Wednesday, November 26, 2008

Should every speech be a manual speech?

This entry may seem alien for those who aren't Toastmasters members. The TM program, while self paced, is still very structured. You can not earn awards without completing certain tasks. Most of those tasks are manuals of speeches.

I first heard the line "every speech should be a manual speech" when I first ventured into district leadership about 3 years ago. Before then it would have never occurred to me that I should not be speaking from manual. I assumed that anyone in the organization would continue to work on developing their speaking skills. Obviously it was a ideal, but incorrect assumption. For one year I assumed this line meant that you should be seeking feedback from every opportunity you have to speak within the organization (and maybe outside the organization if someone is there to give you an evaluation). I assumed that those people who handed me their CC evaluations would take my comments as seriously as I took the feedback I was given. I quickly learned that I was not totally correct.

I pose the question: should every speech be a manual speech?
There are two sides to this: getting feedback and cheating your way through the DCP requirements. Hear my arguments for both sides and then you tell me.

1: Yes, it's an important way to continue developing your speaking skills
I am VP of Education for my club and this gives me a speaking spot at each meeting to give an educational tip. These tips run about the length of a 5-7 minute speech. I have set a goal of learning to be a better mentor and giving these tips helps me do that. I rely on feedback from these speeches to develop my skills. I use the CC manual to provide me with feedback and I do my best to actually fit my tip to the lesson of the speech. There is no manual to help me speak as a mentor so I make do with what I have. If I am at a business meeting for the district I also like to receive feedback on my speaking. I can only improve with feedback and the manuals provide me with feedback for specific objectives. It may be a simple CC speech, but you never know which evaluator is going to hit the nail on the head for something you didn't know about yourself as a speaker. It is important that we see every speech we give as an opportunity to get feedback and grow as communicators. The manuals help focus those evaluations.

2: No, making every speech a manual speech is just another way to cheat the DCP requirements
When I first heard about every speech being a manual speech, I as also told that we should stick to the CC awards and turn them in as we finished the manual. This was also followed by someone throwing a photocopied evaluation into my hands with instructions to just fill it out. I wanted to talk with said speaker about the speech, but I never got the chance. The evaluation was taken out of my hands and the speaker rushed out of the room like I was a leper. This idea of every speech being a manual speech is just another way for the district to cheat their way to distinguished status. It ensures they will reach the goals of how many CC awards they have. They do not take the evaluations seriously and it does nothing to improve their communication skills. How do I know this? You would too if you had been to one of our district TLIs and listened to some of the leaders speak. They clearly take nothing away from any of these manual evaluations.

Now it's your turn. What points did I miss? What rebuttals do you have for my arguments? What is your final verdict? Should every speech be a manual speech?

7 comments:

Dave Wheeler said...

I have heard people say "My speech doesn't fall into a manual" so I'm not going to worry about the manual. The truth is that there are so many different manuals (including many, many advanced manuals) that I find it difficult to believe that someone could not find something in a manual that would improve their speech. If nothing else, the CC manual can help you focus on the basics and a CC can be done as many times as someone wants.

The key, as you point out, is to get feedback and learn from it!

I guess that puts me on the side of "Yes - all speeches should be from a manual."

Thanks for posting about this question and best of luck as a District officer.

Dave Wheeler
D53 LGM, 2008-9
my TM blog:
www.areaA4.blogspot.com

Sara Marks, DTM said...

Dave,
Great point about feedback. The opposite of giving speeches to get DCP is giving speeches to hear yourself speak. There was once a member of my club who did just that. He spoke virtually every week often adding himself to the agenda in a spot he made up. He rarely got feedback for the speeches he gave. He had been a member for about 10 years and had been allowed to do this for almost all 10. I think he earned his CTM once and then just ignored the manuals. When I told him how he had probably completed the program and pushed him to complete a few manuals for feedback he humored me for a few weeks and then went back to his old ways. He ended up leaving the club when I insisted that we all use the manuals to get feedback for every speech. He sure did love to hear himself speak.

Will Hsiung, DTM said...

