A straw poll of colleagues and clients confirmed my view that people often confuse the different roles.
I frequently receive confused requests. Not so long ago, I was asked to moderate when in fact after some discussion the client and I agreed they needed instead a Master of Ceremonies. Another client contacted me to moderate, but in fact what they required was a Master of Ceremonies and facilitator.
When organizing an event, how do you make sure you get the right person for the right job?
Some broad definitions to keep in mind:
A moderator guides the discussion, often but not always in a panel format.
A Master of Ceremonies is responsible for the “show* – the whole event as it unrolls on the day.
A facilitator is responsible for a process – helping people make decisions and achieve results.
While there are differences in responsibilities, there is a common base of skills across the three roles: you need someone who is neutral, is a good listener, and is a clear and confident communicator.
The nuance is that the different roles require more of one skill over another. By understanding this difference, you can be sure that you have hired the right person for the right job. .
From my experience, here are the prerequisites.
The ideal Moderator:
Knowledgeable – knows enough about the key issues to guide the conversation and ask the thoughtful questions. They are not subject experts, but they know how to research the arguments and draw out the main points.
Probing – is confident about asking thought-provoking questions to ensure a stimulating and lively discussion.
Engaged and engaging – is constantly thinking about the audience needs, making sure the conversation is meaningful for them and prepared to inject humour when need be.
Outcome orientated – works with the organiser to ask the questions they want asked to get the results they want.
Top Tip: TV and radio journalists are naturally good at this as they are used to distilling complex information and asking questions in a linear and easily understandable way. Make sure though they realise they are working for you and no longer for their editors!
The ideal Master of Ceremonies:
Personable – knows how to build rapport with the audience so that they are engaged throughout the event. If the audience doesn’t like the personality of the MC, the success of the event will be compromised.
Energetic and enthusiastic – works the room so that the audience is engaged, entertained, and energized.
Quick-witted – picks up quickly on verbal cues and link seamlessly from one session to another.
Charismatic – has confidence, presence and impact.
Top Tip: You need to get the right personality for your audience. If you are organising a big event you may want an actor/celebrity/broadcast presenter. But be careful that it does not become all about them!
The ideal Facilitator:
Well prepared – works out a process and structure for the event to achieve a specific result.
Analytical – identifies clear goals and links group feedback to them.
Empathetic – listens well and support others when they lose focus
Perceptive – links the response of the participants to the process and knows when to lift energy levels.
Top Tip: You need to look for facilitators who have a background in training and leadership development.
If you are organising an event, then do work closely with your “ideal” moderator, MC and facilitator, bringing them in as early as possible in the process to advise on content and format. This will make sure that you can the outcome you want.
If you are interested in this blog, have a read of other blogs on moderating.
I know very little about classical music, but I was privileged to have a front row seat to a master class given by Gabor Takacs-Nagy. As I watched Takacs-Nagy in action, I realised much of what he said applied to public speaking – a world I know more about.
So what does playing in public and speaking in public have in common?
Emotion is everything
Being a musician was like an emotional striptease explained Takacs-Nagy to aspiring professional musicians. The remark made the well-heeled audience laugh but resonated with me. Musicians he said needed to go beyond their technical prowess and convey the emotion of the work so that the audience connect emotionally.
It is the same principle in public speaking as Aristotle pointed out some 2500 years ago. If you want to persuade people, you have to not only have logos (facts) and ethos (credibility) but pathos (stirring the audience’s emotions).
The US author Maya Angelou goes even further: “I’ve learned that people will forget what you say, people will forget what you did, but people will never forget how you made them feel”.
Context is vital
Takacs-Nagy painted a vivid picture of what it was like to be a gypsy musician in the 18th century to help today’s young musicians convey the emotion of Brahm’s piano quartet number 1 in G minor, which is inspired by gypsy music.
If you are speaking in public the most effective way of getting a message across is to tell a personal story or anecdote. In both cases you need to explain the context – what is happening, where and when to whom, so that people care about the characters and the situation they find themselves in.
Show don’t tell
Tackacs-Nagy often picked up the violin and showed what he meant. He said he hadn’t played for many years so it was not about him showing off but helping the musicians hear what he meant.
