Here’s a transcription of the Effective Communication podcast as presented by Brett McLaughlin (@oreillybrett). Really great talk! At some point a video will become available and I’ll update this post with a link or embed or something.
Brett talks about Motivating, Gratifying, and then Rewarding your audience in order to improve your communication techniques!
I apologize in advance for the plethora of typos 
! Hard to transcribe word for word and get everything exactly right.
What DO I know anyway? I’m on the Radar O reilly blog. I post to it mutliple times a week on everything from media. I also do it at my church. I count the fact that I can hold peoples attention as a piece of this ppuzzles. Alot of you are probably hear because you’ve heard of head first. It was not invented by me. Then through the help of a few other people we’ve evolved that. All that to say I have a fair bit of experience communicating
This is an attempt to give you guys some insight into what will work. We’re not focusing on any kind of communication. This is not how to communicate tech in print, or how to prove a claim in person. This is how to reach an audience in a way that engages them beyond what t-shirt you were wearing.
What I’m trying to do is give you some principles you can employ. They will cut across tech, fictiopn, non fiction. We’re trying to keep this as generic as possilbe but also very concrete.
1:06 AND?
THere really are some secrets. There are som ethings that if you do right you will attract a crowd. THey’re not what you thik they are. I’ve read more books on communication than you can shake a stick at, but I find you hear one of two things. You’re either a born communicator and you grow up and your organizing on the playground and you have this gift. OR here if you follow these 28 rules you’ll be great. Neither of these are true. There are core secrets here.
1:07 Stories?
I have heard these things it’s not goingt to be the same old same old right? One thing you always here is if you tell a story and make it personal people will pay atenetion. Aesop wrapped it up in a fable. Movies are based on books. There’s this idea that hey if you can write a good story people will listen to that. In fact the first the series that has become very popular has a lot of stoires in it.
1:08 Visuals?
The head first books have all kinds of visuals. I threw Tim O Reilly on a jet ski. Mostly because It seemed fun not because it would communicate
1:08 Expertise?
There’s an idea going around that if you’re an expert on a topic you communicate well. We can all agree that’s just inane. Some of the most knowledgable people I’ve ever met I feel like I need a PHD To even talk to them
We’ve all been there where a guy starts using 12 syllabel works and people don’t have any context.
1:09 NOT even CLOSE
THese are things that aren’t anywhere in the ball park of what makes you an effective communicator.
1:09 WHat is?
Here’s the thing. If you get nothing else. You have to begin taking a radical view of what your competition. Well I ggive talks for non profit so I need to speak to my coworkers you need to get out of your mind that you’re not in a competitive environment. You’re competing. You’re competiting for attention. For brain space. For time that none of us have. I mean right now people are hopping on, they’re making extremely quick judgements and then they’re bailing or they’re staying.
We can judge this by how many people stayed on after 10 15 minutes
1:10 Most Books
I want to give you somethign concrete and then we’ll pull back out. The typical book syays I have to compete against other books. Well, we need to be better than the other books. So maybe they took the fibve best selling books. I have to present hte material better! That’s just a limited view! Reality tells us that we’re not competing with just other books.
Is we have always taken the attitude we’re competing with a lot more. If you are talking with a bunch of people or on the phone. You are competing with a lot more than some other person making a similiar presention. You’re competing at a minimum with their cell phone. Im competing with your email and your phone. You’ve got a desktop up. I’m at a disadvantage. YouTube is a click awya. I can’t hear you. I’m competing for your attention.
You’re competing with that kind of medium. Anyone over 35 wen t”oh God another video game talk” I’m not saying these things are great that our culture is now holding up education vs. a 60 minute TV show. This is the reality when we’re trying to talk. If I’m not as interesting as Lost or Memenot or MGS4 people are going to check out. They’re going to say this is notgood.
Here’s the thing you’ve got to realize: for the last 10-15 years the poeople who have been coming of age and consumers have grown up with video game controllers in their hands. THat’s really significant! this guy who plays so hard he needs a sweat band one of those buttons on those contraollers. He knows what they do. He doesn’t have to check the A and B and X and Y. I hve a six year old who can just school me. What that tells us it hey’re coming into your talk and your phone call with a totally different view of what they’re expecting. They’r enot thinking that this will be some linear lecture. THey’re thinkingt hey have to be entertained and engaged…
1:13 But I thought it wasn’t about all that stuff?”
I thought uit wasn’t abuot the visuals and great slides?
1:13 Not even CLOSE(still)
Those are aids and tools! If you come up with the best visuals and the best puzzles and games you can still completely lose an auydience.
1:14 Motivate Gratify Reward
Once your ealize you’re cometig with time with money with entertainment you will realize there ar ethree things you’re going to have to do over and over and over again. You’re going to motivate, gratify and reward. It’s a cycle. You’re gpoing to have to do these things in this sequence over and over and over again.
Even if you’re going over this what does it mean?
1:14 You have to Motivate
I’m not talking about leading a chear rallt.
1:15 What Moptivates people?
This slide here doesn’t come across so well, if you ask the typical person this is what they’re going to asy “I want to get my job done or please someone” maybe they want to get promoted. I want to learn new things. You’ll occasionaly here people talk abouta ltruism I want t o do something for the greater good. These are all legitimate but it creates a cloudly picture. How in the world can I motivate all of that. On one hand I have to motivate someone who wants to get ahead. On the toiher hand I have to give a chng the world motivation. ONe of my techniques is find someone who is about 12 and try and convince them.
WHt they are going to do if it doesn’t hold water is they’ll give yopu an atitude look and say “What are you even talking about.”
