Public Speaking - Making it look easy (6)

Dealing with a hostile audience - Five realities

If I were to ask experienced speakers how many times they had faced a hostile audience, most could count them on the fingers of one hand.  So why is it such a big fear? 

At the end of my last post, I pointed to five realities that run counter to the illusion that fear creates.  Here they are again . . .

1.  The fear is greater than the reality,
2. Most audiences are supportive,
3. Usually the worst that will happen is indifference,
4. When there is hostility it is usually from one or two people only,
5. The techniques for handling hostile audiences are the same as those for handling Q&A’s (more or less).

 (In this post I am not talking about some special situations that are by nature volatile, such as the closure of a service or a workplace, engagement in political activity, or challenging environmental or racial injustice.  These are somewhat special circumstances for which the speaker is usually appropriately briefed, supported and resourced.  In this post I am talking about the kind of occasions you might expect in ordinary corps / centre life.)

In the (unlikely) event of a challenge to what you are saying, here is an approach that has more than a reasonable chance of you coming out of it looking good, having acted with grace and retained the sympathy of the audience. 

1. Validate the person making the challenge (perhaps by thanking him/her for his/her concern about the issue), but not the veracity of the challenge (unless it is right of course).
2. If the statement is fundamental to the argument of your presentation explain in two or three quick points why you believe you are right, validate the challenger again, and carry on with the presentation, all the while being conciliatory in your approach. 
3. If the statement is not fundamental to your presentation, give a statement that asserts your belief in it, but your willingness to review it (after the presentation). Again a conciliatory tone is important.
4. Do not invite any further discussion.
5. Move on.

 You can repeat this for one or two times only, but if it goes beyond this you clearly have a credibility problem looming.  You have to take decisive action in some way.  An experienced speaker may be able to draw on the support of the wider audience without overtly putting down the challenger by gently pointing to the anti-social behaviour of the challenger.    

Don’t buy into an argument – simply challenge the antisocial behaviour

For example, I will politely but clearly challenge the behaviour so gently that it is barely seen as a challenge, perhaps something like this;  “Thanks for your comment.  I see that you disagree with my position - and I'm fine with that.  But rather than take up everyone else’s time, is it OK if you and I have a separate chat about this after the presentation?”

As soon as you do this, you have changed the dynamic in the room.  He begins to be exposed as a person behaving badly, and you are becoming established as a person who cares about everybody in the room. 

It may take another one or two attempts at this, but a rational person will realise that as he persists he is increasingly being perceived as small, petty-minded and ego-centric.  He will back off.  On the other hand, an irrational person might keep going of course, but all the time he will be strengthening your sympathy from the audience (as long as you remain calm and self-possessed), and even those who were against your position will be filled with respect for you as a person. 

Some do’s and don’ts

Do:      Remember that your goal in a skirmish is to act with grace under fire, to keep your head while others are losing their’s, to represent yourself, your organisation and your God in a way that you will have no shame about the next day.  You do not want even one sleepless night with the thought “I wish I hadn’t said . . .xxx” going round your head.

Do:      Step forward toward the challenger (It strengthens your own resolve and sends a message that you are not intimidated).

Do:      Seek to validate the challenger without patronising him.

Do:      Give a reasonable time for the challenger to express his view, but then . . .

Do:      Interrupt the challenger politely and graciously when he is going on too long.

Don’t: Allow the challenger to take over the session.

Don’t: Allow yourself to be forced into agreeing to something you do not believe to be right or inappropriate. 

In my next post, the final of my series on public speaking, I will share some some gems from around the blogosphere that will provide interesting reading and help prepare you to become a highly effective public speaker.