Buy your way out of troublesome questions

Preempt. Nice verb, but little used. It is composed of two parts: “pre” which means “before”, and “empt” which comes from the latin “emere” –  ”to buy”. In essence, to prempt is to buy your way out of a potentially difficult situation before it has a chance to happen.

What is there to preempt when you present?

1) The embarrassment to have to admit that you are not the expert the audience thought you were

If you have been asked to present on behalf of the first author, chances are, that during the Q&A, you will get expert questions only the first author (not you) could answer. Naturally, you should have turned down the invitation to be a substitute, but you may not have had the choice, or you may have found the invitation to attend that conference in sunny Hawaii, just too tempting! It is best to preempt such expert questions by warning the audience prior to the q&a session that you are not the first author, and that there could be questions you might not be able to answer immediately. Of course, as its name indicates, such a preemptive move has a cost: you will not be considered an expert, and networking with experts will be limited. But it is far better to honestly set the expectations than to have to face experts noisily expressing their disappointment towards your lack of in-depth knowledge, live, in front of your audience.

2) The embarrassment to have to admit that your contribution cannot immediately solve people’s real problems

Often times, you are presenting mouth-watering research, at least in terms of potential, but it is based on modelling, or it is still at the proof of concept stage. During the Q&A, questions abound on the significance of your work, or on its manufacturing or marketability. All your answers end up sounding like “we haven’t done that yet”, “we’re looking into it”, or “this is yet to be determined.” The audience is disappointed. Your title seemed to indicate the contribution was real and had already gone beyond the experimental stage, but it was a pipe dream. Therefore, preempt such misconceptions. Set up the scope, the exact nature of your accomplishments up-front in your talk. That way, the audience will not have the wrong expectations. During your conclusion, honestly announce what are the next steps necessary to take your contribution closer to a real tangible product or application. As in the previous case, this preemptive move has a cost. It might deflate the enthusiasm of a few people in the audience, but preemting is better than to have to minimise the impact of your work during the q&a.

009 not so expert audience with distracting laptops

Most conference proceedings now come in CD or DVD format instead of paper. How does that change the behaviour of the audience?

Presenters often assume that the audience they are facing is made up of experts in their field. Is that assumption valid? What can we assume our audience really knows? Should what earlier presenters say during their talk influence what we should cover during our talk?

Two questioners raise their hand – who you’re gonna choose?

Your formal presentation is over. You are now taking questions from the audience. Two people raise their hand at the same time. Who are you going to choose?

Is it the woman – if the two people are a man and a woman?
Is it the senior person – if one is elderly and the other one young?
Is it the foreigner – if one is from your country and the other one is not?

Actually, I would like you to consider yet another choice:

Is it the one you know – if one is known to you and the other one is not.

Here is Kevin’s advice. Kevin is a lecturer at the School of Information Systems of the Singapore Management University. He answers the question without hesitation.

“I would choose the one I do not know because I want to expand my network of contacts. Of course, time allowing, I will answer both questioners, but if there is time for only one question, at least I will possibly discover someone else interested in my research.”

Kevin is wise. The Q and A session is not just for the audience to refine their understanding of your work and identify its practical use. It is for you to identify people interested in your research, with the intent of building your network of contacts. You may have up to five minutes of Q&A. If your answers are long winded, you’ll have time for only one or two questions. Therefore, keep your answers short to be able to identify as many interested parties as possible in that short timeframe. While answering a question, keep an eye on the audience, not just the questioner – you may notice someone trying to raise their hand. If this person is a newcomer, not yet part of your address book, do not lose the opportunity to network. You may even want to briefly interrupt your answer and say “Yes, sir (madam) I will be happy to take your question next.” This accomplishes two excellent things. Firstly, it pre-empts a possible follow-on question from the current questioner thus protecting you against the trap of the prolonged time-sapping dialogue. Secondly, it provides relief to the next questioner, who knows he or she will be heard.

So who you’re gonna choose when the two people are unknown to you?
Here again, the answer is not obvious for it depends on who you are, and on what your secondary presentation goals are.
Is it the woman – if the two people are a man and a woman? If you are French, choose the woman :)
Is it the senior person – if one is elderly and the other one young? If you are looking for opportunities, choose the elderly person, but if you are looking for a postgrad to work in your team, choose the young scientist, regardless of gender.
Is it the foreigner – if one is from your country and the other one is not? I will let you answer that question in your comments. But if that foreigner is an elderly gentleman measuring 6 foot 2 inches, and has a slight French accent and a long nose, I recommend you choose him because it’s probably me :)

008 Presenter Mistakes

Dr Sinclair and Dr Curry share their favourite presenter “crimes” against the audience, and in the process, article one and article two of the universal rights of scientific audiences are drafted.