You’re going to find very quiclt that while that motivation is legitimte and applies you;’re going to have to go beyhond those unselfish and unself serving motivations. They’re going to need to be spoken to directly. Money, no matter how much we say it’s not the case we’re motivated by money. We’re in a recession/depression you can’t find me someone who at some level doesn’t have a concern that isn’t motivated by momnney. Im not saying money motivation means you’re trying to fleece someone or rip them off.
As long as we have to pay for food or a home or apartment then money is a motiovation that will speak to us. When you’re speaking think about it. Is there a financial motivation. It doesn’t mean you have to go base. I’m simply saying sometimes the motivation ties in with altrusim. What are you talking about and how does it have a financial impact. It’s the hierarchy of values goals and motives. We’re playing in the bottom of Malswell. We need to be willing to play in theese things.
This is sex. It’s a g-rated webcast so it’s as edgy as we’re gonna go. The simply desire, sexual connection, community, desire all of these things play. If I was putting just the word sex io the screen this would not be so poweful. You can say “it’s a visyual it’s not important.” the visual isn’t key the key is I drew your attention to something that intrigues us. Sex sells. Exactly. If this was not the case no matter how we like it and say it’;s base is when you engage people on a relationship level you are engaging a mental level they fundamentally understand. You are not going to hve to convince someone.
It’s very trikcing tyin you hve to do this in a way. Im not saying throw your ad for a hot dog in front o fa naked woman. I’m saying can youf ind a way to legitiamaltely connect to your audience in a motivation that applies to them.
1:19 Power
There is something incredibly valuable about power. If you explain to someone you can do more. You can understand. You can go further. You won’t have to ask for help. That is hugely powerful. It’s hugely motivating. What I’m goign to contend with you is if you don’t do these kind of things and connect to motivation than you have already lost the battle. Every video game in the world is either showing you some kind of clipo that is engaging or throwing you into a game world. This s why every show on the planet has a minute to 4 minute intro before a title sequence. If they can give you some motivation or cliff hanger or some reason to care or you want to know how House is going to blast htis next person if you get hooked in the first couple of minutes you’e in. THen they can hit you with the opening.
1:21 The rescue
Let me give you a couple of concrete exampless. ON the priont side at headfirst we have something called a rescue. Byu the time it gets pbsed it’s pixelated. There’s this idea of a rescue. This is a 24 theeme. If you can put something in peril and provide me an option to get him out of peril theen I’m in. This seems very fictional but you can provide scenarios on more than a technical level. Instead of saying you need to write some javascript code and isn’t that exciting. We put someone who has a pproblem. I need to go live in a week, and can you help? That little bit of wrappings that little bit of innovation that puts the problem in the context. You’re engaged in a level beyhond purely intellectually.
You don’t go “It’s just technical” there’s some motivation there. We all want to rescue. It fills that social desire we have of betterment and helping others. Your neighbour is flalling.
1:22 The Quest
There are other ways. I call this the quest. If you’re talking self help you’re tlaking community there is always a quest here that there is something greater to achieve or attain. Sometimes it’s the greater good sometimes its enlightemneet. SOmetimes it’s a relatinhop bigger than yourself. All of this speaks to us because it implies there’s a connection to be made or a journey to be taken. This is why we read the thousands of pages that make up the LoTR. The implication the reason this motivates us is that by the end of the journey we’ll be changed.
The others are easier. Motivation is hard. If you don’t tell me early on that there’s something at the end for me I’ll be improved i’ll be furthered then I’m out. Again if we go back to the firtst few minutes of the TV show is this worth my time? Its it worht an hour of my life=? Am I going to be a better communicator?
It’s a huge important thing that your job is not tao make yourself look smart but it’s to motivate your audience. Give them an explicit audience. You will be bettered in some way.
1:24 the Escape
We’re on the phone again right now. We’re on it all day. We all have bosses. Some of those bosses we don’t enjoy every much, Sometimes someone is listening to you because they need a break. I believe some of you are here are because you don’t have to be at your job. And you’re saying something will be more engaging than what I should be doing. It’s ligitaite! It’s an honest motivation. Is there something you can communicate to that will say this will be enjoyable.
This is something that will make you prepared. What is this going to do to not only escape but to improve me. THere’s nothing wrong with acknowleding people are there. You’ve been to the Time Share Deals where people just hang ing for the free tirp. You have the oppotunityh to communicate. You have the opportunity to fight against the initial motivation and to accept and play into it. This is an hour you can count as work. That’s ok. Because I can promis you’ll learn something along the way. You have to movivate. THe result of this is people care.
1:26 I Care!
What’s really fascinating is the great litmus test is if I can get their attention for 10 minutes that’s an hour of adult time. Get younger audiences to pay attention. If you’re teachers. This is iportant. THis is huge big stuff. All are forms of narration. Forms of taking someone on a journey. We respond to all that.
1:27 Gratify
We set the stage for people to engage and not just feel like theyre going to walk to a show but you’re not only gonna motivate but you’ll get something back You motivate and motivate but all the motivation in the world wil not help you if you don’t gratify.
Gratification, here’s the thing and here’s why this is tricky is all of these things have to exist. You have to motivate and gratify well. They have to fit together. I’m going to assume you’ve motivated. Here’s ione form:
1:28 You’ll get what you want, but only when you….
You listen to me and get these 10 other books and those cost and here’s some homework. Well you’ve just deflated everyone. You’ve connected to their motivations and then you said I’m not going to gratify you. I’m going to give you ap iece to a uzzle. People see that and they tune out.
More importantly you’ve got to realize there is always a clock ticking. It doesn’t matter if it’s a one hour allocation of time or if they are expecting it to be two hours there is an internal clock. When that clock bails ouut they bail. If you’re in a room where they can leave they leave The iPhones come out everyone’s like what’s the hashtag. Instead of occasionally communicating they’re lookingfor an excuse to get away from you.
