All posts by Scott Keyser

Want more confidence, clarity and certainty? Then nail your value proposition

By | Uncategorized | No Comments

value proposition
Just got off the ‘phone from a client called Andrew, who runs a small (but ambitious) life sciences consultancy helping strategic functions in large pharma co’s add more value to the business. It was a ‘it’s-been-a-while-how-are-you-just-calling-to-check-in’ call. In the summer I worked with Andrew and his team on their ‘value proposition’ (VP), their offer of value to their market.

Despite some heavyweight experience and a track record in the sector, their ‘overview’ slide deck to attract potential clients hadn’t been getting traction. They knew they needed a more compelling proposition to scale the business.

In a half-day workshop I challenged every word of the slide deck and we stripped their offer back to the basics:

  • Who’s your ideal client and why?
  • What’s their major headache/challenge/problem?
  • What would the benefits be to them of removing that headache?
  • What qualifies you to be able to help them?
  • What’s unique/special about you/your approach?

As a result of their new-found clarity on what they offer the market, Andrew’s refined their ‘parent’ VP to produce a family of ‘child’ VPs for each specific business function in their clients’ organisations, reflecting the varying needs of each function. It’s also unlocked for him a whole new revenue stream that could be his path to hypergrowth.

He and his team are now super-clear about the value they offer to whom, how and why. Clarity brings higher levels of certainty, market engagement and, ultimately, business.

Confidence is another by-product of clarity. A joy in the VP workshop was seeing them uncover confidence — to approach new markets and give their clients confidence in their analysis-led decisions —  as a core value and potential differentiator from the competition. They’re now building on this in their branding and marketing.

And all in one day’s work, with a client who had the courage to commit to nailing their value proposition.

I turn 60 next year. Surveying my 38 years’ experience in B2B comms in one form or another, in my view the single biggest challenge facing UK SMEs — the engine room of the economy — is expressing their offer of value to their market in a clear, concise and compelling way. Think of it as sequencing your business DNA.

Contact me if you’d like to know more.

Writing as therapy: how words can heal

By | Write for Results | No Comments

Girl with Glasses Sitting Wooden Table Workplace

As the sun sets on World Mental Health Day 2018 — though the issue is timeless and universal — I’m minded to talk about what I know best: writing.

Many words have been written about the power of writing to heal trauma, deal with emotional pain or just clarify our thoughts.

“I write because I don’t know what I think until I read what I say.”
Flannery O’Connor

Writing nails what we’re thinking, pinning our butterfly thoughts onto the green baize of the display case, so we can examine them more closely, from different angles, at different times and in different lights. It makes the emotion legible. This emotional legibility can externalise painful experiences, drawing some of the heat of the trauma and loosening its grip on our psyche. Observation without overwhelm.

This process of externalisation — of bringing what’s deep inside us out into the world, or just into our living room — is what we do when we ‘express’ ourselves (from the Latin, meaning to ‘push out’). We verbalise our thoughts in impermanent speech, then into semi-permanent writing (we can shred it afterwards if we want), and finally to the permanent record of publication, eg as a book or a blog, when we share it with the world. And as we push the experience out, we also push it away, ie we get distance on it. While not denying it, we separate ourselves from it to see it more clearly.

There’s something powerful about re-shaping random, chaotic thoughts into black marks on white paper. It’s like reversing cinema history: turning the noisy, technicolour drama inside our heads into a silent black and white movie on the page.

Many accounts of trauma talk about fragmentation — of sensations, feelings and memories shattered. When we write honestly and courageously about what’s happened to us, the process of turning that experience into everyday language can help us re-integrate it, ie to make it — and us — whole again. To piece it back together so it makes sense, and we can give it meaning in our lives.

Once accepted and internalised, the trauma can become meaningful, even positive. I know of someone whose traumatic experience — where she feared being killed — has re-framed her whole self-perception and life view. After loving therapy, which included much writing, she now sees herself as a survivor, with a deep appreciation of life.

