Living in a world with access to so much information is a major asset. No matter the topic, I can go online to a reputable source or reach out to a verified expert on LinkedIn to add knowledge and skills to my repertoire.
As an entrepreneur and consultant, this is invaluable, but there is a point of diminishing returns. The path to that point is accelerated when even well-intentioned advice devolves into “shoulds”.
Anyone in my professional or personal circle will know that I am all for strong opinions and distinct points of view. Investing in the belief that everyone has a story to tell has paid dividends for me and for my clients. The word should, though? It’s just too much.
I’ve given a lot of thought to this since reading a terrific post from a transformational business consultant, Susan Vogel, whose work I admire. When we corresponded about this very topic, she told me that she recently had a client whose only roadblock to success was shaking off the “shoulds”.
It’s a word that adds weight - not importance, just weight. It slows you down. In writing and speaking in particular, it can transform a powerful, audience-inspiring insight or observation, and adds a damaging assumption that another choice based on what others may think would be better.
Here are three ways I've seen speakers presenters hindered by the “shoulds”:
They leave out crucial insights: Whether it’s an anecdote from personal experience, or an tangential observation which reinforces the main idea, the mental roadblock of “should I put this in?” has devastating effects. If you’re asking yourself if something is relevant, it’s at least interesting enough to provoke the question. Start by exploring that.
They add things which they believe the audience wants to hear: This is not saying that speakers don't want to meet audience expectations. After all, every speech needs a goal - for more about that, check out my video guide series. One of my first clients, a macroeconomist, often equivocated in opinion pieces (analyses, of course, are a different story. They must present only what the data says and offer points and counterpoints for economic policies). When she presented both her opinion and why that opinion is wrong, she convinced no one - not even herself. It only diluted her POV and her editorial voice, so we developed a way of balancing expectations with innovation.
They imitate their heroes: Public speaking is an art, and all works of art are derivative to a degree. We draw inspiration from those we admire. However, believing that one person’s techniques are the only way to deliver a presentation is misguided. When I worked with two Wall Street founders who had little speaking experience, they each had a difficult time letting go of what they believed a speaker should "sound like". The roadmap for overcoming this is: (1) developing perfect (for you) content, (2) finding your own speaking style and then (3) borrowing techniques and methods.
If you recognize yourself in any of these, it’s worth examining. But, please, don’t do it because you think I think you should. Do it because you know you can share your greatness with your audience.