We see this in our competition. We’re trying to say here’s a motivation here’s some resolution. We’re not delaying resolution to the very end. I’ve already done that. I’ve given you one point. You have to see your competition quicklt. Then I talked motivation for 10 12 moinutes now I’m bringing youb ack and moving on. I’m going to resolve that and we’re going to go on to the next thing. COnstantly gratify as quickly as you can because it will get people engaged.
1:30 Resolution In The Book
You want to resolve in the book in the macro level. You save your best story for the end, right? It’s the big finish! except that everyones tuned out by then. If you haven’t kept them along the way it doesn’t matter. They’ve bailed. They’re not listening to your great story. You have to bring it in.
1:31 Resolution In The Chapter
So whata re my chapter points what are my arsc? can I gratify more quickly? Can I bring this home? There’s an old form of communication where you would expound some test for 45 minutes of the 50 minute presentation and then you’d give a 5 minute applkication. I think it’s a joke. We have to constantly be feeding back. We have to cosnatly be saying here’s the applicaiton. HEre’s why the promise I made about motivation being met. If you have engaged them on a financial level you need to within 5 minutes maximum be coming back and gratifying that and hsowing them how that motivation will be filled. Otherwise they’ll ay they don’t want to put this much investment in.
1:33 Resolutioon Every Few Pages
Then can you berak it down even more than that? Can you constantly be resolving? OIne fo the resons I’m using a hwole lot of slides is I’m trying to answer a lot of quesitons. What’s in it for me is what someone put in. If you’re making them wait an hour you’d never sit at strarbucks waiting for an hour. We want it fast! Give it to them quickly, over and over again. Break it out in the first two or three minutes. Gratify! Connnect to them. Fill the need
1:33 Instant Gratification
How fast, how small can you go? Ho wminute can you make the time period between when you motivate and when you gratfy. You avhe to constantly be giving them back in. Reaching an anticipted goal bulds triust. You ahve to get something out of that. THe enforncement case is that most of us who are on this phone call are not in pure entertainment. We don’;t have the luxury of people coming to us to relax. Yes there are tons of competition buyt many people are just kciking back they’r not looking for payback. We’re not in that situation. We’re trying to get people in and keep them engaged.
How quickly can I pay that off? You have got to basically have a megaphone to overcome the voices. What I’m suggesting is the megaphone isn’t talking loudly or quickly or great stories. More importantly is your megaphone is your ability to satisfy the motivation you’ve tapped into earlier. It fits in very carefully.
You motivate well then you gratify that motivation I’;ve made a promise I’ll connect with you on some level. Wehther it’s altruistic you have to grafity that. Most importantly even that’snot fair. If you don’t do any ofthese well and two well you’re going to have a masking effect that none of it works
1:35 Reward
You’ve motivated. You’re trying to graftify. But gratification implies reward. What is a good reward? What is satisfactory? Let me dispesl some notions
1:35 I know lots of stuff
We know this guy. He knows more than anyone. He didn’t really know more than anyone, but he told you he knew more than you. Unfortunately th eprogramming community has been filled with. They are constnatly telling us things. But the problem is they need jobs. No one wants to be around them. Here’s the thing: Knowledge is a lousy reward
1:36 Knowledge Is a Lousy Reward
This flies in the face of many things. all of you teachers who just groaned an chedked out it will get better. The idea though that we can impart some truism and some formula we can lament plato and socrates and go back to that or all this or that. Knowledge by itself is not satisfying.
1:37 Knowledge without application is a lousy reward.
IOf you give me something I can’t do something with then you give me something that will dissatisfy me. How and when . How can you appkly this? How can you use this knowledge and when can you sue this? If it’s 10 years from now it’s not going to satisfy. WHat are you gratifying them. The mass of an atom is fine, but what can I get from an atom. We have to not commuicate knowledge unless that test is life. Functional knowledge is something I talk about a lot. The people I respect alot.
The funadmental question you have to answer is
1:38 How do I do things?
Not what do you know, but how do you do things? Games are great examples. You’re constantly getting new poers. Most of the games these days youg et a new weapon or a new move. Even TV shows are giving you… Let’s take anexampe of Lost. Theyre giving you new knowledge and you don’t know how it works. I won’t give any spoilers gbut if you watch the season finale they give you a new piece of information. How do I appkly that? Now I see things differently! If I see tehe shows again I”m going to see something different! I’ll see the reactions differently. I’ll see how locke behaves in a different way. I’ll see how Peter Bishop vehaves. That knowledge iss being synthesized into your knowledgebase. you’re able to see things and those empower you!
Another way to look at this is it’s not just a linear progression but an uphill progression where you are increasing. You are moving up a ladder if you will. You better be giving them new powers. hOw a power is defined in your realm you’ll have to give them new powers. IUf you are urely communicating for smoething that is not a product, you’re going to have to give them something to improve themselves, their surroundsings, their relationsihps. THis si the basis of the huimanities. How can I interact with the world around me in a better way.
Even the exclusivitity p[clkaims they make those claims that by adheing to this you can actually improve things. If you look outside of the prodcut realm alot o these commuictions are trying to improve something. If you’re in a product base you’re going to show that functionally you’re going to improve their lives. If yiou’;ve motivated them financially with a gratification cycle you better reard in that area. There are a couple of quick ways to do this.
1:41 Pat on the back
This is simpliest and we do it alot. You did a fantastic job. We take that deep inward breath. ANd they go Great! Do it again next year! The pat on the back has to be used very carefully. There’s a reason we look down on that. We want something more tangible. THe only way that’s effective is if you have a relationship with people. Preferablly a personal one. Or if you have a tremendous amount of respect. Some of you that are intechnology. If Tom O’Reilly heard your idea that may suffice. If Pres. Obama loved a theory on energy that would be valuable because of ther espect you have. Most of us aren’t Obama or O’Reilly so giving pats on the back and saying good job is very rarely satisfying. I can’t pay my rent ith a pat on teh back. We have to be careful.