Like Vice Admiral James Stockdale, the highly decorated US fighter pilot held by the North Vietnamese as a POW for seven and a half years. Tortured 15 times, held in solitary confinement for over four years, in leg irons for two, he transformed his perception of his trauma:

“I never lost faith in the end of the story. I never doubted not only that I would get out, but also that I would prevail in the end and turn the experience into the defining event of my life, which, in retrospect, I would not trade.”

I’m reminded of how the body heals itself. It forms a scab over a cut or graze as outer protection, allowing the deeper healing to take place. Writing can be the scab.

~~~

If you’re struggling with any painful experience and want to write about it, here are some tips:

  • Write by hand. The connection between brain, hand and words is stronger than simply punching plastic keys on a keyboard. (A neurological map of the human body shows that our hands are connected to more neurons than almost any other body part.) So write long-hand with your favourite pen or HB pencil (I know: I need to get out more), rather than type your thoughts on a computer.
  • Don’t over-think it: write spontaneously. Your aim is to get into flow, to allow your thoughts and words to flow out of you onto the page. Judging the ‘quality’ of your writing — especially if you’re hard on yourself — kills fluency. Therapeutic writing is for your eyes only, not anyone else’s. If it helps you, it’s working. And if self-censure comes up for you as an issue, write about it there and then.
  • Write in a quiet place and time. It makes sense to explore your innermost thoughts and feelings in a place and at a time of day when you can be quiet, relaxed and thoughtful. On the tube on the way to work or during a spinning class is probably not a good idea. Many people write their ‘morning pages’ the moment they wake up.
  • Read it out loud. Vocalising what you’ve written in the safety of your own home can be a powerful way either of ‘exorcising’ what they represent, or simply facing them. R.O.L. helps us feel the resonance and power of our words in a way that we may not feel when we hear them in our head.

Scott Keyser, The Writing Guy, helps professional services firms transform their writing culture. He’s also on a mission to improve the life chances of the young and the disadvantaged by showing them how to write with impact.

Scott’s message to the world is that writing is neither a gift nor a black art, but a learnable skill. It’s a life skill that’s not the preserve of the few, but the birthright of all.

You can reach Scott at scott@writeforresults.com.

Why my writing workshop scored 100%

By | Uncategorized | No Comments

gilgamesh book
Yesterday I ran a rhetorica® writing workshop for the comms team of a British property business that has a presence in 60 cities and ten countries around the world. The delegates gave the day an overall rating of 5 out of 5, ie ‘Excellent’, or 100% satisfaction, with some flattering comments on the evaluation forms. 

What resonated with them to give the day that accolade?

It’s because we emphasised story telling. Not only how to tell a compelling story, but also how to unearth stories in the business — like ear-wigging canteen conversations where someone mentions what they’ve done in their day job that to them is prosaic, but to a writer is gold dust. We don’t tell enough stories in business, which is why most business writing is dull. Yet what better way is there to inform, evoke, entertain and persuade, all at once? From camp-fire to dinner table, humans are hard-wired to respond to good stories well told. We neglect them at our peril. 

In yesterday’s workshop I referred to chapter 9 of my book (rhetorica® — a toolkit of 21 everyday writing techniques), ‘Tell Your Reader A Story’. In it I refer to the four elements of any story:

1) Protagonist (from ancient Greek theatre meaning ‘first actor’) or hero;

2) Predicament or challenge (that tests the hero and creates the drama);

3) Narrative, ie the plot, context and setting;

4) Resolution, ie how the hero overcomes their challenge, revealing their strengths and weaknesses.

From Gilgamesh — written on clay tablets in Mesopotamia in the second millennium BC — to the latest TV soap, business case study or pitch, all good stories embody these four elements.

At the end of the workshop — despite some initial resistance from them — I gave the delegates a broad brief: to find and write a story about something of interest in their business. And they had less than an hour to do it.

