Below is an AI-generated transcript and therefore it may contain errors.
Francisco Mahfuz 0:00
Hi everyone, Francisco here. Just before we get started, I wanted to share something I'm really excited about. I recently launched the story powers bootcamp, a course that teaches you everything you need to know about how to find craft and tell stories that work. But it's not just an online course, because you get personalised feedback from me for all the practical activities in three hours of life coaching to work through any challenges, or focus on specific projects. So it's like if you bought a cookbook, but the chef came along with it. So go to story powers.com and click on Course, all the information you need will be there. So please check it out. And if you love the show, and would like to support us, you can go to buy me a coffee.com forward slash story powers. I drink about five coffees a day, so any support would be much appreciated. All right on with the show.
Welcome to the story powers podcast, the show about the power of stories that people who tell them and why you should be doing it too. I'm your host, keynote speaker and storytelling coach Francisco mahfuz. My guest today is Simon Raybould. Simon started his working life as a scientist looking at the causes of childhood leukaemia, and spent over two decades in research. Now he helps people make presentations that change the world, or at least their little bit of the world. And his work with everyone from entrepreneurs to politicians from top universities to the NHS in the global companies like Dell and Dunlop. Simon is a man of strong opinions. He believes that many speakers are thieves. Audiences are selfish. And if you're not using trained elephants in your presentations, you're missing a trick. But today, Simon will help us figure out this enigma. If stories are the answer to life, the universe in everything. What is the question? Ladies and gentlemen? Simon reybold.
Simon, welcome to the show.
Simon Raybould 2:00
Hello, that makes me sound like a monster. And the only the only people who describe me as monsters are my children. That's not wrong. I mean, you're not wrong. It just is when you say it, it sounds bad. So well.
Francisco Mahfuz 2:13
So I know you are a man who believes in research. So do I. So my all of my introductions are based on nothing but factual statements uttered by my guests, and perhaps taken completely out of context.
Simon Raybould 2:31
Yes, the juxtaposition is, but you're right, I did start my life as a researcher, I spent 24 years as a as a researcher. And by the end of that career, I'd become the Centre Manager for the UK largest Social Science Research Unit, which is less romantic than it sounds, to be honest, partially because it gives you I don't,
Francisco Mahfuz 2:52
I don't think that sounds romantic.
Simon Raybould 2:55
But it will, it gives you less time to do research, because you're trying to manage things like refitting the Resource Centre and dealing with staff who are falling out with each other and that kind of stuff. But research itself is incredibly romantic sawed off. Because for two or three times a year, I could look at a computer, look at the results and go, honestly, I could go to myself, I now know something that not only nobody else in the world knows, but that nobody else in the world has ever known. I've got on my screen the results of an experiment that's never been run before with data that's never been written before. I am literally the only person who knows this thing. And that is an incredibly exciting circumstance to be unbelievable. To be fair, a lot of the time what happens then is you kind of go, oh, no, there's a mistake in the data. And you have to start all over again. But in principle several times a year, you've got this really exciting thing going on.
Francisco Mahfuz 3:59
I guess it's a it's a process that a lot of people have gone through where you think you stumbled upon something that is completely genius. And then someone says, Oh, you mean that thing that that other guy's doing? Dammit. Yeah, yeah. And one one thing that I I know, to be a frustration, because I've heard, I've heard you talk about it. And I've heard other people talk about it is that you do all this amazing work. Hopefully you find things that no one has ever known before. But then when it comes to the people that actually communicate it, they can't get the right message out. They can't get the right the message out to the right importance. And that was one of the things that got you into doing what you do now. Right?
Simon Raybould 4:43
It was because in theory, and largely in practice, scientists work on what's known as the information deficit model, which is you have information you form an opinion. If more information comes in that refutes your opinion, you say to yourself, Oh, I was wrong. and you change your mind? No, it doesn't always happen in practice. But by and large, that's what scientists do. And by and large, that's certainly what they aspire to do. Turns out that real people in inverted commas, whatever the hell real people are, it turns out that real people don't behave that way. So you give them information, and they don't change their minds for a whole bunch of reasons. So for example, My PhD was looking at the causes of childhood leukemias, it's kind of a bit of a waste of time to be honest, because in terms of cancers and stuff, we don't need to know the 99th new cause chemical possible cause of cancers, we just need mothers to stop freaking smoking, and giving them the information that smoking is bad for their baby doesn't work, you need to do something else. But the facts are the bounce off people all too often, which is why I started getting into presentations, because I started to realise that scientists were really bad at explaining what they did. And people were really bad at understanding what scientists did. And those two things just meant that scientists were largely wasting their time, a huge amounts of time, because they've got these new, great ideas, and no one was acting in them.
Francisco Mahfuz 6:11
I don't think that's a problem that is exclusive to science. You know, I don't, I haven't done much of any work with scientists in the storytelling or presentation arena. But But you talk to business owners, you talk to entrepreneurs, you talk to almost anyone, most people are not doing a terrible job at whatever they're doing. But the quality of the work or the service they can provide is almost always significantly higher than the communication that is trying to sell that work or convince people that work has value. You know, you have the opposite scale of that, which is, you know, the snake oil salespeople, or a lot of politicians. But when it comes to most people,
Simon Raybould 6:53
you're not wrong. I would like to think that scientists are the extreme case of it's because we are trained to work in, we are trained to work in this information deficit way, and therefore we take it to another level. But you're not wrong. The snake oil salesmen are really good at pushing what they're believing or what they're selling, even in science. So you have people thinking that MMR jabs cause autism, because one rogue doctor made up some TASH, and told the story in such a phenomenally appealing way that people started to believe it. The number of people taking their MMR measles, mumps and rubella. In the UK, we have a triple jab when you're when you're a kid at school, those things are three things all together. And the number of people taking that jab went down because of the believed link to auto I can't have that my daughter might turn out to be autistic.
Francisco Mahfuz 7:44
Yeah, that's the that's the the Andrew Wakefield story. Right? Exactly. Yeah, it was my favourite part of that story. And I don't know if you know this, but this is just batshit crazy. So Andrew Wakefield who
Simon Raybould 7:56
have no idea how great it is to hear a Spaniard go batshit crazy.