What is our reward? Is a pat on the back better? Not only can it not help but it can hurt.
1:43 Test Drive
Here’s better. Something htat moves beyond a pat on the back. I call it the test drive. Here’s the way that works. If you are trying to advocate a set osf steps that lead to a result then you need to all wo the audience to take thos e steps and compare the results to yours. If you do this and do that and follow these steps than this will happen. Some result will happen. To verify and validate that then compare that resiult with ours. If their result matches ours we get an adrenaline rush. It is very very important to undersdtand that there is powe in letting someone actually put your suggestion to the test.and then validate it! We say if you do X Y and Z then it’ll happen. Then you can move those mountains! There’s no way to verify or validate that. In your ocmmunication how can you allow people to validate that. In this talk if you guys go out and try this and you go and put this in a sack and all I get are negative emails then I’m going ot have to change something. You have to be ablw to validate this. Are all of you going to be able to do this tomorrow? Of coursenot! but it’s important to understand that validation of the results you promise is a form of reward. It implies a confidence in what you’re communication. It sys Hey test his out! Compare your results with mine!
1:46 Give over your knowledge
Be redy to give away what you’ve got. many of whom follow O’reilly we really have a give things away. We don’t DRM a lot of stuff. They’re small ways we trtyin to give over what we’ve done. If you empowerpeople they become satisifed. Sure people will take advantage of that. You caneither look at the world as a not a good vs bad thing but a do you think everyone is out to scam you? If they are intentionally out there to scam you. Most people have good intetions. So give it over. Be willing to give away the knowledge you have. Be willing to let someone else take everything you’ve got and do something with that that goes beyond what you could.
I’ve got some of this knowledge from here that’sfnatsatic. Can you buildsomeone else not falsely where they say not only hae I learned some stpes but I’ve begun to gain an understanding. I can applyu it even better! We should always be gaining ground with our audience. We should be improving in some way. This is about empowerment. People want to be empowered. Nobody long term, just wants a set of steps. Short erm it’s all we want. Long Term we all recognize we need a set of steps then I become dissatisfied with the steps.
It’s very important as communications we go beyond You Vs. We go beyond this idea that is just about how good is my stuyle and we start to look at our audience. Most effective communicators the audience leaves. Sometimes they’re not talking about hte communicator but they’re talking about wht they learend. Here’s how I can put that into effect. Here’s how I can try this on my copter or talk to my neighbor or tell my SO bout this. We are taking what we’ve learned and are doing osmthing with it. Becoming functional and that is what makes the comunication powerfull.
This is the cycle. I’ve packed this in and flown through it. You’re going to have to think what kind of mmotivations anm I applying to my audience. WHat does gratification looks like/ Am I writing iPod Ads? iPhone Apps? What exactly is my mechanism for gratification.
When I do gratify, what is the reward? I undersand we all have to get paid and I think financial motivation is hugely imporatn. It’s worth saying i there is no reard motivation for the audience then consider what you’re oding. We all value functional knowledge. even if you have a product. We have products that have different motives. We want you to buy these books. But tehres’ a motivation that goes beond that. I want you to be a better ocmmunication. TO hold communication and satisfy your audience. Have the indirect motivation. Have the reason. Be big enough and honest enough to say that people have poured into you whether it’s academically or tehcnologically.
Whatever you do you have got to motivate, grafity and reward. If you do those things and time them together then you will be more effective at communication.
Below is the CHAT transcription that went on during the entire WebEx
from Marsee Henon to All Participants:
Hello, anyone twittering today? What Hashtag should we use?
from Brett McLaughlin to All Participants:
I’d totally twitter this, but I’m gonna be a bit busy 
from Bernard (ben) Tremblay to All Participants:
I thought of #WebexOR
from Zachary Spencer to All Participants:
I’m gonna work primarily on transcription…
from Alfredo Pacheco to All Attendees:
#WebexOR is o.k. for me
from Omaha Sternberg to All Participants:
Not finding streaming a problem
from Alfredo Pacheco to All Participants:
I have low quality. Maybe it’s because Panda updating
from Philipp Winterberg to All Participants:
my attention is dropping already… 
from Bernard (ben) Tremblay to All Participants:
“Brett spends most of his time these days on cognitive theory, codifying and expanding on the learning principles that shaped the Head First series into a bestselling phenomenon.”
from Marsee Henon to All Participants:
For more info on Brett: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/au/152
from Alfredo Pacheco to All Participants:
is there video streaming? can’t see anything but ads
from Mark Reese to All Participants:
they’re not ads, they’re slides
from Ian Clark to All Attendees:
An…?
from Bobby Metz to All Attendees:
Anyone else seeing chopped off text?
from Tim Ake to All Participants:
yes
from Alfredo Pacheco to All Participants:
ok, I’m on that tab
from Michael Sauers to All Participants:
Everyone is.
from sam williams to All Participants:
will this presentation be archived anywhere?
from Mark Reese to All Participants:
nope
from Bernard (ben) Tremblay to All Participants:
Right side is slightly clipped … known issue.
from Bobby Metz to All Attendees:
weird, didn’t do that on my last one with O’Reilly
from Omaha Sternberg to All Participants:
I don’t see any clipping.
from Anne Cagle to All Participants:
No clipping on mine.
from Ian Clark to All Attendees:
Considering we’re talking about communication…pity about the clip
from Bernard (ben) Tremblay to All Participants:
“The smartest guy in the room” syndrome.
from Martin Stein to All Participants:
Here it says LOS on the lower right movie picture
from Marsee Henon to All Participants:
Twitter!
