by just essentially framing what I'm talking about either in something, in a question somebody's already given me, just straight up and say, okay, let's work from that. Or in figuring out, as you look at all your work, Jeanette, What are the common questions that it seems to align with? That can be a great place to start because we're just, even from the beginning, we're starting at a place that they recognize. So I'll pause there. Does that, like, thoughts, questions?

Yeah, what really pops up for me when you're saying this is this actually, we have an idea, right? And we think it's so good, but we actually need to backwards from that idea.

Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. So yeah, and I talk about this a little bit in Find Your Red Thread where one of the big concepts there, one of the two key principles of that book was that ideas are built, not found. And what I meant by that is that over time, through trial and error from us doing the same process of asking a question, testing this, testing that, thinking this works, that doesn't work, refining, refining, refining, eventually we land on the way we do things. And sometimes that, that recognition of the thing that will work, or the, the, this kind of final idea that seems to click in as the thing to do or the thing to focus on, feels like we've just found it. But in fact, it is the, it is the result of this very long process of searching, building, trying, theorizing, experimenting, etc. And so in order to make this big, beautiful, nuanced, complex, gorgeous idea make sense to people, we kind of have to turn back the clock a little bit and go all the way back to, to some extent, what was the question you were asking? A lot of times is what was the question you were asking way back? Now, sometimes that's not easy. That's, you know, it's a, that's, you know, there's something called the curse of knowledge, which is that it's sometimes very difficult, if not impossible, to like remember what it was like not to know something. But the— but what I'm— one thing I have found to be key with all of this is that oftentimes, and I think you and I have actually had this conversation sometimes, Jeanette, is that that question will sound to you now like the wrong question. Sometimes that's the way to find it, right? So, and there's— what I have seen over and over again is there's a point of where, you know, if the idea is important enough to us, if we believe enough in it, part of us— I have found that I personally have had to let go a little bit about how people talk about it, because as long as my, you know, like, as long as people come to the right place with it at the end of it and it gets— it answers the question they're looking for, who am I to say how they, like, how they decided to frame it? Like, If it's working for them, I'm gonna let that go. So I think that's a kind of a key piece right there. And yeah, I want to answer Tiziana's question real quick. Don't go anywhere, Jeanette, because I want to finish on this thought leader piece. But Tiziana was like, wait, curiosity is an upside-down curve? Yes, so interesting. I believe it's a paper from Celeste Kidd et al. I would have to like, I can pull up the citation real quick if we need to. But yeah, that's one of the places where, yeah, so it's negatively curious when somebody doesn't understand, when they don't feel expert. It rises to positive curiosity when they understand enough to know that they don't know enough, right? And then it goes negative again when they feel like they're already expert in it. So this is where another danger, and this, Jeanette, could be part of what's happening as well, can come in where It's sometimes it's not that people don't understand, it's that they think they've heard it before, right? And then so whatever it is, however you're describing something to them, like again, the question should be something they recognize, the answer should be words they recognize and a combination they probably haven't heard before, you know. So, so something that again intuitively they're like, okay, I think I understand that. I would not have predicted that as being the answer. But again, just— and I'm not saying that all my messages are end-all be-all, but when I say to someone, build the story that someone will tell themselves about your idea, again, people intuitively start to understand what that means. And they start to understand why that would make sense for building buy-in, right? And so that's part of what we're trying to do is to make sure that on the other side of the curve, we're not landing on things that sound like they've been done before, right? Or depending on the sophistication of your audience, sounds like an idea somebody's already heard. You know, I, you know, as a TEDx executive producer and then idea strategist, I hear that a lot where somebody will come in and we'll talk about it as if this was the first time somebody's talked about this. And it doesn't reduce how important an idea is to that person. But if it's not different to somebody, if somebody doesn't immediately detect that it's different, then they'll turn back off. Yeah, so, so Jeanette, I think that to some extent, that's, that's where diving right into the framework can also get us into trouble when we're, when we're going there, because It's, it's people cannot quickly understand, is this something I've heard before or not? They're just like, you're giving me a bunch of steps. I don't know what it is, right? And I think that that's part of the work of it. So I mean, as you know, when I'm working with clients, we start with that question. We start with that question, what is it they're trying to ask? And really, it's really hard to go any further with a message without having some fairly workable idea of what question you want that to be. And then we're kind of moving forward and saying, what in your framework is, is an aspect of that you think is required for answering that question that is really like underappreciated, right? And therefore not a predictable answer, right? And then you do that again, and then you combine those two things to go, ah, so that's really interesting. In order to achieve this thing, we need to do these two things together that I haven't thought about before.