Francisco Mahfuz 7:59
Well, I'm not spending I'm Brazilian, but very even so I think a Latin person I think that yeah, okay. So the My favourite part of the of a horrible story, which is the indirect for this Asian inventing this idea that vaccines cause autism was that in his in one of his kids 10th birthday party, he was running some experiments. And then he he offered the kids money for their blood, because you run wanted to run some tests. And then his wife said, but you honey, you can do that, like Chu doesn't know, but I'm paying them like I'm paying them five bucks. They never want to come back to our son's birthday party. Again, they will offer them 10 pounds next year. And you see how many of them give me the blood again, kids were throwing up keys or passing out there's like, no, it's free market. I offered them money, they accepted it. So that's the
Simon Raybould 8:53
way it should have warned people about the morality of the person involved, isn't it? But you mentioned politicians. And here in the UK, we've just woken up to some fairly staggering election results and some really staggering election results. I venture to say that a lot of the voting that has occurred in the UK in the last I'm going to be generous to people hear in the last decade is based upon the way there has been an awful lot of political storytelling, which hasn't necessarily been based on on the truth. But it has been a massively impactful story. It's had enough truth, just enough to mean that we try and refute it. It sounds like you're making excuses and it's like a complicated
Francisco Mahfuz 9:34
one thing about your approach that I think is interesting. It's not sure if it's unique, but it's but it's definitely not the norm in the presentation, storytelling communication world or industry. Is that because of your background, a lot of the stuff you're doing or most of the stuff you're doing is based on on science and on research. And I you know I know you've you've got a book out called presentation genius which is All and I know that I know the genius. I know it's the book series. I know it wasn't your, your title. Right. But my question to you is about your take on the, on the state of the storytelling science because I, I've done I've done a tonne of research on this stuff I've had. I've had Paul Zak on the podcast, who is the guy who came up with found out about oxytocin. And he's one of the big names and we come to the science. I'm working on getting Yuri Hassanal, who's done a lot of the brain imagery studies.
Simon Raybould 10:32
I'm not worthy, I'm not worthy. But
Francisco Mahfuz 10:35
what I'm not sure is, apart from the the hard science, you know, the hormonal stuff and the brain imagery staff, the impression I get is that most of the other stuff that gets said about storytelling is either based on no science, or based on very flimsy science. So something that I have quoted, for example, because it's a great stat is this is this number. It comes from the book Made to Stick, right. So they they gave people pure information, they gave people stories, and the next day, only 5% of people remembered the information 65 or 64%. Remember the stories, which is an increase in recall of 1,980% Pretty impressive numbers. But I mean, it's the flimsiest science you can have to justify how much stories have better recall. And there's a number that goes round all the time that is 22 times more memorable than other stuff. No one can find the the scientific source for that, like I've tried plenty of times can't find it.
Simon Raybould 11:37
I can't find it either. So you're in good company there. I think you're right, there is a lot of a lot of bad science, a lot of over extrapolated science. So for example, the one that always drives me nuts is I forgot, my mind's gone blank beaker, Malcolm Gladwell, this idea that 10,000 hours of anything will give you mastery. Actually, that's not what the science papers said. The science said papers said that, on average, 10,000 hours of intentional practice might give you mastery. And it's become simplified to the idea, the only thing you have to do is play the drums for $10,000 or write computer code for $10,000 or whatever. Which implies that playing the drums is as easy as becoming a violin virtuoso. It's not
Francisco Mahfuz 12:27
I'm sensing. I'm sensing some drummer hater, some Java hatred there.
Simon Raybould 12:31
When I can play the drums. I'm not a violin virtuoso, but I can't play a decent I can't play a decent tempo on the drums. So it's
Francisco Mahfuz 12:38
vital. It's vital in jealousy. It's not drama, hatred.
Simon Raybould 12:42
Oh, I used to be a violinist. Oh, come
Francisco Mahfuz 12:44
on. You ruin my jokes. Yes. I'm sorry.
Simon Raybould 12:47
Sorry. No, I met my wife in an orchestra playing the violins. I was inside player back desk, second violins, which is the lowest of the low for those of you who don't know, orchestra hierarchies. And she was the outside player back desk, second violins. And she got promoted to first violins. And I remained in the second violins, and I have never forgiven her, after 37 years of marriage. And for that seven years of courting before that it's nothing to do with her teacher being the string coach for the orchestra at all, I'm sure. No, talent, pure time. But yes, you're right. Science does get over interpreted. So that research you're talking about relating to the storytelling and stuff. There are so many caveats, possibilities and confounding variables in there that you can't possibly make that definitive claim about 22 times more effective knowledge ages. It's a hint, it's a hint is a strong hint. But it is also all too often stated as a simple fact, as though it was always going to be true. Use a story and your audience will remember you 22 times more than double. Nothing is that clean cutting science, not even not even quantum physics is that clear cut, because it's everything is probabilistic. There's the you are more likely to do this, if you simply succeed if you do this, and if you do that, but it's always a percentage game. It's always a numbers game. The stuff I get my clients when I start working with them is that what I will do with them is true in the sense that men are taller than women. Now, all of the things being equal. The chances are if you haven't met me and you haven't met my wife, you would guess that I'm going to be taller than than her and my case is true. By I don't know if he's listening but by nearly a foot. I said this yesterday and I got into trouble because I said she's five foot two and apparently she's five foot three, which is
Francisco Mahfuz 14:42
for my American for my American listeners. A foot is when I actually Americans use for fit for non American listeners. It's like 30
Simon Raybould 14:51
Yeah, it's 2029 29 and a bit of centimetres. Yeah. But I made the mistake of saying that on an interview last night and she was This shout from outside the door when I am five foot three, not five books do I chop to shorten it by two and a half centimetres.
Francisco Mahfuz 15:08
But one problem. One problem, though, just on what you said about how people overstate it, and people say it as if it's a fact. I'm very aware of that. But I'm also very aware of, of the Dunning Kruger effect. And how, you know, for anyone who doesn't know this, this is essentially something we've all experienced where the more you know, the more you know that you don't know. So you know, there's caveat. So that's usually true, but maybe not, which makes you sound less confident than what you're saying. Whereas people that know very little about a subject think they are experts, and they will talk with absolute confidence. So I'm concerned about that as well, which is, in particular, if you're trying to talk about something that you believe to be as true as men are taller than women, if you if you're too x, if you've equivocate that's what I was looking for, if you click equivocate too much, then people are like, Well, I'm not that doesn't I'm not, you don't sound very convinced.
