Episode 36: Observations as a Mentor and Judge

A few weekends ago, I had the opportunity to talk with Ph.D. students in the GradProSkills (Concordia University) Skills program at Concordia University and assist them in preparing for an upcoming case-solving competition. Additionally, I mentored and observed students from around the world participating in the How to Change the World's May boot camp. I'd like to share a few key observations from these experiences:

1. We need to help students use simpler and more direct language when describing their problem statements. There's often a tendency to use complex words to show off their intelligence and what they have learned, rather than focusing on clarity and straightforwardness.

2. Students must consider the perspectives of their audience and stakeholders. They should ask themselves what these individuals' needs and concerns are and how they can best address the issues faced by those on the ground.

3. We also need to teach our students to create a stronger connection between their presentations and the audience by weaving together a narrative that engages and ties together the various elements of the problem they are trying to solve.

Simple and Direct

For the past two decades, my message to my teams and students has been to be simple and direct. Too often, presentations become overly complex and difficult for the audience to understand. I recall a judge's feedback during my first team's participation at the Engineering & Commerce Case Competition (ENGCOMM - Engineering & Commerce Case Competition) in 2014. The judge remarked that the proposal my team presented was not understood, particularly by the non-engineering judges. This feedback resonated with me and became the cornerstone of my coaching from 2016 to 2023, during which our teams achieved phenomenal success, reaching the finals seven times.

I also remember working with a team member on a not-for-profit project who tended to use "big words." We collaborated to simplify her speech, making it more straightforward. Interestingly, when her sister later joined a team, she adopted a similar approach by using simpler and more direct language, influenced by her sister's advice.

What do I mean by "simple and direct"? It refers to using everyday language rather than trying to impress others with sophisticated vocabulary. It’s about translating your knowledge and experiences into terms that everyone can easily comprehend. Experts often suggest that writing should be at a grade 6-8 reading level, and I believe this standard should also apply to spoken communication.

Over the sessions a few weekends ago, this was an issue with the participants. In the sessions, the teams and participants often try to show off their knowledge rather than using simple and direct language in their documents, answers to questions and comments.

Audience and Stakeholder Perspective

In several previous newsletters, I have discussed the importance of positioning, particularly in the context of a case-solving role play. This serves a few key purposes: 1

1. Setting the Language Level: It establishes the appropriate level of language based on the audience's knowledge, ensuring clear communication.

2. Understanding the Audience's Needs: It helps us consider the needs and concerns of the audience we are addressing.

3. Demonstrating Respect: It sets the tone for the level of respect we convey through our language.

In a case-solving scenario, the role play takes precedence. It is essential for the team to define the roles assigned to the judges and to themselves. This often changes in the final round of a live case, as many judges represent the client organisation or the characters in the case.

Recognising the values and perspectives that judges adopt in their roles is crucial. This understanding should guide the language we use. In my teams, we always emphasised the importance of utilising the organisation's language to ensure our message is clear and understood by all judges. It's important to be mindful that judges may not be familiar with the specific language of the client organisation, so you may need to define some of those terms during your presentation. This can be addressed when the judges are introduced, or it can be assumed that there will be outsiders on the judging panels, especially in preliminary and final rounds.

Another common issue many teams face is the level of formality in their language. Often, the role play involves external consultants addressing senior management. Unfortunately, many teams resort to informal language, using phrases like "you guys." It's important to show respect by addressing the judges by their names, as these are often included in the case information. Alternatively, you can use "we" and "you" appropriately.

Storytelling and Strong Connections

A lot of information needs to be conveyed to the judges in a relatively short time during your presentation. Keep this in mind as you develop and deliver your presentation. Too often, I see teams treat each slide as a separate entity, presenting each one independently without connecting it to the others. It is crucial to tell a cohesive story. Share the narrative of your solution and explain how it is justified. Make sure to link the message of each slide to the previous and subsequent slides, creating a unified story throughout your presentation.

Consider how you will capture your audience's attention from the start. Pay attention to the rhythm of the conversation throughout the presentation, even if it is primarily one-sided. Finally, think about how you will create a powerful concluding moment to leave a lasting impression at the end.

As a judge, if you tell me a story that captivates me and addresses my main question early on, you will have my full attention. However, if you fail to engage me or allow me to become distracted by unanswered questions, that’s when the Q&A becomes challenging. This makes it difficult for me to score well on my scorecard.

An Aside: Presence and Ego

Several factors come into play when selecting candidates: presence and ego. When I coach less experienced coaches or work with students on team selection, they often focus heavily on whether candidates have stage presence. I tend to be less concerned about presence because I believe it can be learned. There is a delicate balance between the necessary skill set and stage presence. If I can find candidates who possess both, the selection process becomes much easier; however, this is not always the case. More often than not, I prioritise the skill set, while presence becomes a part of the development plan.

Ego is another significant factor, and in my experience, it is often detrimental. I frequently note that one of the challenges with MBA teams is that we spend a lot of time at the beginning trying to manage egos or encouraging team members to check their egos at the door. Ego is a problem both in the team dynamics in the resolution room and on the stage.

To have presence, I would paraphrase what Dr. Michael Gerharz posted a while back. To have presence, it requires you to be present in the moment, in the room with the people in the room. I would take this a step further and be present in the moment in the room with the people in the room with your ego left on the other side of the door.