What came back was remarkable: a fairy story about a refurbished church that blended magic with realism; a description of a hilarious but high-risk April Fool’s Day prank played on the CEO and chairman; a content-rich piece on the challenges of place-making with garden villages; a historical take on the business coming of age in terms of its culture, style and place in the world.

Where the writing samples they’d sent me before the workshop had been dry and lifeless, these stories leapt off the page — vivid, vibrant, confident, authentic and powerful. In one day, in a small way, I’d helped them find their voice.

‘Cos that’s what I do: I help organisations, teams and individuals find their writing voice.

Let me know if you’d like the same for you or your team: scott@writeforresults.com.

Write for Results Online is here

By | Write for Results | No Comments

pexels-photo-597331

This autumn I’m launching an online programme, in which the best of my rhetorica® writing techniques will be available to clients for a limited period. The content will take the form of video and/or slide show modules, each no longer than nine minutes. This is nano-byte learning for busy professionals.

I’ll be offering it as a complement to my live workshops, when staff can’t attend due to their location and/or client commitments — when well-intentioned fee-earners are pulled away on a client matter at the last minute. The programme will include a ‘pathfinder’ service, where I recommend which modules to study in which order, based on my analysis of the client’s writing needs. There will also be a series of live calls to help clients apply and embed the new writing behaviours.

I’m giving all my clients the ‘heads-up’ on this before anyone else, with the opportunity to benefit from pre-launch prices. Pls contact me if you’d like to know more.

Nano-byte on Writing

By | Write for Results | No Comments

pexels-photo-267569

We can re-discover our mojo through the written word.

Words express ideas, which can arouse us emotionally, intellectually, spiritually — or leave us cold. If ideas have different levels of energy, so do words.

Generally, formal ‘high register’ words — derived from Latin and Greek — have less energy than shorter, mid-register, plain English words which come originally from the Germanic languages (I’m talking roughly 1500 years ago), eg ‘end’ vs ‘terminate’, ‘buy’ vs ‘purchase’, ‘ask’ vs ‘request’.

This came alive for me the other day.

I was running a writing clinic for some lawyers. One of them had written a turgid blog post on a legal development, full of high falutin’ phrases and verbose expressions. She could barely read it. So I asked her to ‘translate’ it into plain English.

What a contrast! Suddenly the imagery was concrete, vibrant and interesting; the turns of phrase were original and varied; there was even some levity in there. She’d found her voice. The piece was transformed. But so was she.

Her whole demeanour had changed. As she skipped out of the room, her face and body beamed with energy, confidence and joy.

This is why I do the work I do.

The only thing in life that’s rocket science…

By | Write for Results | No Comments

flight-sky-earth-space

The only thing in life that’s rocket science…is rocket science. So writing well is not rocket science.

I posted a video yesterday of me riding bumpily to my next meeting in a bicycle taxi on a sweltering afternoon in London. I was on a high: I’d just helped some lawyers transform their writing in one of my rhetorica® workshops. Not only did their writing improve, but their whole demeanour, energy and body language changed. One of them said they’d re-discovered their mojo through the energy of the words they’d used.

Here are the five things one of the delegates and I did to take what was already an adequate piece of legal advice to an excellent one:

1. Added sub-headings to emphasise the structure, eg showing the reader that the answer to their question was right at the front, not buried in the middle or relegated to the end.

2. Introduced the memo stating that what followed was their legal opinion. This obviated the need to repeat the phrase ‘In our view’ a zillion times.

3. Omitted other needless words and phrases, eg ‘For the avoidance of doubt': if your writing is clear, this is redundant! eg replaced ‘It is usually the case that…’ with ‘Usually…’

4. Made the language less formal and more ‘human’, eg rather than say ‘elected to sue them’, said ‘chose to sue them'; replaced ‘Furthermore’ with ‘And’ or ‘What’s more’ (you CAN start a sentence with And, by the way, despite what you had drummed into you at school).