Simon Raybould 16:08
Exactly. So two people trust confidence. And the less confident you sound, the less trustworthy you sound. I'm making sweeping generalisations here based upon hope. I'm actually committing the sin that I'm complaining that other people commit for the sake of a conversation. But yes, the more you communicate, the less confident you sound. And interestingly, but in brackets, the less confident you feel. So the less confidence you project, the less you are trusted. Which is why I'm saying it seems like yes, it's, it's almost true. But as soon as you've got people stopping, and for those of people who haven't come across the Dunning Kruger effect before, here's how to hear it, I'm going to make a very, very, very politically incorrect statement, you get in a taxi, and ask the taxi driver about the local football team. Because my experience of taxi drivers is that they can all run the local football team better than the manager. Indeed, they can probably run the national team better than the manager. And one of the reasons they're so confident in their opinions that they know nothing about football. They're great taxi drivers. That is they know so little about football, it looks easy to them.
Francisco Mahfuz 17:15
Simon, could you run could you run the United Kingdom Kingdom better than the current government?
Simon Raybould 17:23
Why my daughter's decently close? He is such an incompetent that even dad could do a better job.
Francisco Mahfuz 17:31
Yes, I'm not sure. I'm not sure that's the Dunning Kruger effect.
Simon Raybould 17:36
That's the nearest I've got to a compliment from one of my daughters for a long time I'll even dad was
Francisco Mahfuz 17:43
my daughter my daughter is in the is in the business of giving me very strange compliments. One that I've mentioned in the show before was that I am funnier than a snake. Okay, and we checked we just 100% Literally in her case, she saw a snake and the snake farm thought it was hilarious that the snake was climbing the handlers arm but not as hilarious as me apparently. But the other day she said to me that you you too crazy. And and her back was turned to me. So I didn't know if she was upset Or happy when she said is that a good thing or a bad thing? She was like, Well, of course it's a good thing. Why bother? Cuz you make me laugh and laughing is very important. Okay, fine. I'll take that.
Simon Raybould 18:25
Yeah, I'll take that. Yeah, that's fine nicer than my kids are flippin
Francisco Mahfuz 18:29
heck, she's younger. That's probably right.
Simon Raybould 18:32
Mine I've got Okay, so she's the age where she thinks that daddy is immortal and can do everything. Yes, yes. Probably. You're both in for a massive disillusion. Okay, so
Francisco Mahfuz 18:43
one, one thing I wanted to ask you about, which I thought was a really interesting concept when it comes to telling stories that have to do with data or research and I don't think I've heard it expressed that way before is the difference between the story in versus the story of?
Simon Raybould 19:02
Yeah, it's a bugbear of mine, because I I started to froth at the mouth and rant metaphorically about presentation trainers and people going tell stories tell stories tell stories. What people are really interested in is how hard it was to get the data and they care about the personality stuff and only angst that you would actually do you know what, while those things might be interesting, they are not important. In the grand scheme of things. Nobody cares that I was up till two o'clock in the morning cleaning the data. What's really important is the story of the data, the story, the story of what the data is telling you, rather than the story of how you collected the data. People only care about the personal bit, the two o'clock in the morning bits in the gossip columns. Anybody who's actually using the data, who's using it, all they care about is what does this tell me? How can I use it and can I trust it?
Francisco Mahfuz 19:55
I have a question about that. Because and this is the beginning of I think A long list of things that might be disagreements. But I don't know if there's disagreements because we generally disagree or because we're just talking about slightly different things. So I just had a couple of episodes that go ahead, that guy called Matthew decks on. And he is arguably one of the best storytellers in the world, because there's this math thing in the US, which is a big storytelling event. And he's worn it 51 times now. And he trains a whole bunch of people on storytelling in during our episode, he gave an example of something I started calling a napkin story, which sounds very much like the type of thing you're describing. Now, this is not a scientist. This is someone that works for a tech company. And she was giving this presentation. And the presentation is fine. And it's getting the message across. But he said to her, okay, let's make this slightly more interesting. Tell me when you figure that out, when when did that idea come to you? No, it was a story like the ones you sort of talking about it, she was up drinking wine, and she didn't, you know, she was checking her email, sort of not thinking about it too much. And then the idea sort of just hit upon her, she wrote it down on a napkin, and she actually still had the napkin. So she did the exact same presentation she was doing. But she just used that little bit, to humanise it a little more. And she said, people love that. So that that worked very well.
Simon Raybould 21:18
And that's that's fair point. I think what I'm ranting about are those people who see themselves as the researcher or see themselves as a scientist as the point of the presentation. So people who are just using stories, and that keyword there is using come back to that perhaps people who are using stories as leavening to lighten the presentation to make it more interesting to make it more accessible, great, no problem with that it works nicely, it should be done. It's good for the audience. It's good for retention, it's good for penetration, all of those kinds of things. Great, no problem at all. The people that I'm kind of frothing at the mouth about are those people who go look at me, I'm clever. I did all this research. And the presentation becomes about how they did the research about how clever they are, about how hard it was about the fact that they were raised by crocodiles. And every day they had to fight the other crocodiles to get fed by the mammoth crocodile and all of that kind of nonsense. So
Francisco Mahfuz 22:15
I mean, no, no, I think you're being you might be being a species is not the term but I think you're showing some prejudice for people who have been raised by crocodiles.
Simon Raybould 22:25
Yeah, that sounds unfair to kudos to them. If they have been raised by crocodiles, then I apologise and go for it. Sue me, anybody who can say I have been raised by crocodiles feel free to sue me. So it becomes a very much a balancing act between using the stories to get your point across and just telling stories for the sake of self aggrandisement or, and there's a quite rude phrase we use here. So be prepared for the bleep I think I'll get away with it. Be prepared for the great, I
Francisco Mahfuz 22:56
think you can swear here. So
Simon Raybould 22:57
okay, so we talked about artistic, emotional masturbation, which is when you go on stage, and you're making a presentation, and actually what you're doing is, well, yeah, emotionally masturbating. Just going look how hard it was, look how hard I work. Look how clever we are. Look how good my team is. Look how well I lead my team. Oh, by the way, here are the results.
Francisco Mahfuz 23:17
I guess the question I have with I mean, I completely agree with what you're saying. I mean, none of that sounds like a good use of story. The question I have is, we talked earlier on about how difficult sometimes it is to get an idea across to the people that need to hear it. And it's definitely the case that getting science across to lay people is a big challenge. You know, right now we have this whole issue with with climate change or climate crisis, like some people settling calling in most of the population doesn't really care. I mean, there is clearly a messaging issue there. And what I don't know is, if a good use of the type of thing you're ranting against, you know, like making it more human, instead of just the data, if that's not what is needed, at least with the lay population, to get them more interested in some of those ideas.