So, you know, what's so interesting for me is how you, you're looking at it because there's so many options, but you're actually always finding a way to hone into the most foundational one. And that, I think, is the beauty of, of, of this, the, the way you work with it. But thank you.

Well, thank you. I mean, I think that, um, yes, and there's there's, for me, that serves multiple purposes. Um, because so often the idea needs to serve— I mean, some of this was built into me from like the, you know, the 10, 12 years now I've worked with TEDx, was the, the idea of ideas worth spreading. Well, the one of the things is, yes, they need to be worth it, but they also need to be in spreadable format, meaning somebody else needs to be able to articulate your idea with I would say 90% accuracy the way you would describe it, which means you need to be able to describe it in the way that like 90% of people could describe it, which means taking it out of, at least when you first talk about something, out of kind of the details of your intellectual property and much more specifically to saying, you know, we are focused on these aspects together. We're focused on proximity, you know, how close you are to something, and purity. That's one of the ones that I worked with, you know, an ore mining company. You know, that those were the two, you know, they're really saying, we are trying to give you the purest source of this ore as close to you as possible. Like that's, and that is the core of their work and their, their ideas. So that's what we're trying to figure out. So any other questions on that front, Jeanette?

No, I think I'm good. Let others come in and, and, and, uh, work with it.

Yes, super. Thanks, Jeanette. All right.

Yay.