from Mark Reese to All Participants:
i’ve got full image
from Bernard (ben) Tremblay to All Participants:
“Attention economy”?
from Lionel Gibbons to All Attendees:
staff meeting in one ear
from Omaha Sternberg to All Participants:
I have full image too.
from Jared Smith to All Participants:
I’ve got the full image as well
from Lisa Tossey to All Attendees:
We have full image as well …
from Michael Sauers to All Participants:
pre-show some determined that macs tend to be showing the whole image, PCs are clipping. (May not be 100%)
from Mark Reese to All Participants:
Brett “Solid Snake” Shepard
from Mark Reese to All Participants:
?
from Omaha Sternberg to All Participants:
I have a Mac.
from Lisa Tossey to All Attendees:
We’re on a Mac too
from Philip Reid to All Attendees:
I’m getting clipping on PC
from Martin Stein to All Participants:
Dual screen (different sizes) Vista setup here. Right side seems to be clipped.
from Bernard (ben) Tremblay to All Participants:
PC/Mac ad showing PC w/clipped side. (Vista here too.)
from Stanislas Rusinsky to All Participants:
Macbook pro: perfect image
from Omaha Sternberg to All Participants:
Brett is competing against our technical support conversation. LOL
from Stanislas Rusinsky to All Participants:
OR maybe, maybe men are starting to multitask
from Philipp Winterberg to All Participants:
Multitask? Reading, listening, writing, watching? Nope. I’m confused…
from Omaha Sternberg to All Participants:
I dunno…I multitask, and I’m a woman.
from Alfredo Pacheco to All Participants:
I’m a man. Sorry, I’m simple :S
from Bernard (ben) Tremblay to All Participants:
Hierarchy of values / goals / motives.
from Stanislas Rusinsky to All Participants:
simple chit-chat + listening now works for me, after YEARS of training
from Philipp Winterberg to All Participants:
How does this have a financial impact?
from Martin Stein to All Participants:
sex sells
from Bernard (ben) Tremblay to All Participants:
“Iron law of capital” on its head …
from Omaha Sternberg to All Participants:
If sex didn’t sell, we wouldn’t have al of those porn sites.
from Mark Reese to All Participants:
sex sells, only if it is presented in a way that stands out from the rest of the sellers selling sex
from Bernard (ben) Tremblay to All Participants:
Q: different for investment and for purchasing?
from Stanislas Rusinsky to All Participants:
is there any psy* in this chatroom to confirm? -> the youth may make such faces, but they listen carefully anyway!
from Jorge Pinto to All Attendees:
No computer brand??
from Omaha Sternberg to All Participants:
provide tools
from Omaha Sternberg to All Participants:
same with writing…get hooked by the first page.
from Bernard (ben) Tremblay to All Participants:
External link: Terry O’Reilly “Age of Persuasion” http://www.cbc.ca/ageofpersuasion/
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
First paragraph actually. That’s what my editors always said.
from Katie Simmons to All Participants:
a persona
from Stanislas Rusinsky to All Participants:
my best teacher never gave the day’s subject, but always told stories, everybody was hooked
from Bernard (ben) Tremblay to All Participants:
impulse
from Matthew Duda to All Participants:
See, it is about stories afterall.
from Ian Clark to All Attendees:
Have to play to instant gratification?
from Jaime Clay to All Attendees:
song writing too…it’s the hook
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
That’s right Matthew!
from Bernard (ben) Tremblay to All Participants:
Subjective narrative
from Omaha Sternberg to All Participants:
Actually, it’s about instant hook, but long term committment, sounds like,
from Matthew Duda to All Participants:
Omaha: It’s about well-written stories, then.
from Bernard (ben) Tremblay to All Participants:
Furthered? or titillated.
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
Games provide a path for improvement that is well understood. Follow the rules and you get a specific, pre-defined reward.
from Omaha Sternberg to All Participants:
Matthew: yeah…I was responding more to the instand gratification question.
from Mark Reese to All Participants:
like prepping for rising?
from Michael Sauers to All Participants:
like lunch…
from Stanislas Rusinsky to All Participants:
Neal: good point!
from Matthew Duda to All Participants:
Games vs. stories are an interesting discussion. They are not the same, although they share attributes.
from Ian Clark to All Attendees:
I got Omaha’s point.
from Ed Parker to All Participants:
games are based on stories
from Michael Sauers to All Participants:
Most of the best games today are stories.
from Bernard (ben) Tremblay to All Participants:
@neal Games as operant conditioning?
from Omaha Sternberg to All Participants:
Matthew: not necessarily…in fact, there is a big conversation re story in games (do games need story? some say yes, others no).
from Matthew Duda to All Participants:
Games <> stories. Different mechanisms at work, although games can *contain* a story.
from Jaime Clay to All Attendees:
interesting visuals…all female
from aya natalia karpinska to All Participants:
for example, the WarioWare games–fantastic, 3-sec gameplay with minimal plot
from Alfredo Pacheco to All Participants:
I see games as a form of narrations
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
To a degree, yes Bernard. (Making games is actually my day job)
from Martin Stein to All Participants:
What about Bedazzled? It’s just the skill and the score
from John Januszczak to All Participants:
I see some presentationzen here
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
This graphic is definitely on point.
from Omaha Sternberg to All Participants:
the most successful games either are forms of naration.
from Bernard (ben) Tremblay to All Participants:
/me found Neal on WikiPedia.
from Mark Reese to All Participants:
is there a time implication to gratification?
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
Depends on who you think of as the narrarator.