Simon Raybould 24:10
So two responses there. If you're going to humanise it and personalise it, the heroes of your stories need to be the audience, not the presenter says the start telling stories about people who can't get their houses insured, for example, and all of a sudden, they suddenly realise that rising sea levels are going to be a problem. It's fine. You know, the city of cork is beautiful. But if the sea levels rise by five metres, that ship is going to be underwater. So what if sea levels rise COC is going to be underwater and you won't be able to insure your house? Oh, now it's a different it's a different kettle of fish. As we said in the UK, it's it becomes much more personal. So yeah, by all means, personalise it, but it's not. It's still not about the storyteller, the story user, it's about the audience. But the other trick that we're looking at here quite a lot is the use of analogies to explain technical things to a non technical audience. It's like such and such, but different as long as your audience knows what the original such and such is your two thirds, three quarters of the way there, I'd mind you having said that, even that can go wrong. So, for example, I, some time ago, I was trying to explain LinkedIn. And I just said to the LinkedIn is like, Okay, now, obviously, I'm going to say it's like Facebook, but for grownups, or it's like Facebook, but for business, or it's like Facebook for so and so.
Francisco Mahfuz 25:29
Which is, which is, you know, accurate enough as these things go. If you have no other point of reference, then it's the closest thing anyways, because it's not like Instagram. It's not like Twitter. Facebook is the one that's closest to it.
Simon Raybould 25:41
I wasn't going to go into the details of it. I just wanted them to get a very crude overview of it. So I could move on and talk about something else. So I'm on Facebook is like what? And I paused. And when, in fact, you know, you tell me, just to find out where the audience was. And there's a lady in the front row, shout out Facebook is like Tinder, but for jobs. And this is horrible.
Francisco Mahfuz 26:05
Let me let me let me process that for a second. He's like Tinder birth for jobs.
Simon Raybould 26:09
Yeah.
Francisco Mahfuz 26:12
I'm very surprised you went there? Because there's plenty of other ways you can describe it that nothing to do with Tinder.
Simon Raybould 26:18
Yeah. And there's this horrible moment where I went, I don't know, not. About two seconds later, the rest of the audience caught on to what she said. And started. About two seconds after that, she realised what she had said, and was mortally embarrassed. But it turns out that letting your audience think for themselves is not always a good idea.
Francisco Mahfuz 26:41
Yeah, so So this, so you said before about how the story should be about the audience, no disagreement there. But I think this leads us to the point where of this, I've heard you rant about a lot, I still think there is a language, not a language was a semantics issue or terminology should there because what you're telling people what they should do or shouldn't do is there metrically opposite to what most people that work in stories, talk about, which is your stance against personal stories. Now, if I if I understand it correctly, your biggest point about this is that it can sound very self involved. It's not necessarily the easiest thing for people to relate to, if you're talking about all these things you've accomplished. And I don't disagree with any of those things. My contention against that is that those are not the personal stories you should be telling, not that you shouldn't tell personal stories,
Simon Raybould 27:41
your your I think we're agreeing, I sometimes overstate the case, when I started to froth. And the problem is that those people who tell that kind of story find it very difficult to judge where that line is. And I spent most of my training career pulling people back to the, this is a useful story, tell it and move on. And the difficulty a lot of people have is that they can't differentiate between using a story to illustrate a point. And then they start to blur into telling the story where the story itself becomes digital. So I'm going to break my own rule here, I'm going to be completely hypocritical. And I'm going to go for example, over the weekend, okay, and just tell you about a conversation I had over the weekend, where a friend of mine phoned me up and said she had finally seen my TEDx loved it best thing I've done. Blah, blah, blah, none of which I paid her for all of which I was suitably deprecating and embarrassed for and pretended that Oh, shucks. But one thing she said was that, every time I started to tell a story, a personal story, she cringed and thought, Oh, God is going to go, oh, it's finished it about a time she had braced herself for the story to go on and become about me, the story was over in two seconds, because it was a an illustration of the point. So there was a slide which had four, four topics on it ABCD. And each of them had an example story for it, but each story was one was two sentences. One was I'm going from memory here. One was three sentences. And of those two sentences. The fourth was five sentences. And these are short sentences. So you bounce for the best advice I can give people is that you bounce likely off the stories rather like stone skimming across a pond or something. And then move on to the next one. Because the very second you start to take too long to tell the story. The story becomes the point of the presentation. And then the presenter becomes the point of the presentation, rather than the story being illustrative of whatever the hell it is. The point is that you're trying to make I'm fully aware that I've just broken my own rules by taking about two minutes to do that.
Francisco Mahfuz 29:50
But this is what I this is what I found very strange about that. That advice because I don't feel that at all. I think there are stories that are poorly chosen. There are stories that are well chosen. There are stories that are poorly crafted in stories that are well crafted. So if you're using a personal story, and I would argue that most of the story that I get depends on what you're trying to do, if you're trying to connect with the audience, then it it has to be a personal story, I can't open, I can't open a presentation with a story about something someone else completed, it has nothing to do with me whatsoever, it might do a job. But what the job is not doing is connecting me to the audience. But what I can do wrong is let's say even if I pick the story, right, I might just tell it for three minutes longer than it needs to be the story was was a minute long that all I needed was a minute. And then I went on for three or four with a whole bunch of extraneous details that don't actually do what I want the story to do, which I think is more of a problem of you need to edit your story down to what is actually important, then necessarily, you know, don't tell us tell personal story or tell a story about someone else.
Simon Raybould 30:58
So yes, up to a point. And the point being, sometimes it is easier to just for me to overstate my case and say keep it to two sentences than it is to fight the good fight. And you're quite right, a well crafted story will work. Most people can't tell stories, then they have the Dunning Kruger problem, and they think they can or not cancer. But I want to challenge what you just said there. You started from the assumption that you need to make an emotional connection with your audience. Why do you need need in italics to make an emotional connection with your audience, you my youngest doesn't come to hear me speak. And actually, it's true a couple of times, people in my audience have come and said, I enjoyed your last presentation. So I came to this one. But by and large, audiences come for the title, the subtitle, and what they think they're going to take away at the end of the day. So what I need to start doing right at the beginning, when they're paying attention is starts to give them a damn good reason to stay and to stay awake and to stay paying attention, which has to do with the outcome that they can expect. Making a connection with me is a means to an end. It's not an end in itself, of course. So if I so if I can get away with not divulging any personal information? Why would I want to bother divulging any personal information? Now, maybe that's a cultural thing, because I'm more introverted than you are?