Um, so yeah, I mean, I think that this is one of those things where when it comes to how to do this and kind of the more, the more specifics, this is one of the things that I do in, um, the monthly, uh, message design fundamentals where I go in and explain this this kind of core case idea a little bit more. But it really, you know, just to repeat, because this is at the— forgive the language— but it's at the core of all my work, is this idea of this core case, this core rationale. And actually, Jen might appreciate this. It's not one of the videos I recorded, but it's outlined for the future. I got on this— I was thinking about this idea of why do stories fall short, and why do I get annoyed at how reliant— sometimes people are on storytelling as if it's the end-all be-all. Now let me be clear, storytelling is critically important. It is in fact how we understand the world. Uh, it's how we can create emotional connection. It's how we entertain. So I— let me be super clear, I am not anti-story. And they don't always work the way we want them to. And this was a question that I— that actually sparked, um, the second book and actually sparked the, the work that I'm doing now for my, for my doctoral research, because I wanted to understand a little bit more about what— where stories fall short. And in one of my, um— I gotta go find my notes now because now I'm off on a rant, um— in one of my, like, word of the day, hypnopompic states. That is the liminal state between sleep and waking, um, which is when I do my best thinking. Um, I had this idea that the, the thing about story, which is what I talk about in Red Thread, which is my version of a universal story structure— side rant, not just the hero's journey, that's only one kind of story, and It's not appropriate for all messages, all organizations, all people. Just, all right, back onto the main rant. So that was my universal story structure. What I was seeing was that, you know, again, most of my core questions, core question I exist to answer is basically how do we maximize adoption of ideas, right? Like, that's, that's what I'm all about. And the thing is, is that stories, to borrow the definition from my friend Ron Plouffe, I love his definition, which is that stories are the results of people pursuing what they want. So stories show what happens, right? They show external influences, right? And then the response, the action somebody takes based on their internal influences. Thanks for putting up Hypnopoppic, Jen, that's awesome. And yet, and so that's important, right? Because from the, from kind of to see how somebody else reacts, like, so as you're telling a story, to see how somebody else reacts and to what can tell you a fair amount about them. But what we're often left to do is to infer the internal story. We're actually left, based on that kind of telling of events and showing the reactions, we're left to figure out more often than not what somebody was actually thinking. Sometimes we get little peeks into that, right? Well, someone said, like, if it's a written book, well, you know, omniscient narrator will get that. Sometimes people will say, and I was thinking to myself, blah blah blah, but we leave a lot up to inference, right? But remember, again, one of my core principles and one of the core principles of MDI is that every decision has an internal story behind it. And the internal story reveals why, like what those internal influences are, right? So it's that internal story that we need, really need to understand, to understand why someone behaved that way for sure. Now you might saying, okay, this is a lot, why do I care? Well, because when you are somebody who is trying to make an elevator pitch, trying to position yourself as a thought leader, when you are trying to just speak from the stage about something, right? If you're just telling a story and if you're just— and then if you're leaving up to inference what's actually going on, we're asking people to put we're leaving a lot open to chance, um, and ultimately, um, you know, how someone behaves is a product of that person's internal influences reacting with the environment, the external influences. That's a borrowing, I think, Kurt Lewin's famous formula there of behavior is a function of a per— of a person in their environment, um, So all that to say, stories are the external story, right? Somebody wanted this, they, they ran into this problem they didn't, didn't expect, uh, if they got in the way of it that they had to solve first. They had this moment of truth that made— they meant they had to choose between what they wanted, what they were doing, and what they believed. They made a choice and then they acted on that choice. Like, that's the universal structure. Sitting underneath that though, any story is really— and is, is, is revealing the kind of the— it's a, it's a story as an argument in disguise, right? It's basically saying, if this is true and that's true, then this will happen. And now we get back to that if-then piece I was talking about before. So this is a very long way of saying that the Red Thread— goal, problem, truth, change, action— is one layer deeper, kind of that, that external version of the ITBA— if, then, because, and. They start in the same place. That same question starts in the same place, like, if I want this, then— and then the story is, how did you come up with the then, Jeanette? That's what we're talking about. But actually, the way to find it is to go into, well, I realized we absolutely positively need this piece because. And the because is that kind of deeper principle. The example I gave earlier already was, you know, every decision has a story. That's an example of the kind of principle I'm talking about. Or a principle to support that company I was talking about with proximity. The closer something is to you, right, the more control you have over it. Yay! So that's, that's valuable if somebody is trying to reduce costs or improve their outcomes with something. And then usually that's not enough, right? You have, you have a second— almost always you have a second aha that, that, that precedes. That's the moment where you feel like you get that flash. That's that moment of truth. That's the second, that's the second piece. That's the and. So if, you know, I went through this too, how do I make an idea irresistible? Okay, I can try all these things. I'm like, ah, Anytime somebody kind of makes a decision about something, they've told themselves a story about it. So we need a story.

Great.