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
LOL
from Ian Clark to All Attendees:
I played a game with Proust once — got as far as p81 — chuckle
from aya natalia karpinska to All Participants:
what kind of narration is there in chess? it’s not a main driver, but still a geat game
from Jorge Pinto to All Attendees:
Cards and predicting the future Tarot? The unknow. The trip or quest of truth
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
There is a story in chess. It’s a murder story. Who done it.
from Stanislas Rusinsky to All Participants:
Mark: bad latency kills the joy making link between act and reward
from Michael Sauers to All Participants:
@Neal that’s Clue.
from Omaha Sternberg to All Participants:
Aya: chess is a war game as well… a conversation about two armies and their battle with each other.
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
That too.
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
Yes Omaha!
from Anne Cagle to All Participants:
Yes, I think there is a time element to gratification for any writer that has waited for a cheque.
from Alfredo Pacheco to All Participants:
Flandes Table begins wiht a question: Who killed the knight? about a chess mach
from Bernard (ben) Tremblay to All Participants:
Gratification … stream of sugar pills contra nutrition. O’Reilly feeds folk.
from Katie Simmons to All Participants:
I have to drop, but what’s the best strategy for communication when you don’t know what your audience is going to be?
from Omaha Sternberg to All Participants:
Katie: you need to guess what your audience is going to be, I think, then adjust as needed over time.
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
Exactly right Brett (regarding gratification)
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
Make the audience wonder what happens next.
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
Make them care.
from Omaha Sternberg to All Participants:
Neal: I would rephrase that to encourage them to care.
from Matthew Duda to All Participants:
Training 101: “What’s in it for me?” WIIFM
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
True.
from Kathy Sierra to All Participants:
Chess is compelling in large part because it enables a Flow state (just like rock climbing, etc.): challenge balanced w/ knowledge/skill.
from Ian Clark to All Attendees:
Gratification builds trust?
from Bernard (ben) Tremblay to All Participants:
Reaching anticipated goal => trust.
from Paul Andrews to All Participants:
I frequently go to presentations/watch TV programmes WITHOUT needing to feel that I have to have some payback.
from Matthew Duda to All Participants:
Of course, one beneficial side effect of this is a natural “chunking” of the content for easier comprehension
from aya natalia karpinska to All Participants:
@ben but it is also exciting to not be sure you’re going to reach the goal. the element of surprise, the risk.
from Kathy Sierra to All Participants:
Electric Rain (software) builds their manuals/tutorials on 1 principle: “User must do something cool within 20 minutes”
from Stanislas Rusinsky to All Participants:
The timing of head first books make me thing of the rythm mentionned in Hollywood author Robert McKee’s book “Story”
from Anne Cagle to All Participants:
Encouragement works better than forcing someone to care in the narrative because it is a series of little rewards towards the big reward. In elementary school terms, small narrative rewards are the stickers on the good behaviour chart.
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
“Story” is a great book, though he overanalyzes sometimes.
from Bernard (ben) Tremblay to All Participants:
@aya – low grade VS high grade transaction?
from Stanislas Rusinsky to All Participants:
Anne -> have you read the book “Nudge”?
from Martin Stein to All Participants:
If you are already engaged then the payback will take a different shape. If you are geeking out in something it may not have engaged you before you got hooked.
from Anne Cagle to All Participants:
No, but will look it up.
from aya natalia karpinska to All Participants:
@ben (i don’t know what that means, actually. low grade transaction?)
from Matthew Duda to All Participants:
@Neil: And Story assumed a metanarrative that is primarily the Western “hero’s journey” which may not always be true culturally
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
Yep! The hero’s journey is interesting, but it SHOULD NOT be used as a road map. I’ve seen too many writers get hung up on it.
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
Knowledge that helps you GET something you want is a different matter.
from Alfredo Pacheco to All Participants:
Knowledge is a lousy reward?
from Matthew Duda to All Participants:
@Neail: “Oh, I’m at page XX I need to add a reversal”
from Stanislas Rusinsky to All Participants:
Neal: the hero journey is just one of the mainstream narrative style
from Ian Clark to All Attendees:
I guess a good reward is feeling good?
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
The mass of an atom is fine. who cares. What can I get from an atom however? Can I make atomic energy? Can I run my iPod with it?
from Matthew Duda to All Participants:
This is a primary reasons for the failure of the US secondary school system.
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
@Stanislas I know, it’s just something I see writers get hung up on.
from Kathy Sierra to All Participants:
We designed Head First series with Hero’s Journey in mind… but in our case, it’s the reader’s journey… not a character in a narrative.
from Stanislas Rusinsky to All Participants:
Neal: “Story” mentions also non narrative, no-action, arty movies, movies with no apparent reward (maybe just for eclectists)
from Jorge Pinto to All Attendees:
To find secrets or pearls in knowledge
from annie smith to All Participants:
Putting an application in every 10 minutes – is this not just for people who lack the imagination to see applications for themselves
from Matthew Duda to All Participants:
@annie: Synthesis of knowledge (especially new knowledge) <> imagination.
from Mark Reese to All Participants:
lost, fringe, 24: shaping the education of america
from Matthew Duda to All Participants:
@mark: As long as it’s not science education.
from David Griffiths to All Participants:
Synthesis and integration also aids memory and recall. See “Brain Rules”
from Matthew Duda to All Participants:
“I can’t pay my rent with a pat on the back”
from Martin Stein to All Participants:
only that in TV they always stay at the beginner ‘getting hooked’ level and never graduate to a ‘deeply interested’ level with different rewards. After you go through ‘head first’ you want/need in-depth stuff
from Ian Clark to All Attendees:
Do what you love to do and the money for rent will flow
from Alfredo Pacheco to All Participants:
Is not allways so easy
from Mark Reese to All Participants:
@ian, not necessarily true. see 99% of the musicians out there
from Omaha Sternberg to All Participants:
Ian: I wish that was the case.