Francisco Mahfuz 32:19
I think so. Because I've heard you talk about this, and you talk about how they value personal information is the world's most horrible thing. Now you have to bear in mind that I have written a book called bear a guy to brutally honest public speaking. Yeah. So I think there's a few, it's a very interesting question. And I don't think you necessarily need an emotional connection with your audience to make your talk work. But if you have an emotional connection with your audience, you, your audience who's going to give you a lot more time and attention. If they like you, then if they don't, if you're dry, and you're just giving them content, and they don't care for you at all, I think there's tolerance for the parts of your talk, for example, that might not be so dynamic, or might not feel so useful to them, I think it's going to be reduced. Now you don't need to, when I talk about connection, I'm don't mean, you're going to go and bare your soul in the first five minutes of a presentation. So it can be a very small thing, you just essentially saying, I'm like you, or you know, I know where you're coming from. I'm not a complete stranger here. And that can be the tiniest of stories. And then you find one point of connection. Okay, so a lot of you have children, I have children as well, where a lot of you're pissed off of the pandemic and pissed off at the pandemic as well. You just trying to get across a tiny bit of ama human being I'm not, there's a reason I'm here and not someone else's here. And I have a personality. So a tiny bit of that, I think, goes a long way. But again, you need to choose the story. Well, it needs to be relevant, and it's to be appropriate.
Simon Raybould 33:56
Agreed, a tiny bit of that can go a long way, with the word tiny, written in italics and underlined and in bold. But I think what you're doing is highlighting two issues. And that the real issue is that you are in the audience's engaged with what you're saying. And what you're doing there is using yourself as a way of a personal connection or a personal divulging as a way of creating that emotional connection with your audience because you get an empathetic connection between you and them. All I'm saying is that there are other other ways of doing it. And my beef, if you like, is with people saying you've got to open with a personal stock. No, no, you haven't got to that is a way of doing it. And sometimes it's a very effective way of doing it. But there are other ways of doing it. Such as the really crude one of going Who here has a waterfront house. I'm not saying anything about me at that point. I'm just going with the front house, you need to hear what I'm going to say because in 10 years time that was front house is going to be underwater. Now in a sense is that it's a story, but it's a story in which they and their houses are the heroes and victims. It's nothing to nothing to do with
Francisco Mahfuz 35:06
me. I wouldn't consider that to be a story. No. And I agree, I don't think a story is not the only way to do almost anything. I think it's often the best way if you can pull it off. If you can't pull it off, like many other techniques, it can. I think my experience has been with teaching people or helping people do TEDx for Texas, for example, right? There's lots of different ways you can open a talk, that was people's attention. And some of them are just one in a one line long. And then a question. And a lot of people do it that way. It's one of the you know, when I, in my book, I say that the introduction should be WTF. So weird, thought provoking are funny. I tend to think of stories more than the thought provoking variety, although they could be either. But one of the techniques I've used a tonne of times, it's just a question, you ask an open question that people will relate to, and then then typically a life story. But I just think that for a lot of people that don't present very well, if you find a story, personal or otherwise, that is short enough, that can be the two minutes where they sound great on stage, they're not as nervous than if you're trying to hit perfect points with perfect delivery, and get the beginning going. And I think it's often one of the easiest ways to generate engagement, if you've chosen the story. Well, and if you're telling it well, compared to others,
Simon Raybould 36:31
yeah, there are lots of ifs in that. I'm not arguing with you. If this if this if this if this then even okay, my contention is that so very few people do that well enough. That it's it's an overused technique. And
Francisco Mahfuz 36:45
do you think it's an overused technique? Because that's not my my experience is that most people feel like right now, like, right now, I'm helping someone with a TEDx, right? I have a few people, but there's one particular person. And the whole of the talk, as per this person's draft doesn't have a single story. It's all tell. There's no show in it. Like even when the person is describing something that is made. Clearly you have described it right? You know, that she went somewhere and saw something pretty shocking inches, not telling me, you know, so I went there, and this is now open the door. And this is what she's saying. I went there. And I saw this horrible things. I saw this, I saw that I saw this other thing. So at least my experience it when it comes to a lot of people doing talks is there'll be no stories in the talk. It's just opinions is just facts is just data. Personal. Now, a lot of people tell very poor stories personally. But with talks, I don't know, I tend to find that it's the it's underused technique, in my experience.
Simon Raybould 37:49
So let's let's differentiate them between TEDx and the real world chart because a Venn diagram of overlap of a TEDx talk and the vast multitude of presentations, which are done in the boardroom for business purposes, those are a completely different thing. Now, I tend to work more in the latter. And in the latter stories are, they tend to get in the way now, when you're working with a TEDx and your job is as much to entertain, as to inform that's that's kind of the brief, that I'm less antithetical to early in the morning for me, prophetic for us last year, that's against us against stone. I'm less backed up by stories. But even then, I do think, yeah, they're overused. And the TEDx I was involved with recently, I was the only person who didn't start with either a protracted personal story, or the banal opening, bland question, have you ever wondered about?
Francisco Mahfuz 38:54
But I think there's definitely instead of just to wrap this as much as we ever gonna wrap this, I think there is there is definitely a cultural component in there. Because the one thing that I I still struggled not to be amazed by, is when because I speak to a lot of professional speakers in this podcast, and they have not only no issue with telling stories, but they don't really long stories. I had Ryan Avery few weeks ago, and he has been doing this for about 10 years or so. And he and asked him how long are your stories on stage usually, and he said, I can be anything from you know, a minute, all the way to about 1215 minutes like um, I do have 115 minute story. And I think it's all to do with the crafting of it and how you use it, which I agree it's a much more advanced technique. I know speakers that and I do this sometimes you start the story and then you pepper bits of it throughout the talk, and then you finish it at the end. I know speakers that will. You know, the story has so many points where they can sort of jump Out of the story and interact, and then come back in. So those are more advanced techniques, but they're not short stories.
Simon Raybould 40:07
Ah. So it's not to say, hey, that is so often see it done badly wrong. Sure. So So for example, the professional speaking Association in, in the UK and Ireland is very big on this idea of what's your story. And you'll find people trying to become professional speakers on the back of one story where something interesting happens to them. And sure those stories are really quite interesting. But in a desperate attempt to become credible and relevant and business authentic, they go. And that means that crowbar in the analogy, and then they go back to the story, and they go, so I was diving with sharks, blah, blah, blah, blah. And I started to run out of there, but I did such and such and such and such, that means that your business can and the story is about them. With the business advice, crowbar then are thrown in. All I'm asking for is that that is turned around, and the help and the content and the usefulness is what drives the presentation. And the stories become supportive of that, rather than the driver of
Francisco Mahfuz 41:15
the exemple.