But how do I make sure it's a story that they're going to tell themselves, then eventually going to play? And I'm like, oh, it has to do with preexisting beliefs. Ah, great. So the stories people agree with are based on beliefs they already have. So therefore, boom, that's the answer. If we want to make ideas irresistible, then we build the story people will tell themselves. Based on things that they already want and already believe. So that internal story— if you want someone to behave differently, right, that's what we're trying to get with the adoption of ideas— we need to give them that internal story that they can tell themselves about that behavior. We can wrap it in an external story, but we need to make sure that those internal story pieces are clear. Now, just— that was a lot. So if you've got questions about that, if that's sparks any other thoughts for you. I've just lost something off my desk, but you don't need to know about that. Um, any other questions? Because we've got about 10 more minutes left. So, um, I'm also happy to shower you with other random Aristotelian words. Anagnorisis— that's a moment of truth. Endoxa— those are those principles. Um, I don't think hypnopompia came from him. Um, but anyway, that's kind of one of the things I've been thinking about lately, or just this idea that ideas are interpretations and interpretations are individual, you know. So my internal story is not by definition your internal story, and for me to assume that it is, uh, a risky— let's just put it that— at best risky, at worst really presumptuous. Um, and not acknowledging that someone could see a situation differently than you can. So this is one of the reasons why I am of the opinion that anytime you do tell a story, you still provide the equivalent of the moral, right? From Aesop's Fables, that— and to me, the moral of the story comes back to that idpa, you know, if you want to win the race, then go slow and steady. Why? Because even great gifts can be wasted by idleness. And you can do best what you're— you know, you can, you can perform best in alignment with what your own talents are. I just made that last one up. Can you give an example where you wrap in the internal story with an external one? Yes, I can. OK, so let's— well, I'll give you another example. You're seeing like future video scripts in development here. So I had this idea, uh, and it started with, as sometimes ideas do, with identifying a problem. Um, so back a few months ago, I was asked to speak at the National Speakers Association, and one of the things that I brought up as seeing as something that I see over and over again, uh, you know, in my career as a, you know, brander, marketer, whatever, message designer, is that, as I described at the time, when there's a role model-business model mismatch, meaning that somebody holds up another individual or an organization as the, as the, as the thing they want, or the person they want to be like. And yet, what they're looking at is oftentimes that way that person is respected, the kinds of things that person says, and they're not really looking at what actually why that person structures their business that way, or why they do what they do, or why they've got that kind of esteem. Just a quick example, um, you know, a friend of mine, um, oh, I will get to that. I see that, uh, on Nikki's asking, how do we know what they already believe? Um, let me finish sharing the Sharon Webster first. So what I would do when I'm structuring messages for myself, and when Jen says, Tamsen, it's time to record mess— you know, record videos, and then I went and did two of these without this. But I was like, OK, I know that the problem is sometimes that the role model and the, and the, and the business model or the mental model are not aligned. So I've identified that. But I need to back up now, kind of like Jeanette was talking about, and say, OK, that's the problem. What is the question that people are currently asking right now where that's getting in the way? And so I decided that was that that shows up when people are legitimately trying to figure out what the best practices for something. You know, what's the, you know, who's doing it? Who do they want to be like? They're trying to find somebody to model after. They're trying to figure out what's the best way for me to achieve X, or what's the best way for our company to do Y. And then now, and so that's the, that's the idea, like, that's the if, if you want to do this. Then I was trying to figure out, I was like, okay, we've got this mismatch. And what, why is that a problem? Well, that's a problem. And this is the kind of the story version. That's a problem. Like what, We run into a problem when we focus more on the role model than on the mental model behind it. And now I figure out, I'm like, OK, well, why is that a problem? Because that's the thing we have to solve. Because it's mental models have to match too, right? Because it's in those kind of deeper justifications for why we behave a certain way or why we've built our businesses a certain way that are actually where alignment and long-term alignment can actually happen. Because we as humans operate according to an internal logic. If something doesn't make internal sense to you, you won't continue to do it. Is that enough? If I just understand somebody's mental model, do I understand the best way? Um, no. Um, uh, the— we have to understand like what that theory is, and then we need to reverse engineer to why they're doing it that way. So basically my argument here, kind of the initial kind of internal story was if you want to figure out the best way to do something, then reverse engineer to the mental model that must be behind the role model that you love. Right. In other words, what, you know, what's their situation for what organizations? What's the business model they're doing?

What do you—

what must be true? So, for instance, if you see somebody who you love who's giving keynote after keynote after keynote, but you have a consulting business, that person may not have a consulting business. And so the way that they're doing keynotes may not be the best model for you because they only need to sell more keynotes, not consulting. And a keynote that's built to get more keynotes is kind of fundamentally different message-wise than a keynote that builds and directs towards consulting. That's a whole other topic. So the story then is to say, OK, if that's the question, then we start to build around it. Um, but the cleanest example, which I probably should have started with, Sharon, is like any Aesop's fable, right? So we know the ultimate moral of the story, the core claim of The Tortoise and the Hare. If, like, slow and steady wins the race, you can reverse engineer that to the if-then. The wins the race is the if, the then is slow and steady. If you want to win the race, then go slow and steady.

Why?