5. Removed hackneyed sign-offs, like ‘Please get back to me if you require any further information’ — as if a client wouldn’t do that if they wanted clarification! Cliche’d greetings and sign-offs indicate a lazy and/or unconfident writer.

Like I said — writing is not rocket science. Nor is it a black art or an innate gift. It’s a learnable skill.

PSLs and Associates: how readable is your writing?

By | Write for Results | No Comments

You close your document with a neat turn of phrase, tap the full-stop key with a flourish, lift your hands from the keyboard and sit back smugly.

But how do you know that what you’ve written is clear, concise and readable?

You’ve read it back to yourself over and over, it sounds OK, but you’re so close to it you’re not the best judge. The deadline is looming. You need objective feedback on it and now.

Enter the Readability Statistics.

Developed by Dr Rudolf Flesch — a Viennese Jew who fled to the US from Nazi persecution and became a New York sociologist famed for his work on readability — this is a little-known function in every version of Microsoft® Word, Outlook and Apple. Here’s what it looks like:

readable-writing-readability-statistics

It not only gives you standard stuff like word and character count; it also gives you four helpful numbers:

ASL (Average Sentence Length) In the middle (‘Averages’) section, your ‘Words per Sentence’ is the average number of words per sentence, or ASL.Your ASL heavily influences readability, as long sentences contain more ideas and demand more processing power than short ones. (Technique #20 in my book rhetorica® — a toolkit of 21 everyday writing techniques shows you some easy ways to shorten your sentences.)Your ASL target: 15-20 words.
Passive Sentences In the lower (‘Readability’) section, ‘Passive Sentences’ is the proportion of sentences in the passive voice.Passivitis is a chronic affliction. Writing in the passive voice is longer, less direct and less vigorous than the active voice. The clue’s in the name.Your ‘Passive Sentences’ target: as close to 0% as possible.
Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) score In the same section of the stats, your FRE scores the readability of your text as a percentage, so the higher the better.Dr Flesch used two measures of readability: the average number of words per sentence and average number of syllables per word. In his system, plain English starts at 60% FRE. Authors of technical documents rarely reach those dizzy heights, because technical jargon tends to be polysyllabic, depressing readability. But we should be able to score 45-50% FRE by offsetting techie text with simple supporting language.Your FRE target: at least 45%.
Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level This is functional reading age as measured by the US grade school system, i.e. the minimum amount of American education required to understand a piece of writing.To convert Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level into age, add five, i.e. a grade level of 5.0 is roughly an American ten-year old. This means that, at a minimum, an American ten-year old could understand your text. It doesn’t mean you’re targeting that age group!No target for this one, but most of my corporate clients set a Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level for their external communications of 10–11. (Recently tested articles from The Economist scored an average Flesch-Kincaid level of 10.3 to 10.8, exploding the myth that The Economist is high-brow and only for college graduates.)

Word of warning: the stats work best on fully punctuated body copy of at least 200 words; they don’t work well on titles, headlines, sub-headings, bullet points and captions. If your document has lots of these, save it as a text-only file and run the stats on that for a truer score.

To find out how to activate the Stats and score your next piece of writing, click here to see the article. And while you’re at it, you might want to download your free rhetorica® chapters

The bottom-line

Assessing a piece of writing — whether yours or someone else’s — can be subjective; the red pen is never far away. But the readability stats make assessment a tad more objective: they show you what is going on with the mechanics of the text. So if you’re defending your word-choice to a fee-earner or giving a junior staff member feedback on their writing, you can now do so with evidence and authority. (And if your version turns out to be more readable than your boss’s, you face an interesting dilemma…)