Simon Raybould 41:16
They are examples. Yes. Yeah. So I think I think I think of them as Kate think of them as case studies rather than stories. And if the case study is about a different organisation, similar to better if it's about you so much the better. Although I am completely aware that I'm utterly hypocritical, because the last live gig I did. My bio finishes off with and is a reasonably competent fire eater. So the emcee introduces me as Bella Bella sunray, bah, blah, blah, blah, a reasonably proficient fire eater. And my opening line is to pretend to walk on stage to talk to the emcee and go, can I just pick you up on that because all fire eaters are proficient, you're either proficient or you're dead. There's no middle ground on this one. And then I turn to the audience and start talking. And completely whether I'm being hypocritical because in that first 10 seconds, I've broken the ice by taking the mick out of myself and fire eating and
Francisco Mahfuz 42:04
not just on those 10 seconds, because I seen I don't know if it was your last gig, but I saw one of your last gigs. And you have a somewhat long story about how you learn to dance to impress your wife. Personal story.
Simon Raybould 42:18
Oh, come on, marks out of 10 for romance.
Francisco Mahfuz 42:21
No, you gotta you gotta mark. You know, learning secretly learning how to dance to press your wife on an anniversary or birthday is very, is very impressive.
Simon Raybould 42:29
And you're and you're right. But that's, that's that's a three minute story in the middle of a two and a half hour training session. Yes. So it's used as a as a lemonade.
Francisco Mahfuz 42:38
I guess the problem with the with the with the diving with sharks story, the climbing Everest story, all of these things is that people overestimate what the story is about. And I know I don't think you should ever get tired of talking about this. But my listeners will get tired because I've talked about this so often, is that the story is not about what happened. The story's about what the change that you went through, or the character went through because of what happened. So diving with sharks is interesting gives colour to whatever the story is. But if you may for some people, but if you dive with sharks, and you're the exact same person, you were, after, you know of sharks, is not a particularly interesting story. You know, I've done risky things in my life. That didn't change me in any way I bungee jumped, I was the exact same person after a bungee jumped. That's not a story. There's no real interest in Italian that is just like, oh, I bungee jumped and I took the chance. So you can choose like, what? You just come across like an idiot. Right. And I think that anyone trying to build a speaking career on the back of having done something that sounds impressive, what is very flimsy ground, and chewed doesn't quite get what their own story is meant to be about. It's not about you've gone, and then something difficult.
Simon Raybould 43:55
And the other. The other problem I find with that is something we call scars, not scalps. You know, you want to be talking about stuff, if it's personal, you won't be talking about it after you have recovered from it after you have made the change after you've got the scars to show people. But it shouldn't be when you can still pick up the scabs and go look how much I'm bleeding. Because that's that's just using your audiences on pay therapists. Unbelievably selfish, pointless. And audiences can see straights can see straight through
Francisco Mahfuz 44:23
and suffers from the problem we just described, which is, if you if you're convinced as I am, that the story should be about the transformation. You haven't gone through the transformation yet. You're suffering through it. You don't know what lesson you're drawing from this. So what are you telling us? Oh, I'm suffering. It's difficult. Okay, fine. And I think there is a value for that, but it's not a public professional speaking value. The value for that is in a therapy session. If you're in a meeting, that's those are the stories you're going to tell. You don't need to have gone through. You don't need to be on the other side of it. But that's not what you're gonna do on stage or in the board.
Simon Raybould 45:00
I think what I think what we're very much agreeing here at quite a metaphysical level is that stories should be used in service of the point that you are making, and you and doing that with stories that are too raw, you can't achieve that. Because the point that you're making is, is suffering. Well, that doesn't serve the audience in any way whatsoever. And I'm reminded of a Simon Sinek thing that I looked at over the weekend, somebody asked him for one piece of speaking advice, and he said, You're there to serve the audience. The best speakers don't need anything from their audience. They're there to give, they don't need anything from the audience, not even their approval. Now, for me, that was a massively powerful sentence, because it's not about what you get in the room. It is not about how much people love you. It's not about getting standing ovations. It's about what does the audience do with what you have given them when they leave the room?
Francisco Mahfuz 45:50
Yeah, and there's a line I've heard you use. And I've heard lots of people use, I've used myself, which is, start with the end in mind. And I think this is something that it's very important when it comes to stories, which is, what is the story there to do. And sometimes what the story needs to do is establish your credibility, like the audience doesn't know who you are you not in order to world renowned experts, or maybe you need to establish your credibility somehow. And maybe the story you need to tell there is a story because for that purpose, if the story is to illustrate a point, that so the story should do, and anything that is not helping you make that point, doesn't need to be in the story. And I think a lot of the people that that get confused with that is they make it about them instead about the point that the story is going to make.
