Critical Error 11 Drawing Words from the Wrong Well

Toward the end of World War II, Niels Bohr set up a meeting with Winston Churchill to warn him about an atomic arms race that Bohr correctly predicted would occur after the war. Bohr wanted all countries to establish guidelines to contain these weapons. A

  • PDF / 203,891 Bytes
  • 13 Pages / 439.37 x 666.14 pts Page_size
  • 88 Downloads / 202 Views

DOWNLOAD

REPORT


It is hard to overestimate the dismay and resentment of an audience that has to put up with a paper read hurriedly in an even monotone.1 –P. B. Medawar

Toward the end of World War II, Niels Bohr set up a meeting with Winston Churchill to warn him about an atomic arms race that Bohr correctly predicted would occur after the war. Bohr wanted all countries to establish guidelines to contain these weapons. A few months earlier, Churchill had diminished hopes for such guidelines by signing away British rights to nuclear development. Because Bohr, who had recently fled Denmark, did not speak English very well, he decided to write out the presentation in his best English and have a friend, R.V. Jones, go over the draft and polish the language. For three days, the two men worked on this presentation, and when Bohr was pleased with the product, he memorized it. The day of the meeting arrived, and Bohr was brought to Churchill by an aide who was sympathetic to Bohr’s position. Unfortunately, as soon as Bohr and the aide met Churchill, Churchill put both the aide and Bohr on the defensive by claiming that the meeting was nothing more than a reproach for England’s signing away of the rights to nuclear development. Bohr tried to improvise, but according to R.V. Jones, “no doubt suffered from his usual anxiety to be precise.”2 Within 20 minutes, Churchill lost patience and had Bohr ushered out of the office. How should scientists and engineers deliver their words in a scientific presentation? Should they read those words or should they memorize them? Another possibility would be that

229

230

THE CRAFT OF SCIENTIFIC PRESENTATIONS

scientists and engineers speak extemporaneously—that is, the speaker commits to memory the organization of the talk, but not the exact wording. In an extemporaneous talk, the speaker practices the talk several times to be sure that he or she can fashion the words on the spot. Still another possibility is that scientists and engineers speak impromptu, which is often referred to as speaking off the cuff. Before deciding upon an answer, you should consider the advantages and disadvantages of each approach, as listed in Table 5-1. What might surprise you is that occasions arise, as shown in Table 5-2, in which each approach is appropriate.

Table 5-1. Advantages and disadvantages of different sources for speech. Sources

Advantages

Disadvantages

Extemporaneous

Credibility earned

Wording not exact

Easy to adjust speech

Much preparation

Eye contact

Natural pace

No preparation time

Potential for disaster

Eye contact

Difficulty in organizing

Impromptu

Lack of visual aids Memorizing

Reading

Precision

Potential for disaster

Smooth delivery

Unnatural pace

Credibility earned

Inability to adjust speech

Eye contact

Most preparation

Precision

Unnatural pace

Smooth delivery

Lack of eye contact Inability to adjust speech Significant preparation Lack of credibility

Delivery: You, the Room, and the Audience

231

Table 5-2. Appropriate occasions for each source of speech. Sources

Situati