And then again, they're not the, the justifications for that, the, the B and the A, the because and the and, are not explicit in that story necessarily. Um, but we can kind of deduce them. I don't recommend that. I recommend making them very clear. Um, I believe there's something like, you know, you, you operate best, you know, in alignment with your best self, right? Like, so Turtle's good at being slow. Hare's good at being fast. And then the second one was, which was actually a previous, um, moral of that story, which was that even great gifts can be wasted by idleness. The story is how they tell it. Once upon a time, there was a, there was a cocky hare and there was a slow tortoise, and the hare, feeling really cocky, decided to put that one to the race. Um, now we've got a problem. Uh, should the, the, you know, the tortoise can't win without can't be a hair, so what is he gonna do? Um, and then, then you kind of build it out from there. I feel like I went way off the rails there, but this is the joy of being live. Okay, um, also, woman of a certain age, super hot all of a sudden. Um, so Nikki, you would ask, how do we know what they already want or believe?

Okay, the—

this is a— this is one of those places right towards the end of our time together today where I realize that my approach is very countercultural because it's not that we don't need to think about the audience. We just don't need to think about them as much as we think we do right at the beginning of our message. Here's what I mean. Number one, what they already want is going to be— I mean, there's ways to find this. You can ask ChatGPT around your topic what it sees as the 10 most common questions people have around your product service offering, the thing that you do. That's a great way. That's a lot more efficient than we used to do of having to like figure out the keywords and figure out what questions were there. Honestly, the predictive generative AI, because they kind of know what people ask, it's a great place to start. Tell me the 10 most common questions. Now, even then, I'm going to say there be dragons potentially. There's still danger there if you're choosing a question you don't actually love. And this is something I work with a lot with my clients, where, um, the quickest I'm going to say it to you right now is don't chase a market. You got to look at those questions and say, that's the one that I would be really excited about if I could really help people answer that question. I know you could answer all of them, but this is really about putting that focus and clarity on what's the— what, you know, if you had to prioritize, what's the one that you would, you would stake your claim on. Now, when it comes to what people already believe, this is kind of a side project of my research right now, which is back to an Aristotle term. Thankfully, there is a video and a post on this one, which I know Jen will put up, uh, called endoxa. And what endoxa are, are generally accepted truths about the way the world works. This is the level that I'm generally recommending that you support your ideas. At things like what goes up must come down, and, you know, to get to zero, every negative needs a positive. Honestly, you just need to get to as basic a level as, you know, that, that even a skeptic would agree with you. That's the key. Um, and so, and, and, and, and something like, for me, with every decision has a story, if it gets any— if somebody doesn't believe that, then because that is such a foundational principle to my work— and by the way, it is very well supported by research— um, I'm never gonna— I am not gonna convince that person of my— of seeing the world the way that I would want them to see it in any amount of time or effort I'm willing to give to it. So what we're looking for very much are things that are commonly held to be true and actually are. So we're looking above what are known as primal beliefs. You can go to myprimals.com to learn more about those. Love that research. And below kind of identity political beliefs, you know, you're kind of— you're really looking at these, these, you know, people with science or math or engineering backgrounds the kind of first principles of science and math, the axioms. That's what you're looking for. You're looking for things that people go, yeah, can't argue with that. Just quick examples of things that I've, you know, ones that I've come up with with clients. You know, accountability is the ownership of outcomes. Partnership is the equal exchange of expertise. Success requires accountability at scale. You heard me say one earlier, the closer something is, the more control you have over it. Captured equals contained. We're looking for as commonly held something as you can get to. So hopefully that answers your question, Nikki. All right, we are closing out today. This was a you know, a bit of a tour of my brain in addition to everything else. But, um, this is the first, so we'll get a little bit more, you know, fancy about it later. Um, if you've got future things, this is definitely the kind of place where in response to this or, uh, on the various socials, if you've got questions, let me know, and then I can come in and future, future versions of this, um, with, with some— hey, You know, Jeanette asked X, Y, or Z and make sure that we answer your questions for you. So thank you, everyone, for joining the first official live message design office hours. Looking forward to seeing you again here soon.

Bye.