Simon Raybould 46:35
So there's a big, the phrase that springs to mind here is that I believe, as a presenter, you should be a story user, not a storyteller, so you define what it is you're trying to do. And if stories are the best way of doing that, then tell the damn story. If dancing elephants are the best way of doing that make dancing elephants. If as it turns out, on one occasion, finishing my gig by getting a standing ovation by playing the drums was the thing to do that played the damn drums on stage. And it's worth pointing out at that point, my brief walk from the conference organisers was finished a conference with a standing ovation, that's what I was getting paid for. So the thing I was designing to the presentation to do, therefore was to get the audience on their feet. That's what
Francisco Mahfuz 47:15
this is something, this is something that I think people, people like me can be guilty of, or other people think we are guilty of, which is because we talk so much about stories, thinking that the story is the only thing when it's not, I can't, there are very few presentations that I can tell someone to deliver in, the only thing they're going to do is tell a story. It doesn't work that way. So I can, you can just use a story in business communication. In a presentation, the story might be what the rest of the presentation revolves around. But it's not just the story, there's all the things that you're going to need to do in there. And sometimes the story is not going to be what the presentation revolves around. So I think sometimes people can have a false dichotomy between Oh, if you're teaching people storytelling, or you're telling people to do stories, then it's all about the stories. Well, now a story the story is to like many other things in the presentation, and you have to realise what the two is for and when the two is properly used, and when you're overusing it or under using it,
Simon Raybould 48:18
right? I couldn't agree more. But I'm brought back to that Matthew's inquisitive if everything is everything you've got is a hammer everything looks like a nail. And the number of times I have seen people saying buy my storytelling tools by my storytelling training and the storytelling is the answer it is the silver bullet is the way forward it's using not telling or not telling for the sake of it and we're absolutely in agree that we should stop now because we're absolutely in agreement about that point. I think
Francisco Mahfuz 48:47
there is at least one other point I want to pick you up on it's not just something we disagree I don't have a clear opinion on this yet because I've used it both ways and I think both ways work fine. So I think you believe or or you prefer people to give the point of the story first, and then tell the story when they're going to tell a story. Is that correct? Or the present? Yeah, the point of the presentation. Okay. Yeah, because I get very differing opinions on this one so I see the guys from anecdotes that do a lot of work with with what they call story power the communication so it's business communication but there's a lot of stories involved in it. So one of their get the main guys they are Sean Callahan he believes he likes to do to give out recalls relevant statement so he will say something like yeah you know some sometimes we looking at one thing and thinking it's the most important but actually with this regarding what actually makes a difference in then he will tell whatever example or story comes on the back of that to make that point. Some of the other the other guy that works with him Mark shank believes more traditionally that you tell the story and if you want to emphasise the point at the end, but you don't sort of give the headline before you do it. And I spoken to a lot of other storytellers that that Do both and some that absolutely hate one or the other. It's like, No, you cannot possibly give the moral of the story of the point of the story before. But I identify that in business at least, you just need, you just need an antidote for coming across as a complete weirdo that just launches into a story. And sometimes all you have to do is say, I'll never know that you say that. I just remembered something that happened last week. And then you give the example. But normally, I wouldn't say I wouldn't try and give a point. Before I tell the story, I tend to go for the story first.
Simon Raybould 50:36
So I don't necessarily believe you should give away the punchline of the story. I believe you should give away the punchline of the presentation, which is by the end of this presentation, you will be able to whatever the hell it is. So the audience are getting phrase it more sophisticatedly than that. Yes. But if the audience don't get that at the beginning, they don't know why it is that they why should they pay attention?
Francisco Mahfuz 51:00
How early in the beginning, though? Well, usually in the title. Well, yeah, so. So this is there's a bit of a cheat there, because the title will tell them exactly what the presentation is about. Most of so I have a have a presentation coming up in a couple of weeks. And it's the title of a brief event for his story, power culture, how to drive engagement, purpose and performance. So you know exactly what I'm going to try and tell you. So the quote. So my question to you is, if someone is otitis very clear, you know what the presentation is going to be about? How early on do you need to make that point? does have to be two minutes in the five minute like, assuming it's an hour long presentation? How early on? Do you need to have gotten to your thesis?
Simon Raybould 51:50
If I knew the answer that question, Richard round, and I couldn't do it. But let me let me throw a story back at you and see what you think. So you should have seen this pick something. Okay. My contention is that you should be getting to the content, the usefulness of the presentation as early as you can, right? Sure. What you don't want to do is start off with a personal story. And all too often what I mean by that is I see people going, they warm themselves up to the presentation by talking about something that absolutely confident about which is their own history. Great. Absolutely. And that's what I'm from as a member. The analogy I want to use here is my elder daughter is a doctor, she works in a hospital. What she does not do when she sees a patient is walk up to the patient and go, Hello, my name is Dr. reybold. I graduated from medical school such and such in such and such a year, I've got distinctions in this exam and this exam and this exam in this year this year. And this year, I'm currently studying sound. So I'm a specialist in such and such areas of research papers, because the by that the patient has died of old age, what she's trying to do is get the audience to trust her, get the patient to trust them, I get why. But a presenter doing that just bores, the pants off the audience, what my daughter does is turn up wearing a white coat scrubs with a stethoscope around her neck, they tell the story so that by the time she opens her mouth, the patient in this case, the audience has already decided to trust her or not, because she's only about five foot two, and nobody tries to five foot two female doctor who looks like that well, but the audience in the presentation was reading the same thing I don't want to be giving you the you know, my PhD was in childhood leukemias, I spent 24 years as a research scientist, I then became the manager of some research scientists, there was a team of 30 turnovers, I decided to do my escape trying to get bored by that, oh,
Francisco Mahfuz 53:42
that's that's what the presentation programme is for. If they want to stick a buyer in there, they stick your buyer in there, they shouldn't you shouldn't waste the beginning of the what we often say a lot of your sales, how very little attention or interest people are going to give you. If if in the first minute or two, you're not sounding interesting, the phone is going to come out.
Simon Raybould 54:02
And that's why you should tell them in the first minute or two. Metaphorically, don't if it's literally the first thing to do, why the hell they should listen to you. So we talk very much here. I know we are talking my personal business talks about business presentations more than TEDx presentations. But we talk about something called a credibility statement, which is one sentence of something you have done or achieved or whatever, which tells the audience how damned cool you are, and that they should listen to you. And it should be empirical. And it can be over in three sentences. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, my name is I want to talk to you about funding for search in search. I have four black belts in three in in different martial arts, three of them at top down. Well, that point was because Oh right. I'm going to sit down and shut the hell up a because you can kick the kisses out of me. But if she's got four black belts, three of them top down. She obviously knows her business. Whereas what most people do, and the phrase most people do is inverted commas here. Yeah. This is they start by saying they start by listing the four black belts that they have got and tell you when they won the damn things and how hard it was and yadda yadda yadda. Or they say, I've climbed Everest from both sides. That's it. That's all I need to know. I don't need to know when I don't need to know how hard it was. I don't need to know how many times you tried. I don't need to know who the hell else was with you. I don't need to know who was sponsoring that damn expedition. I just need to go. I climbed Everest from both sides. Okay, you're cool. Listen,
Francisco Mahfuz 55:32
I think I think one thing, I don't know if we mentioned it now or in the on the regional part of this recording. But I cannot stress how appropriately you chose the name of your storytelling programme, which is the real reluctant storyteller.
Simon Raybould 55:53
There was a lot of research went into that.
Francisco Mahfuz 55:56
I mean, I completely get it. In I, before when we were preparing for this, I actually took your test, there was a test, which a very strange test on your website, and the test told me, You're fine, bugger off, you don't need this.
I'm a lion, apparently. So I don't.