In public speaking, it can be more powerful to describe a situation and let the audience form their own opinion, rather than telling them what to think. People in the professional world are often reluctant to show emotions as this can be seen as a sign of vulnerability. When I ask someone to share a personal story, I always share one first.
Light and shade
Too much emotion or too much of the same emotion is counterproductive as it will turn the audience off. Using the analogy of Da Vinci’s most famous painting, Tackacs-Nagy told the pianist playing Mozart’s piano quarter number 1 in G minor that he should see himself at certain moments more as the backdrop to the violinist’s Mona Lisa.
In public speaking it is vital that the speaker varies the emotional range – moving from “levitas” to “gravitas” to keep the audience interested, changing tone according to the message they are giving.
Photo by Deborah Berlinck
The Master Coach
As a media/public speaking coach, I know how important it is to have good intent when helping people through transformational change. Earlier this year, I went on a course where the sole intent of the trainer – a doyenne in the acting world – seemed to be to knock our confidence.
How refreshing to see in the equally competitive world of classical music, a coach whose constructive approach helped the musicians reach new heights of excellence, even to my untrained ear.
It amazes me that politicians still think they can get away with not answering the question during media interviews. Who are they hiring for media training? Certainly not me!
The web is full of examples of what not to do during a media interview. In my trainings I use an example of a Blackberry executive who is so on message but completely fails to hear the question.
Watch this as an example of a car-crash interview on BBC Breakfast.
He then went on and made the same mistake in other interviews. He became the story.
Twitter went into overdrive.
What happened to the hapless executive? I understand he is no longer with Research in Motion, the Canadian company behind Blackberry.
That fate may also lie in wait for the beleaguered British Prime Minister, Theresa May. She has made so many mistakes in handling last week’s tragic fire in a London tower block, that PR experts will be trawling over them for decades.
I shall limit myself to one.
BBC Newsnight presenter Emily Maitlis asked her if she had misjudged the public mood in her response to the fire. The Prime Minister had initially failed to meet those who had lost their homes and loves ones, preferring to talk exclusively to the emergency services.
Watch this extract of the interview.
As you can see, she dodged the question. How much more effective it would have been to have acknowledged that the support for the families had not been good enough. A remark she eventually made 4 days after the fire gutted the tower block, leaving at least 58 people dead.
So what is the key learning point here? If you should ever do a media interview, make sure you answer the question that is actually asked – not the one you want to be asked! Then you can bridge to what you want to say with much more credibility. It will also mean that you are less likely to be asked the question again or accused of not answering the question.
It really is as simple as ABC – acknowledge, bridge, continue to your comment.
What a pity that the British PM failed this basic lesson in talking to the media.
If you would like to hone your media interview skills, get in contact with Claire and her network of ex BBC and Reuters journalists. They will put you through your paces so that you get your message across effectively.
One of the golden rules of moderating is that the moderator does not have a view. Your role is to remain neutral and stimulate discussion so that the audience is engaged, learns something new and ideally changes behaviour or takes action afterwards.
The theme of the symposium was flu vaccines part of the solution for a healthier and more productive society. It is a challenging theme – perhaps not as immediately gripping as the panel discussion the day after on shortages and supply. As I know from my background as a BBC correspondent and PR professional, it is easier to sell problems than solutions.
So, how do you bring the subject alive?
It is a combination of the right people on the panel and the moderator’s skill at structuring a discussion so conversation flows easily from point to point and panellist to panellist.
When I worked at the BBC, the job was to get experts who were articulate but who had differing views. This is what makes a lively panel discussion.
On our two panels we had some very articulate and engaging experts but they were all advocates for the flu vaccine as a smart dose of prevention.
Would it have been more powerful to include a sceptical voice? Would this have attracted a bigger audience? It is a strategy, not without risks, but in my experience it always makes the experts defend their points with even greater impact.
Otherwise, the alternative is for the moderator to play devil’s advocate and of course for the audience to ask the challenging questions.
Structure, structure, structure
Whoever you have on the panel, the moderator’s job is to work out what they want to say and then structure a logical line of argument.