from Courtney Nash to All Participants:
Ian: Check out Mike Rowe’s TED talk. Different perspective on that entirely…
from Philipp Winterberg to All Participants:
Ian: I can approve: Follow your excitement – it works!
from Martin Stein to All Participants:
You can make it if you try… go for the gold
from Mark Reese to All Participants:
unless your passion is basketball and you’re 5’6″
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
@Mark LOL
from Dustin Boeger to All Participants:
Think Spud Web or Mugsy Bogues
from Mark Reese to All Participants:
name one more
from Michael Sauers to All Participants:
Librarian (me)
from Alfredo Pacheco to All Participants:
phrasal verbs: a nightmare for non-natives anglospeakers, LOL
from Mark Reese to All Participants:
empowerment is addictive
from Ian Clark to All Attendees:
My son-in-law has parkinsons and has given up his law career to work with Michael fox — example of empowerment, making lemonade, following bliss
from Jorge Pinto to All Attendees:
If don’t use it it get stale. Give it out
from Bernard (ben) Tremblay to All Participants:
@Mark empowerment = realistic self-esteem?
from Mark Reese to All Participants:
you can empower people with no self-esteem, its up to them to use it and build their own
from Anne Cagle to All Participants:
I agree that quite a bit of school curriculum is just facts for the sake of being taught. The studies that engage the teens that I know are the classes with tangible rewards like woodworking, art, and home ec. There is no real small step payoff for math or science. I think this is why Western countries have such difficulty bumping up their math and science numbers. These subjects aren’t applied in a way that will immediately award.
from Matthew Duda to All Participants:
@Anne: Exactly my point.
from Stanislas Rusinsky to All Participants:
@Bernard as human _being_ we need to be recognized in the being, if you have no voice, you are not in a relationship -> no empowerment
from Alfredo Pacheco to All Participants:
clips went off. Only my case?
from Bernard (ben) Tremblay to All Participants:
@Stanislas – My hobby horse: discourse contra discussion.
from Matthew Duda to All Participants:
Fast hour of content. For me, that means I enjoyed this.
from annie smith to All Participants:
@Anne: do you think in Japan, Germany….. they teach maths with immediate rewards. I think not, it is more the opposite.
from Stanislas Rusinsky to All Participants:
Anne: do you know Freinet and Steiner teaching methods?
from Matthew Duda to All Participants:
@Annie: Don’t discount cultural differences as they apply to educational methods.
from Paul Andrews to All Participants:
Alfredo: it happened to me early on – had to rejoin
from Jorge Pinto to All Attendees:
Motessori
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
If you want to look more at gratification and reward in games, you could check out this book:
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
http://www.amazon.com/Swords-Circuitry-Designers-Role-Playing-Development/dp/0761532994/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1242755209&sr=8-1
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
from Omaha Sternberg to All Participants:
Jorge: my daughter is in Montessori…very different from US primary and secondary.
from Madhav Gopal to All Participants:
Can someone clarify how gratify is different from reward, feel they are the same
from tim jones to All Participants:
is there a way for me to get a recording of this webinar?
from Alfredo Pacheco to All Participants:
I’ll be right back
from Matthew Duda to All Participants:
@Neil: Good book! (Pepsi Blue) j/k
from Jorge Pinto to All Attendees:
It is different but is a great base
from Anne Cagle to All Participants:
I like that some schools are instituting classes in life skills (how to handle money, how not to max out the credit card, how to survive the first year of college) that applies math and social science curriculum to help teens to have rewarding lives.
from Bernard (ben) Tremblay to All Participants:
Motivate / gratify | dignify / validate.
from Ed Parker to All Participants:
@Neil just bought a copy
from Omaha Sternberg to All Participants:
Madhav: gratify=sense of success?
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
Gratification is emotional, reward is sort of the take away.
from Mahdi Gharavi to All Participants:
@Madhav Gratify => resolution of problem/issue, Reward => provide positive feedback
from Jaime Clay to All Attendees:
thanks, Brett!
from Matthew Duda to All Participants:
Brett: Can you please confirm that this will be archived by O’Reilly?
from Madhav Gopal to All Participants:
aha I see, gratify is engage them, reward is a takeaway
from O’Reilly Media to All Participants:
Yes, we’ll have a recording of this available shortly. I’ll send email to all participants when it’s ready.
from Philip Reid to All Attendees:
instant v deferred gratification? what is best?
from Madhav Gopal to All Participants:
you got it
from Jorge Pinto to All Attendees:
How you reward reading classics
from Zachary Spencer to All Participants:
Hey guys, here’s a transcription of the webcast: http://www.zacharyspencer.com/2009/05/effective-communication-making-your-point-in-a-video-game-culture-webexor/
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
Thanks Zachary!
from Matthew Duda to All Participants:
@Zach: Thank you!
from Bernard (ben) Tremblay to All Participants:
Q: Talking about motives and goals: are the drives different for investment and for purchasing? Short term VS long? Something about buy-in
from Jorge Pinto to All Attendees:
How to motivate reading classics how you reward??
from Omaha Sternberg to All Participants:
Thanks, Zach
from Mark Reese to All Participants:
whats for lunch?
from Michael Sauers to All Participants:
Lunch is your reward.
from Stanislas Rusinsky to All Participants:
Philip: pretty near in time gratification -> latency dislink act and reward, thus removes the feeling of “joy” (endomoprhin)
from Martin Stein to All Participants:
That’s why people say ‘no pain no gain’ — we do have morals that say delayed gratification is better than immediate.
from Matthew Duda to All Participants:
What about delayed gratification (aka intermittent reinforcement e.g. slot machines). Perhaps vary *when* you give reward?
from Bernard (ben) Tremblay to All Participants:
Yaaa … suspicion. Manipulation VS inform / empower.
from Mark Reese to All Participants:
haha
from Kim Young to All Participants:
How does one begin to better understand what truly motivates – as communities are comprised of individuals?
from Jaime Clay to All Attendees:
Why did you use primarily female imagery in your presentation? Would a mix not be more inclusive? Just wondering…
from Jared Smith to All Participants:
Q. How would you change your approach if you were asked to give a 5-day 8-hour-a-day training class? Do you use labs to gratify? How do you keep students motivated for an entire week?
from Omaha Sternberg to All Participants:
gratification/reward when information is the goal? For information sites.
from Bernard (ben) Tremblay to All Participants:
+5 Brett
from Martin Stein to All Participants:
In gambling the reward mostly never arrives. People stay hooked on hope too.
from Philip Reid to All Attendees:
research shows that kids that can accept deferred gratification do better later in life
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
Break it down into pieces. If I want to be a movie director, what do I have to learn first? What’s the first lesson? Milestones!