Simon Raybould 56:17
So what I'm getting at with this whole reluctant storyteller thing is that the markets that I can be most useful for, I think, are those people who know they have to make presentations, but who are not instinctive or natural, or who want to make presentations. And very often what those people do is fall back on the here's some data. And here's some more data. And I'm going to read it off the screen now. And here's some more data. And it's all written in 12 Point type, so you can't read it. Because if you're reading the screen, you're not looking at me, and I don't want you to look at so the people I work with, are those people who've got something massively powerful to say to the world, but who are anxious about how the hell they do that? Hence, the reluctant birth?
Francisco Mahfuz 57:00
Yeah, no, I understand that. It's not. It's interesting that because I, so I find that most of the people that I do a lot of, I think the better work I do, is not with those people. So identifying that the people that are okay, communicators, they're not embarrassed to go up on stage, they're not embarrassed, the presentations. They're just not very good at it. You know, they they're probably the people that most of their colleagues think are good presenters. But actually, they're not, they're still a bit boring, they're still a bit confusing that there's still a lot of things that they need to do to to have really good presentations. But they don't look at you know, they could get up there, they do their thing and then sit down. And never the presentation never does anything doesn't necessarily get the results they want. But it's not our business to sell it to them or to everyone else that they need. They need to push that up to the next level, identifying that, that I enjoy doing that more than I do, you know, from the ground up schoolwork.
Simon Raybould 58:01
Doesn't that frustrates you when you come to those people and people have told them that they are great presenters, and they think they are great presenters and you look at them go you were unutterably crap. But because the baseline is so damned low, all they have to do is be not completely crap. And everybody thinks that they're wonderful. Wouldn't it be great, just wonderful. If somebody came offstage and said, How was my presentation? And people were honest enough to go out on me? I wasn't listening. But because they are friends. And because this is such a scary thing to do. And because they're your boss, maybe or because they're your colleagues, we go, Oh, that was great. I love that. Yeah, it's great. And the person who's come offstage does not know that they were crap and boring, and the other person was not listening.
Francisco Mahfuz 58:45
Yeah, I find that there are some, there are some tricks to get over that without forcing people to give someone negative feedback. If you only ask them after ask the audience have to two or three questions that are pointed that they will only not be able to answer if they were actually paying attention. It will be very clear to the presenter that people weren't paying attention. So say, so what is the main point of their presentation? What's the main piece of advice that they're giving you? And give you an example of where you should apply that? Most people won't be able to answer those questions with most presentations, not not just the boring ones.
Simon Raybould 59:17
I'll help you right. And I go even further than that, and say to the people I work with how will you know if your presentation is a success? What are your presentation intended to do? And truthfully, it's almost never intended to get a standing ovation. It's not even intended to be popular in the room. It is intended to make a business change. So if your presentation is for example, about the new child protection policies that you've got in your sports organisation, the success success success measure of the presentation will be what percentage of the audience starts to adopt the new protocols. Yes, yeah. And you don't even need it. You don't measure the success of the deliver the presentation you succeed, you measure the success of the outcome of the the presentation For me working in the business field is so much easier. Because I can say to people, what would success look like? What would good enough look like? And what would absolute success look like? absolute success might be we won the pitch good enough might be, we did not disgrace ourselves in the pitch, and we enhanced our reputation. So the next time we pitch this organisation, we've got a stronger building point, a failure would be, they laughed at us. So we know what we are aiming for. And just I completely screwed this. It's an awful business model. I did that with an organisation who probably got 124 million pounds worth of work over five years. I was on a flat rate fee. I really, really, really should have been on the percentage figure should I should have just gone I'll take 5% of what you get
Francisco Mahfuz 1:00:48
today. But the problem with the problem is people that do our job, I think is that we, we get so annoyed with terrible presentations, or, or terrible stories, sometimes in a case that you just want to fix it. So people come to you and they say, Can you give me your opinion on this one? And I struggle to say, Wow, if I were on the clock, I would if I just go? Oh, I've often done this where someone sends me something else. Like, I know it takes me 30 seconds to fix it. Right? It's like, okay, this needs to be emphasised. This part doesn't need to be there at all. This needs to be a lot shorter. Hold on, let me send you a voice message. And then I tell them the story in a minute is just you can just you can do this now. And and they can go and do it. And they say Oh, it's great. It really worked. And I'm like
really getting ready getting the hang of this like oh, he complicated?
Simon Raybould 1:01:49
Absolutely. I'm, I suppose I'm getting better at the freebies. The mistake I make is when I say Let's book an hour in and tune a bit hours later, I'm still working with the client. But because I've said Let's book an hour, I can only charge for an hour despite the fact I've given them half a day. Yeah, yeah, similar problem. Yeah, yeah, similar problem. I'll be rich. If I if I invoice properly, I would be rich.
Francisco Mahfuz 1:02:14
Well, I think we can both agree on that. And on that point. best, best best to stop before we get into some other disagreement because I had I had more stuff on my list, but I don't think that time will allow for it. Simon, thank you very much for your time. Over two days, it was the for the for the listeners they will notice but this was harder than it should have been.
much appreciate your time. Your forbearance
Simon Raybould 1:02:41
story my life is harder than it should have been. So if
Francisco Mahfuz 1:02:44
people where do you want to point people to these days? Is it a reluctant storyteller stuff or presentation genius?
Simon Raybould 1:02:50
That's good, but you can get to everything from everywhere else. So let's just go for presentation genius dot info, and then you can get to everything else you can get to everything else.
Francisco Mahfuz 1:02:57
And what's the name of your your TEDx talk,
Simon Raybould 1:03:00
how to hear bad news. Okay, which seems massively appropriate at the moment.
Francisco Mahfuz 1:03:06
And it's fairly new, right? It came out a few weeks ago. Oh, it
Simon Raybould 1:03:09
was 10 days ago. Okay, perfect.
Francisco Mahfuz 1:03:11
I'll put the link to the put a link to that back. So it's on YouTube now. I
Simon Raybould 1:03:15
guess. It's on the TEDx YouTube channel. Yeah. Okay. As of as of a week and a bit ago. Yes. Perfect.
Francisco Mahfuz 1:03:20
I'll link that on the show notes.
Simon Raybould 1:03:21
Those handle mistakes and all.
Francisco Mahfuz 1:03:25
Alright, everyone. Thanks for tuning in. Take care of yourselves. And until next time.
I hope you enjoy the show. And if you did, I'd love for you to subscribe and leave us a review or a rating on the Apple podcasts app. It's very easy. You open the app and find this show and scroll down a little and when you see the stars tap. I'd really appreciate it and it does help other people find this. And if you'd like to get in touch or find out more about what I do, reach out to me on LinkedIn or visit my website story powers.com
Comments