~~~

If you’d like to go to the heart of the matter and download three chapters of my book, rhetorica® — a toolkit of 21 everyday writing techniques, here’s the link: Download your free rhetorica® chapters

writeforresults-newlogo16

Scott Keyser runs Write for Results, a communications and business development consultancy. Write for Results works with professionals who perform technically complex work (eg lawyers, accountants, engineers), but who sometimes struggle to communicate the value of that work to their market in an engaging way. Scott and his team simply show them how to make their comms — including their bids, tenders, pitches and proposals — clear, concise and compelling.

To book a slot to speak to Scott about your or your team’s writing, click here: http://bit.ly/2f5o6di

PSLs and Associates: is your ‘professional’ mindset ruining your writing?

By | Write for Results | No Comments

A few months ago I spoke at the annual conference of an international network of accountants and tax advisors. The setting was the 5-star Parco dei Principi hotel in Rome (nothing but the best for The Writing Guy!), which overlooks the Villa Borghese, a beautiful landscaped park.

Facing an audience of professionals in the Eternal City, it seemed fitting to examine the Latin origins of the word ‘profession’.

From profiteri, its original meaning was to ‘take a vow in a religious order’, but it later morphed into the idea of making a public declaration of competence in a particular occupation. And an occupation — like accountancy, medicine or law — demanding a high level of skill, specialist technical knowledge and long periods of study. Being called ‘professional’ is generally a compliment; being described as ‘unprofessional’ is not.

Trouble is, when it comes to writing, the ‘professional’ mindset does not serve us, because it generates three overlapping myths:

Big Fat Myth #1: ‘I must show my expertise’;

Big Fat Myth #2: ‘The cleverer my writing, the more convinced my reader will be’;

Big Fat Myth #3: ‘The more detail I give the reader, the less risk to me and my firm’.

Big Fat Myth #1: ‘I must show my expertise’

When your intention is to show how expert you are in your topic and impress your reader, rather than genuinely communicate with them, you inevitably talk more about yourself and/or your firm than them. You use the words we, us and our more than you and your. It becomes all about us, not them. I call this ‘we-ing’ all over your reader, which is extremely rude. ‘Writer-centric’ might be a politer way of putting it.

Like the party bore who insists on talking only about themselves and shows no interest in others, readers find this a turn-off. And when they’re turned off, the chances of them doing whatever it is we want them to do plummet. As I heard someone say the other day, ‘If you don’t write for your reader, you won’t have any’.

Another facet of this myth is over-doing technical jargon. Why use ‘equitable estoppel’ if you know that your readers won’t understand it? You risk frustrating, confusing or alienating them. And if your readers are a mix of techie and lay, and ‘equitable estoppel’ is precisely the right term for the context, then use it, and explain for the non-techies what it means.

Big Fat Myth #2: ‘The cleverer my writing, the more convinced my reader will be’

Like Myth #1, this one’s also more about impressing the reader than communicating with them, but with the emphasis on style rather than content. This is a seductive myth: as most professionals are highly intelligent, educated and conscientious (is my flattery working yet?), surely their word-choice and syntax should reflect that?

No, they shouldn’t.

Using polysyllabic, fancy words in long, complicated sentences is not good writing. Needlessly complicating the simple to show how clever or educated you are…is not clever; it’s infuriating. It makes the reader work much harder than they want to to get your meaning, which will likely alienate them from you than endear them to you.

And this links to another mini-myth: that professional writing must be formal.

So rather than saying buy, the writer says purchase. Instead of pay, they say remuneration. Rather than use or apply, they plump for utilise, and so on. We call this high-register language, where ‘register’ is a scale of the formality of your writing. High-register, formal language is solemn, serious, cold, unfriendly and hard to relate to; it fails to build rapport with the reader.

Big Fat Myth #3: ‘The more detail I give the reader, the less risk to me and my firm’

This is A Major Myth, ‘cos professionals tend to be detail people; they’re more at home in the minutiae of a matter than in the big picture. More insidious, perhaps, is the unconscious belief that by maximising the detail, the reader can’t criticise them for lack of information, protecting their firm from client complaints. This smacks of a defensive, unconfident CYA (Cover Your Arse) mindset — not a recipe for clear, concise or compelling communication.

This myth produces ‘brain-dumps’, documents that are dense, unstructured slabs of text, like this:

professional-mindset-myth-3

And that’s only a snippet of the original email! The recipient, a good friend, remarked: “I asked them a simple question. If they think I’m going to read all that, they’re deluded!”

In my book, this is lazy writing. The author is dumping everything they know on the reader with the words ‘There you go. You work it out. I can’t be bothered.’

How do we explode the three Myths?

Turn Big Fat Myth #1 on its head.

Rather than showing off your expertise (or your boss’s, if you’re writing for them), show off your understanding of the reader. Get to know them so well you can write as easily about them as yourself; place them front and centre of your writing. I call this being ‘reader-centric’ and it’s the single biggest challenge in B2B writing. But crack it and you’re on your way to being a great writer.

So, how can you get to know your reader?

If they’re internal, ie they work in the same firm as you, go and speak to them; build a relationship with them. If they’re a client, like a GC or a CEO, ask your boss about them; speak to everyone in your firm who knows them; read their blog; Google them; look them up (and follow them) on LinkedIn; go to an exhibition/conference they’re attending or speaking at. (Just don’t hang around outside their home at night: that’s stalking.)

