So today I am back to looking at two books I have plugged shamelessly this past couple of weeks.
But, (some of you will be pleased to know) today's epistle has nothing to do with banker bashing!
The books in questiona are Michael Lewis' 'The Big Short' and John Lanchester's 'Whoops'. Both available from all good bookstores (and doubtless some rubbish ones as well).
So - I am declaring they are BOTH great books and well worth a read.
BUT I want to tell you my own story of how I read them. I opened Lanchester's book first and read the first dozen or so pages. It was good. It would be wrong to say it had a weak start because it didn't. But nevertheless when it came next time to have a read I picked up the Lewis book. Within a dozen pages I was hooked. So much so that I informed the very smart Mrs Bozo that I would finish it in 48 hours, and I did, despite being away on a retreat with friends and actually having to make a presentation myself.
I went back to the Lanchester book, which is actually much shorter than the Lewis book and 11 days later I have just finished it. It's a very good book, I do not hesitate to recommend it. Even if only because it taught me about the Hedonic Treadmill: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedonic_treadmill
So what's my point? Both books are good but I read one faster? Big deal.
Well yes. As you know Bozo's day job is about communication and the lesson here is exactly about communication. I work, as you all know, with senior management teams about to go to IPO. Or senior managewment teams about to present at major conferences. If we take the book's performance as analagous one represents failure and one success. At a conference, or on an IPO presentation you do not have 11 days to make your point. The audience does not give you eleven days to grab their attention. At the end you may have listed all the relevant facts in a well ordered neat structure. You may have thrown in a lot of jokes, one-liners and funny asides. But in the sort of meetings, presentations and conferences you do in YOUR business you have to get the job done in 30 minutes AND you have to get them hooked in the first five.
So did Lewis' book have a better start technically? Was it funnier? Faster? Snappier? Better written?
No...
It was a story about people. real, ordinary people. Of course it becomes about their un-ordinariness. But it's that journey we take with these people from ordinary to un-ordinary that grips us.
The Big Short establishes itself in the first 20 pages as a STORY about people doing stuff.
Whoops establishes itself about something that happened, generically, to society.
Anyone interested in what happened to the global financial system should read both.
Anyone interested in how to grip an audience and make them pay attention to every word and nuance of your speech should learn (perhaps once and for all) that the audience don't want your facts and figures. Or your graphs. Or your theories. They want to be told a story.
Of course this is just Bozo's personal point of view. And maybe "he would say that" because people pay him to teach them to do it this way. But i suspect that the best-seller lists will validate my opinion. (Perhaps a bad yardstick given Dan Brown's success - but maybe even Mr Brown proves my point. He writes arrant nonsense very badly, but he does tell stories...)
Go see for yourselves. The pair will set you back £45 full price. I paid £36 at Waterstones (i like physical bookshops - so I guess I have to pay £12 to preserve the joy of wandering around them sniffing the books because you can get both for £24 on Amazon.) Or the library will get you them free of course.
Have both with you, read 20 pages of each... see which one you want to finish first.
If you are about to make the most important presentation of your life the question you have to ask is not: "do i have the courage to make this a story" it's: "can i take the risk of NOT making it a story"
See you next week, maybe for some final week political fun.
Recent Comments