In the first panel, I decided to start with the messengers, the WHO,IFPMA and the International Federation on Ageing, so that they could set the scene in terms of recommendations, the science and the challenges for the at risk groups and older person.
Graphic facilitator Sarah Clark. Photo – Marsel Van Oosten
This led to a discussion on the need to advocate for a greater role for nurses and pharmacists as vaccinators and for more data to make an even more convincing scientific and economic case to governments and donors about the value of the flu vaccine.
On the second panel the structure was simple. I interviewed the Secretary General of the World Medical Association on why the flu vaccine should be everybody’s business in the workplace and on the need for health workers to lead by example and have the shot themselves. I then brought in the two organisers of the event IFPMA and FIP for their perspective.
Graphics by Sarah Clark.
Communication, communication, communication
Interestingly, one of the key messages that came out of the two panels and the audience Q and A was the need to change the narrative – the importance of not focussing simply on the facts or in some cases lack of data – but the need to convince hearts as well as minds.
I could not stop myself from saying that the Greeks had it right – 2,500 years ago. If you want to persuade someone you need not only logos (facts) and ethos (credibility) but also pathos (stirring the emotions of the audience).
As the discussion turned to the dangers of social media and alternative facts in propagating the myths around the flu vaccine, I found myself biting my lip. I desperately wanted to say that in my view more responsible journalism was part of the solution. But I managed to stop myself, aware that I was in danger of falling into the trap of becoming a moderator with a view!
Have a look at the video highlights of the seminar: The author: Claire Doole is a former BBC journalist, UN, IFRC and WWF spokeswoman, who moderates conferences and workshops for international organisations, federations and companies. She runs workshops on the art of talking to the media, speaking in public and moderating memorable and engaging events.
My colleague, Jean Milligan, and myself, have just come back from Bangladesh where we were handling the local media for an event organised by one of Geneva’s international organisations.
For the organisation’s President, who is himself from Bangladesh, it was an opportunity to show that his country was open for business, able to successfully organise an international conference attended by more than 1200 people from 126 countries.
As this was the first international conference in Bangladesh for decades, there was a massive local press corps following the proceedings in great detail. Several national TV channels even broadcast the press conferences live.
I realised during my stint there that it is not easy to parachute into a complex local media environment, and manage the challenges and opportunities that arise. Looking back on my experience in Bangladesh and in numerous other places, I have come up with some tips on managing local media in an unfamiliar context.
The first thing to keep in mind is that many local media work to the highest professional standards. You may find that doing an interview with them requires much more knowledge than with the international media. However, do be aware of the constraints that some of them work under.
National media can be politicised. In some place, “just the facts” is not the modus operandi of the media. Governments can exercise little to extensive control on the media. As we all know, freedom of the press is sadly not a universally agreed principle. So if you are responding to media questions as a spokesperson or giving an interview while on a business trip, remember to take into account the reason for your organisation being there and the relation between the press and the government.
I lived an extreme version of this situation. I once did an “interview” on Turkmen TV that consisted of two questions: What did I think of Turkmenistan? What did I think of the Turkmen President? Unfortunately they wanted me to speak for 3 minutes and I quickly ran dry. I talked about the health TV programme I was producing for BBC Media Action, but avoided answering directly their question. I have no idea whether the interview was broadcast. News, I was told, is never live in Turkmenistan and usually broadcast 3 days after the event – no doubt after heavy editing from the censors.
Being a journalist can be life threatening. In many countries it is far too dangerous for local media to ask critical questions. I once made a film on domestic violence in the state of Veracruz, Mexico. A reporter in the town where six women had been killed told me she regularly received death threats as a result of her articles. Her option was to seek protection from the authorities or the drug cartels. She chose the drug cartels, which were claiming that the authorities were complicit in the deaths of the women.
Fear transcends borders. Last month I was running some media training for humanitarian professionals at the Geneva Centre for Education and Research in Humanitarian Action (CERAH). They were asked to be spokespeople for MSF after the Nigerian military had bombed a refugee camp. The press release clearly said that Nigerian military was to blame. But a student, from a South Asian country controlled by the military, completely failed the exercise. She was culturally totally unable to criticise the military and as a result tied herself up in knots. I am sure if you are interviewed by the media in this country, you should prepare yourself for questions which are very pro-government.