If they’re still as elusive as the Scarlet Pimpernel, then you must use one of the writer’s key skills — your imagination.

Have an imaginary conversation with them:

  • ‘What sex are you?’
  • ‘How old are you?’
  • ‘What do you do?’
  • ‘What do you want more of/less of?’
  • ‘What are your values? What motivates you, gets you out of bed in the morning?’
  • ‘What are your fears, hopes, dreams and aspirations?’
  • ‘What are your pain points?’
  • ‘What information is critical to you?’
  1. Your goal here is to think your way into their heads, walk a mile in their shoes, see the world from their perspective, understand what makes them tick. By building a pen-portrait of them (referred to in content marketing circles as their avatar or persona), you can write in a way that engages them and makes them receptive to your message. And if you have several reader-types, then create an avatar for each type.

When we shift focus from ourselves to the reader, something magical happens. We start using the personal words you and your. They cast a spell over the reader, because they make them feel as if we are talking to them, and only them. They satisfy a basic human need to be heard and feel special. Try using you and your three times as often as I, we or us.

Personalised writing is about being so tuned into the reader that they recognise themselves and their agenda in your words. It’s empathic. E rmpathy creates connection. And connection persuades.

As for Big Fat Myth #2 (‘my writing must be clever, and formal’), if you’ve nailed Myth #1, you should be on your way to conquering this one. Long, fancy words in labyrinthine sentences lose the reader and tax their brain much more than short, simple words in short, simple sentences. If you get that, you probably won’t do it. This is about using mid-register, plain English, ie neither formal nor slang. So instead of terminate say end or kill; rather than in respect of/in relation to say about or on; don’t say in order to achieve our goal when you just mean to achieve our goal.

Finally, let’s annihilate Big Fat Myth #3 (‘more detail = less risk’).

Your choice of detail should be a function of the reader’s needs, not yours. So, if you must include lots of detail to explain a complex matter, that’s fine. Just make sure it’s so clearly structured, laid out and sign-posted that the reader will joyfully find the information they need. That includes but isn’t limited to contents lists, sub-headings, topic sentences, pull quotes, tabbed dividers, colour-coded sections and varied fonts.

Structure is more important than language. Inductive logic (ie leading with the main message, followed by the evidence) means front-loading your communication in service of the reader. In other words, lead with what most matters to them, eg your summary advice or the benefit to them of following that advice; your conclusion or recommendation, or the action you want them to take. They can then dive into the ensuing detail if they wish.

Make navigating your document easy-peasy.

What’s the bottom-line?