I think it comes down to what the member wants. If the member wants to accelerate their goal of getting an award, the club officers should do whatever they can to accommodate that goal, including finding other clubs the member could speak. If the member refuses to work the program, the officers can talk the member about the benefits of doing manual speeches and achieving their awards but that is about it. If the officers force the member about this for whatever reason, be the DCP or setting an poor example to the other members, the member could abruptly leave and the club may lose someone that may in other cases be a valuable member.

I felt that it was important for members to give manual speeches because we need to set an example to the guests as to how the Toastmasters educational system works. Years ago in my primary club, there were a couple of members that either give non-manual speeches or redid their Icebreaker numerous times and I felt that cheapened the program and feared it would turn off guests to where they would join a club values such an educational system. I still believe that is the case, however we need to respect all the members and if we have some differences we need to find a common ground that everyone can agree to.

I just put an entry in my blog (http://www.willhsiung.com/tmblog/?p=169) about a District 30 officer who abused the Distinguished Area and Division program and is now our Lt. Governor of Marketing. If he becomes the Lt. Governor of Education and Training next year, it will have me debating the value of giving manual speeches and submitting educational awards as I fear he could manipulate them for his personal and political gain. I used to wear a "Friends don't let friends give non-manual speeches" button, but I gave that to a D35/D54 member who was very interested in the button plus I've expressed some concerns to him about the way D30 does things similar to the DCP abuse you and Bill Bishop addressed recently.

I'll keep you posted about this in the future and keep up with your posts - the issues you addressed recently should be discussed with everyone in the organization.

Sara Marks, DTM said...

Will,
Your point about supporting the member's desires is important. My follow up question is should the club support the member's goals when they contradict the club's and organization's mission?

I think we teach leaders to cheat at DCP. How often do TLI sessions focus on leadership these days? I did a president's training and ignored DCP. The presidents were very happy with the training, but I got the impression that a few district leaders were not happy. How can we expect anything but cheating when we teach it as soon as someone becomes a leader?

Will Hsiung, DTM said...

Regarding the follow-up question, I don't think the club needs to support someone who is at odds with parts of the Toastmasters mission or values, they should respect the member if that person is valuable in other areas. The club should stress to all members what is right without singling out one or two who are not.

I was at Secretary training earlier today at my District's Winter TLI and the DCP was only brought up regarding sending an officer list, but the main focus regarding that is for WHQ and District officers to contact the appropriate people in the club. The LGET was present as he was also the secretary for his club and did not mention anything regarding the DCP.

I did not attend any of the general sessions today as I have no interest in hearing some of the people running my District. In a couple of previous TLIs, a Past District Governor who is now an International Director used a "human" DCP presentation in which he went over each DCP goal and asked those who are committed to that goal to go on stage and have them explain why they committed to that goal (i.e. for the 1st 2 CCs, he asked two who are committed to getting a CC to come up and explain why they are pursuing that). His main point with this presentation is that it is the people behind the DCP not the numbers - though this person has a huge reputation in Toastmasters International for being a numbers person!

Sara Marks, DTM said...

Will,
I agree that you can talk about DCP without actually talking about it. I like the human approach. If people can articulate why they want to work for a goal then it's a valuable way to present it. There are some leaders who are doing it better than others, but they are rare.

Anonymous said...

For most of my Toastmaster career, I was profoundly indifferent to the concept of "every speech is a manual speech".

Then I relocated and joined a club where the emphasis was to NOT do manual speeches.

I joined a club that was 5 years old. The core of 4 original founders of the club had progressed to the point where they thought they were good enough to become professional speakers.

Toastmasters fell by the wayside for this crew (even though they had 3 of the officer positions: Pres, VPE and Secretary/Treas). Meetings became "rehearsal time" for what these folks would be presenting at their upcoming Professional Speaker Association meetings.

Club attendance plummeted from 18-20 or so to about 7.

Once we staged a palace coup to evict the "professionals", we began the hard journey towards rebuilding a club. We're now back to 17 members but it has been a tough road.