Talk to everyone, but target critical media for you. Do some media scanning before you go to know who you must speak with and who it is desirable but not essential to speak with. This will help you prioritize in those countries where there are large numbers of digital, print and broadcast outlets.
Know whom you are talking to. Make sure you do your homework and assess any media requesting an interview. Find out what they have written on the subject before and prepare for their likely angles. They may be critical of international organisations and companies, which they feel treat their country unfairly and only have a western perspective.
Ask for translation. If you are running a press conference make sure you have translation for those on the panel who don’t speak the local language. In Bangladesh most of the questions were in Bengali and so were the replies of the IPU President and Speaker of the Bangladeshi Parliament. We learnt what they had said by reading the English language newspapers the next day!
There can’t be many subjects that provoke more heated debate than the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. So when the founder of the Geneva Human Rights Film Festival (http://www.fifdh.org/site/en/home) asked me to moderate a debate on the subject this week, I knew I had my work cut out.
As a former BBC journalist, I follow current affairs but I am not a subject expert. Yet at the Festival I would have a room full of subject experts. There are large Jewish and Arab communities in Geneva and many organisations that work towards ending the conflict.
Preparation was crucial if I was not to make a diplomatic faux pas and do justice to the speakers: Israeli professor and peace activist, Daniel Bar-Tal, founder of Stop Israel Save the Occupation (http://www.siso.org.il ) and Palestinian peace activist, Ali Abu Awwad, founder of the Tarir/Change Movement and Roots initiative (http://www.friendsofroots.net/the-people.html).
Daniel Bar-Tal, Claire Doole and Ali Abu Awwad at the Geneva Human Rights Film Festival.
So how do you prepare to moderate a panel on a hot topic? Below are some essential steps based on my experience last Sunday of moderating the discussion on Israelis and Palestinians against the Occupation.
Research the subject. I read up on key moments in the conflict, checked when the last peace talks happened and the latest developments on what the new US administration was actually saying on the two-state solution, settlements and moving the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.
Briefing with the panelists. It is key to build rapport with the panelists find out what they had done, their motivations and where they agree and disagree. I spent an hour with Daniel Bar-Tal on Skype and with Ali Abu Awwad in person.
Structure, structure, structure. When you are faced with experts on a hot topic, the moderator has to have a clear idea of how to guide the discussion as otherwise it can easily get out of hand. Work out subject areas to cover during the panel. For example, objectives, motivations, internal challenges, external challenges, future vision, and reaction to recent events.
Coherent flow. If there is a film or speaker before the discussion, it is important to refer back to this to ensure there is coherence but not duplicate the points. This means watching the film and knowing what the speaker will say so that you can move the discussion forward.
Pre-panel meeting. Meet the organisers, technicians and panelists 1-hour before to check the choreography of the event – layout on stage, microphones, and timings. I also gave them an idea of my line of questioning. This is not a BBC interview but an opportunity for the panelists to get their points of view across.
Check intro and bios. On a hot topic, every word counts. I made sure I asked the speakers to fact check my introduction and to agree to their bios.
Dance in the moment. You have to be prepared to follow up on what people say, get clarity on certain points and get as many specifics as possible.
It is about the panelists not the moderator. The audience, particularly if subject experts, has come to hear the panelists speak. It is not a BBC interview when the journalist often interrupts to press a point or get the news. However, the moderator does need to elicit interesting answers – not least because the organisers need quotes and sound-bites for their website and social media platforms. It is a balancing act.
Questions not comments from the public. This applies to all panels, but particularly when the audience is full of subject experts. Even though I made it clear that I wanted questions not comments, I repeatedly had to remind people, as they started to make statements, to ask a question. The moderator has to be firm for the sake of the rest of the audience and the panelists.
Give the panelists the last word. When faced with a potentially heated Q and A session, it is important to keep control and leave the last word to the panelists. Give them 30 seconds to wrap up with their main message or, in the case of Sunday’s discussion, their call to action.
If you would like to find out what motivated Daniel Bar-Tal and Ali Abu Awwad to work for peace, watch this short clip.