Top writers understand that persuasive writing is all about the reader. It’s about shifting intention and focus from themselves to their reader(s). Good writing is less about intellect, language or word-choice, and much more about emotional intelligence.

~~~

If you’d like to go to the heart of the matter and download three chapters of my book, rhetorica® — a toolkit of 21 everyday writing techniques, here’s the link: Download rhetorica® Chapters

writeforresults-newlogo16

Scott Keyser runs Write for Results, a communications and business development consultancy. Write for Results works with professionals who perform technically complex work (eg lawyers, accountants, engineers), but who sometimes struggle to communicate the value of that work to their market in an engaging way. Scott and his team simply show them how to make their comms — including their bids, tenders, pitches and proposals — clear, concise and compelling.

To book a slot to speak to Scott about your or your team’s writing, click here: http://bit.ly/2f5o6di

PSLs and Associates: are you making these five mistakes in your writing?

By | Write for Results | No Comments

Speed-read

Here are the five mistakes:

  1. Vague objective
  2. Waffle and wind
  3. Poor structure
  4. Formal language
  5. Passivitis (over-use of the passive voice)

As this article is Season 1, Episode 1, we’re just dealing with the first mistake here — otherwise it would be an extremely long article and you probably wouldn’t read it! Coming soon to a screen near you, Episodes 2 to 5 will handle the other four mistakes.

MISTAKE NUMERO UNO: Vague Objective

Have you ever read an article or blog that meandered from subject to subject, that didn’t seem to know where it was going? Chances are, the author didn’t either.

This is often because the author didn’t take the time to plan, and part of planning is nailing your objective or purpose. This is your magnetic north, the Pole Star of your writing.

If writers do consider their objective, it’s often in terms of what they want to say to the reader, ie their main message. They’re focusing on the communication transmission. The best writers turn that on its head and focus instead on the reception, ie how they want the reader’s behaviour to change as a result of receiving the words. It’s a subtle shift, but it’ll cause a sea-change in your writing.

How to nail your objective

I recommend using an acronym, F.F.A. — Facts. Feelings. Action. In other words, what you want your reader to know, feel and do. I’m going to address the triad in the order of Facts, Action, Feelings.

Facts: what do you want the reader to know?

This will vary enormously, depending on what you’re writing and for whom.

If you’re writing a pitch for instance, there will be many things you want the client to know, e.g. your understanding of their needs; your proposed solution, approach, team and price; the great benefits they’ll get when they appoint you; your track record with similar organisations or contracts.

The challenge with facts is knowing your reader well enough to judge which ones they need and which ones they don’t. In other words, pitching (excuse the pun) at the right level of information and detail. Too little detail and they’ll feel frustrated; too much and they’ll be overwhelmed or bored.

Action: what do you want the reader to do?

The list is endless. You might want them to respond to your blog or client alert, approve your award submission, give you a pay rise (chance would be a fine thing!), sign off your budget application, register for your training course, send you the document you need. The single action you need from the reader is usually obvious.

Feelings: what do you want the reader to feel?

Where persuasive writing gets interesting — and challenging — is in the emotions department.

Many people think that emotion has no place in business. But we neglect it at our peril.

Think about a recent or live document and list all the emotions you might want your reader to feel when they’re reading or have read your document. Here’s my list, in no particular order:

  • Confidence/trust
  • Desire
  • Inspiration
  • Anger, outrage
  • Excitement/enthusiasm
  • Motivation
  • Patriotism
  • Fear
  • Greed
  • Relief/reassurance/comfort
  • Self-value, self-esteem

In the professional services environment you work in, I would suggest that the vital emotions are confidence/trust, excitement/enthusiasm, fear and greed.

A client is unlikely to heed your legal advice if they don’t trust you or have confidence in your ability.

If your document is dull, your persuasion is unlikely to work. We don’t bore people into submission, but we can excite them to action. Hint: they will find benefits to them and/or their business pulsatingly exciting.

What might your reader be scared of or anxious about? If falling foul of a new directive could land them in prison, I think you’ll get their attention.

What do they want more of, are greedy for? Not just money. Maybe they want more time, information, control, power, influence, opportunity, a better image or a sounder reputation.

So, what’s the role of feeling and emotion in persuasion? It’s all thanks to this guy…

writing-mistakes-aristotle

… the grandfather of rhetoric, a pupil of Plato and tutor to Alexander the Great. None other than Aristotle.

Aristotle identified the three elements of persuasion that are as relevant to us in the 21st century as they were in the fourth century BC:

Ethos: the character, reputation or credibility of the ‘persuader’, i.e. you, the writer.

Logos: ancient Greek for ‘word’, this is about appealing to the reader’s sense of logic and reason.

Pathos: ancient Greek for passion or emotion. Aristotle believed this was the king of the three.

The bottom-line

The reason why Feelings in F.F.A. are so important is this: logic makes people think, but emotion makes them act.

~~~

If you’d like to go to the heart of the matter and download three chapters of my book, rhetorica® — a toolkit of 21 everyday writing techniques, here’s the link: Download rhetorica® Chapters

writeforresults-newlogo16

Scott Keyser runs Write for Results, a communications and business development consultancy. Write for Results works with professionals who perform technically complex work (eg lawyers, accountants, engineers), but who sometimes struggle to communicate the value of that work to their market in an engaging way. Scott and his team simply show them how to make their comms — including their bids, tenders, pitches and proposals — clear, concise and compelling.

To book a slot to speak to Scott about your or your team’s writing, click here: http://bit.ly/2f5o6di