The Wise Presenter would do well to study how people make decisions (and how you yourself make decisions.)

Jonathan Lehrer is a Rhodes Scholar out of Columbia University, an editor at large for the science-focused Seed Magazine and the author of Proust was a Neuroscientist.  He has written for numerous publications, including his blogs at The Frontal Cortex and at his own website.    His new book is How we Decide. 

Lehrer says he is pathologically indecisive.  “It’s not uncommon for me to spend 20 minutes in the in the cereal aisle deciding between Honey Nut Cheerios and Apple Cinnamon Cheerios.”

He speaks about the assumption that human beings are rational creatures and that the “bad guys” in decision-making are the emotions. 

Apparently, when the decision is a complex one, it’s best to absorb as much information as possible and then let it seep into your unconscious for a period of time. Your intuition may be your best bet in a complicated situation.

Lehrer references case studies of people with damage to the emotional centers of their brains who become unable to make even trivial decisions.

“Rationality without emotion is a disease,” he says.

As speakers who seek to win the assent of our audiences, whether we’re in sales or leadership, research or product management,  Lehrer provides further proof that the ancient Greeks were right:  we need both intellectual and emotional appeal when trying to persuade our listeners.

Sims Wyeth is a private speech coach in Montclair, NJ specializing in executive speech coaching and public speaking training in order to give accomplished people the knowledge and skill they need to become accomplished speakers. Learn more public speaking tips at www.SimsWyeth.com.

Asked to describe a speech, I think most of us would say, “It’s a guy standing at a lectern on a stage reading from notes, a script, or a teleprompter.”

Asked to describe a presentation, we would say, “It’s somebody standing in front of a room with a screen behind her, where she’s showing visuals to explain something to the audience.”

So what’s the difference? 

First, the similarities are pretty obvious.  Both involve one person talking to a group of people.  The people listening are sitting down, facing the speaker, and passively listening.  The person speaking is working hard to say something to the listeners, and has probably worked hard to prepare her thoughts and materials.

The first difference is that we don’t see visuals in a speech.  The speaker strives to paint a picture in the mind of the audience, but he’s doing it with words, not with images on a screen.

The next difference is the degree of formality.  Speeches are more formal than presentations.  They date back to 500 BCE and maybe even further, beyond our historical record.  Great speeches have rocked the world.  They are about (or should be) about big ideas, values, and concerns. 

Presentations are more informal than speeches.  We associate them with more technical, mundane circumstances.  They have their roots in education, the military, and the practical trades, such as building and engineering.  They tend to be about facts and figures.

Speeches are given to larger crowds, and therefore must to appeal to the emotions.  The larger the crowd, the less complex the material should be.

Presentations are generally given to smaller groups, and therefore can be more detail-oriented.  The smaller group should always be given a chance to discuss the material, ask questions, and engage with the speaker.  This is not possible when thousands are listening to a speech.

Speeches are made in suits and tuxedos,  presentations in shirtsleeves and slacks.   Speeches require broad vision, whereas presentations often require a deep, narrow focus.

Speeches can be made to persuade or entertain, but not to inform.  Presentations can do all three — inform, persuade, and entertain.  Occasionally, someone gives a presentation that accomplishes all those goals simultaneously. 

Just because you’re good at one, it doesn’t mean you’re good at the other.   Speechmaking is a different muscle, requiring development.   Likewise the informality and accessiblity of  presenting can be hard for those accustomed to the lectern and the teleprompter.

CEOs and thought leaders give speeches.  Managers and technical experts give presentations.  Of course this is an oversimplification, but it evokes the distinction I’m making. 

Someone once said ( I forget who) that the only reason to give a speech is to change the world.  That’s a tall order, requiring the speaker to ratchet up her degreee of intention. 

Presentations require clear thinking and organization, but do not often demand that the speaker light the world on fire–just throw a little light on the subject at hand.