Isn't the problem you outline simple a case of using the wrong rhetorical mode? Since before Cicero we've know that you can talk about three things: the past, the present or the future. Talking about the past is to summarise lessons learnt, the present is for entertainment, and the future is intended to change peoples' behaviour.

Most motivational speakers – as you point – are talking about the past. They're entertaining and you'll learn some interesting lessons, but they' won't change your behaviour. There's no imperative to do anything different after you leave the room. We should really call them "inspirational speakers".

If you want to drive new behaviour then you need to talk about the future – the future for each individual in the audience and what it means for them – and provide both the justification and the call to action which will drive them to act differently once they leave the room.

It's not really a question of finding someone from inside or outside the organisation. The real trick is to find someone who can paint a picture of the future the audience wants, and who can build a platform for change.

Thanks for your comments Peter.

I agree that a more accurate term would be "inspirational speakers", but it is not what they call, or sell themselves as. They make it very clear the see their role to motivate your staff.

No matter if the person is internal or external, whether they are discussing the past, present or future, workshops, away days or events are merely one step in a longer change journey.

The "easy" way out is getting someone else to come in and try and change and motivate your people. The proper way is to realise its your job, and these type of sessions are just one small step in motivating your people to create change.

Shawn,

Couldn't agree more with your conclusion. Motivational speeches work for an afternoon and indeed may linger, but by the end of the day it's entertainment, an incentive. I think one can stick to 'motivational' for the short term effect. A wise coach told me once that the reason for motivating people is fear and that the motive behind inspiring people is love. So, if a company hires a 'motivational' speaker... what do they really want to achieve?

Even though motivational storytelling may not create a 'leapfrog change' in your staff's motivational level, but the problem lies in expecting this 'leapfrog change'. As a training manager I clearly have the limitation in front of us i.e. we cannot weigh 'motivational talks' in the same scale as 'Excel 2010' or any hard skill. Same goes for soft skill training sessions like 'Leadership' or 'Teamwork' as well; when was the last time you felt like Steve Jobs after attending a Presentation Skills workshop?

However, many a time when the speaker is from your own practice area (and not Olympics or Sports) is does have lasting impact of participants.

Great post. I'm finding that what motivates people the most at conferences is being guided through sessions where they're able to talk with people about unusual and relevant questions.

Having time to have interesting conversations is a luxury and helps people create connections, see new possibilities, and play around with how those possibilities might work in their work. It doesn't sound glamorous to conference organizers, but people love the salon experience.

Lois couldn't agree more!

I have found it takes real courage to be the person who is pushing these kind of ideas - just giving people time and space to have great conversations.

A lot of the time at work our interactions are merely 'transactional', so having a semi-structured way to get people talking and sharing their stories is a fantastic way to build momentum and lasting motivation to change.

Thanks for taking the time to post your comment.

Hi Kevin, I certainly agree with the underlying points being made.

Stories are a great way to influence people, but without a process to embed change, creating a real shift, it s no surprise that few people will really be motivated.

The real difficulty with these motivational stories/speakers - I can still the remember the naked rower - is that unless there is a connection with the listener, it is not going to change my behaviour, unless of course I wan't to also row a little boat across an ocean.

Cheers
Charles

Your blog looks very impressive. A motivational speaker has talent to inspire and motivate an audience to succeed. He motivates others through speaking. I also heard an International Motivational Speaker Kevin Kelly's speech. He is highly skilled at motivating others through public speaking.

@kevinsbishop

Yep, the biggest barrier to change in any organisation is the operationally focused and risk advise culture that most management breeds. Even if someone finds the take stirring and changes their behaviour, they'll just be slapped down in the following weeks as the company's social norms reassert themselves. If you don't change the culture (in itself a huge task) then all else is folly.

Wasn't there a paper call something like "On the Folly of Rewarding A, While Hoping for B."?

Interesting discussion...my take on this is around the nuts and bolts of integrating any of the learning that comes from motivational talks. It's true that people can feel a strong, if not, profound emotional connection to how a speaker relates their story, yet, to really create any longer term sustainability, the recipient of the story likely has to set an intention or objective around how he or she will use what they have heard and set about consciously bringing it into their way of being. To me, this is where "strategy" comes into play. If you bring in a big name to motivate, influence or whatever, what are you hoping to accomplish, what's the outcome you want to see and how will you know when you achieve it? If you want to create a feel good situation, go for it, if you want to create long-lasting change...align the process to the goal and commit the resources to it, and while you're at it...let the people share their stories so that the greater community can benefit and shift in the culture can occur from the inside out.

Cheers,
Teresa

PS: Great website. Great team approach.

OK - so I get paid to speak but like you hate the motivational speaker phenemenon. My subject is social entrepreneurship and right now, help audiences make sense of 'Big Society' and what it means for them.

For me it works best when my audience are interested or concerned about my subject and want to know more. I use storytelling, but not about my own exploits but about things I've seen and people I've met.

I think they key to good speaking is to describe things your audience can do - rather than things you've done that they clearly never will do. Bringing out people from within the audience group who have done great things too, can work really well - particularly if handled as an interview.

It's not about making the impossible look even more impossible, but about making the seemingly impossible become just possible!

Good stuff. Great reasons not to use the 'Celebs'. No behaviour change... Unless the speaker's main thrust is all about how the 'ordinary' person can assess their current behaviour and (using a clearly defined and simple tool)try different behaviours in full consciousness - some of which actually address that darned in-box :-).

Guess what I do for a living :-)

I couldn't agree with Andy more. The final paragraph of the article says it all - changing behaviour is not something that could be achieved in one afternoon with an 'after dinner speaker', it's something of a long slog, perhaps HR directors could earn their keep.

I've always thought that they are a great rationale, allowing management, and the like to continue to ignore real problems in the work place. It's a bit like The Secret. The successful deserve it, via wishful/magical thinking, as do the unsuccessful. They, generally, ignore the fact that much in life is outside our control, and that which is within our control isn't a guarantee of success.

Most of the industrial psychology data I've seen indicates that workers who are "non-plussed" with their jobs, not necessarily "happy" or ascribing to "happyism" (yet another complex, misunderstood concept that may actually create billions in losses by creating an uncritical "positive/yes" culture), are actually more productive than their "happy," (whatever that means) counterparts.