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
Exactly.
from Matthew Duda to All Participants:
@Philip: You are taking about the “marshmellow” training?
from Philip Reid to All Attendees:
yes
from Ian Clark to All Attendees:
Feedback is important — doesn’t an individual measure against the evironment and change — “getting better?”
from Mark Reese to All Participants:
mini-certifications each day?
from David Griffiths to All Participants:
Why not treat the first hour like a one hour course? Then the second the same way then…
from Jared Smith to All Participants:
I already break the week into about 20 different modules
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
It boils down to show, don’t tell.
from Zachary Spencer to All Participants:
How does this concept of Motivate, Gratify, Reward co incide with rapid iterative development?
from Ethan Watrall to All Participants:
Q: We know how well this sort of approach works with “skill based training” (programming, math, etc, etc, etc). How could this approach be used in another context, such as teaching philosophy or history?
from Matthew Duda to All Participants:
@Ethan: They need ”
from Jorge Pinto to All Attendees:
Great questio Ethan
from Jeremy Schultz to All Participants:
say hello to my lil frenn
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
Here’s the road. Here’s how you’re going to get there.
from Stanislas Rusinsky to All Participants:
If you received a reward in the past for a long term goal and linked the reward feeling with the completion thought, you will be more likely to achieve long term goals
from Matthew Duda to All Participants:
@Ethan: They need practical applications of the knowledge or to see how the information applies to them
from Matthew Duda to All Participants:
i.e. History as culture, cause and effect, process/logic
from Bernard (ben) Tremblay to All Participants:
“Historiography” … not just kidding.
from Zachary Spencer to All Participants:
“Those who do not remember history are doomed to repeat it!”
from Jaime Clay to All Attendees:
get them to act out a piece of history
from Zachary Spencer to All Participants:
just recite that as a mantra
from Ian Clark to All Attendees:
So is the purpose of the teacher to teach (with a knowledge of results, gratification, and rewards) of to ask leading questions?
from Bernard (ben) Tremblay to All Participants:
“History is written by the winners.”
from Jorge Pinto to All Attendees:
History or reading the classics. How?
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
Understand the trends, the personalities.
from Ian Clark to All Attendees:
History is bunk — Ford
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
And mythology is written by the losers.
from Martin Stein to All Participants:
Philosophy though jokes: http://www.platoandaplatypus.com/
from Bernard (ben) Tremblay to All Participants:
Discourse: what matters to a person matters.
from Carl Albing to All Participants:
Brett: Do you think this is different because of the video-game culture? Wasn’t this always true?
from Ethan Watrall to All Participants:
criticality and the construction of historical knowledge is certainly a good approach
from Matthew Duda to All Participants:
See the book Everyting that is Bad is Good for You
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
We have an expectation now that the universe works for us. Rather new fangled notion.
from Bernard (ben) Tremblay to All Participants:
Icons … avatars … communicating with tokens.
from Marsee Henon to All Participants:
For more information on Head First Books check out headfirst.oreilly.com Save 40% off book purchases with the discount code 4CAST
from Zachary Spencer to All Participants:
Yes, we must embrace nature and cultivate it (human, or otherwise)
from Philipp Winterberg to All Participants:
Thanks Brett! Interesting presentation! Liked it.
from Neal Hallford to All Participants:
Thanks Brett!
from Jorge Pinto to All Attendees:
Great talk.
from Marsee Henon to All Participants:
@oreillybrett
from David Griffiths to All Participants:
Excellent pres.
from Aaron Glimme to All Participants:
Thanks Brett!
from Zachary Spencer to All Participants:
I followed you
from Ian Clark to All Attendees:
Magic
from Michael Williams to All Participants:
Thanks Brett! That was great
from Jared Smith to All Participants:
Thanks Marsee!
from Bernard (ben) Tremblay to All Participants:
+5 Brett … you validate web conferencing.
from Peter Yu to All Participants:
Thanks Brett!!!! Appreciated!
from Omaha Sternberg to All Participants:
Thanks so much Brett!
from Ed Parker to All Participants:
Thanks Brett!
from Marsee Henon to All Participants:
follow @oreillymedia too
from Doug Hindman to All Attendees:
tx
from Matthew Duda to All Participants:
Great job, Brett!!
from Philip Reid to All Attendees:
ty Brett
from vipin kasarla to All Participants:
what is teitter id?
from Mahdi Gharavi to All Participants:
Thanks, Brett! This was great
from Brett McLaughlin to All Participants:
@oreillybrett
from Anne Cagle to All Participants:
Thank you, Brett.
from Bernard (ben) Tremblay to All Participants:
@oreillybrett
from Mark Reese to All Participants:
maybe obama can pat you on the back sometime
from Steve Cavrak to All Participants:
tnx !
from Zachary Spencer to All Participants:
In Mother Russia, You Pat Obama!
from Marsee Henon to All Participants:
http://twitter.com/oreillybrett direct link