My Thoughts on Tiger Part 2 - What He Said

Unless you are enduring 45 days of in-patient therapy, you were undoubtedly exposed to an unlimited number of media stories and commentaries about Tiger’s statement over the weekend. Though the source of Tiger’s fame and fortune is his career as a professional golfer, his story has leapt from the pages of the sports section to the mainstream media. Every news outlet had an expert ready and willing to dissect Tiger’s statement and speculate about deeper meaning (myself included). Who was Tiger really speaking to? What was his goal in making this statement? Do you think it worked? What does it all mean?

Three themes became evident to me as I soaked up the analysis. First, there are those who would have thought the statement abhorrent regardless of what Tiger said or did because they cannot get past his objectionable behavior. This sentiment was largely represented through the “man on the street” interviews, and largely from women. Because they wouldn’t be persuaded by anything, we don’t need to discuss this group any further.

Next there are those who thought Tiger seemed sincere and that his statement was all-in-all a successful first step at rehabilitating his career and his public image. Lastly, a significant portion of the “experts” thought Tiger came off as cold and self-serving. I think both groups are right, and I think the difference in perception stems from Tiger, at times, sending inconsistent signals. What he was saying (verbal communication) often didn’t match what he was doing (nonverbal communication).

We’ll discuss the nonverbal communication tomorrow, but let’s look at the words written on the page Tiger was so carefully reading. The statement is better than average. In fact it is a good round…for an amateur. If only he had sent it in for a little editing, we could have tweaked here and there to make it excellent. For instance, when I got to the part where he brags about how his foundation work has benefited thousands of kids, my red pen would have been furiously at work. We didn’t need the self-serving statistics to get the point, and the placement of it within the speech was awkward. Speaking of awkward, who knew Tiger Woods collaborated with Buddha? Semi-interesting, I guess, but do we really care? And what, pray tell, do performance enhancing drugs have to do with the price of tea in China? All of the above were self-serving (not to mention bizarre) components of his statement that only served to distract the audience from his core apology message.

The people who found him sincere were most likely responding to the language he used. He was very successful at using powerful, emotional language that was appropriate for the situation. Atone, foolish, irresponsible, integrity, decency, character, bitterly, ordeal – each word meant to elicit emotion from the listener by convincing us that the speaker himself is emotionally tied to the statement.

Much has been made of the ten times Tiger used his wife’s name, Elin. While some speculate he was speaking directly TO her, I find it hard to believe that he said anything here that he hasn’t already said to her. After all, they have “started the process of discussing the damage” so I would bet he has started the process of apologizing…in private. It is more likely that his “Elin never hit me that night or any other night” statement was Elin speaking to us through Tiger. He clearly communicated his respect of Elin and her behavior by saying “Elin has shown enormous grace and poise throughout this ordeal. Elin deserves praise, not blame.” For me, this was one of his stronger pieces of rhetoric in the statement because of its strong, concise language. Using these bold, emotional and relatable words clearly gained him bonus points with a portion of the audience. '

His intention was to apologize and, yes, to take a first step in the process of rehabilitating his image. As far as apologies go, he was successful (remember, I’m still talking about the statement itself, not his delivery of it). He took responsibility for his actions and several times referenced the hard work he had ahead to “atone” for his misdeeds. Without fail, Tiger offered this apology to every person or group that has an interest in him. This seemed sincere.

Sincere, yet cold. So those who thought he was sincere were responding to his verbal communication. Check back tomorrow for my review of his nonverbal communication and where the statement went terribly awry.

Body Language in the Press

Normally, when a ZMFer is quoted in the news, its published in the section reserved for "In the News". Today, we are breaking that rule for an article I was quoted in called "Body Language Decoded"- right on target for a blog about communication. Published on Forbes.com, the article does a great job of explaining how important nonverbal behaviors are in conveying your message to your audience. I love the specific examples and practical suggestions for improvement.

I Can Charm - Can You?

Cicero wrote that every communication, no matter the purpose, has to have three components. It must Charm, Teach and Move. These ingredients to successful communication should be delivered in order, and every step is required.

First we must charm to get the attention of the listener. Only then will we be able to teach. And then, once the listener has new information, we will be able to move or persuade. According to Cicero all communication is meant to, in some manner, stir the listener into action. In essence, what Cicero advocates is that when you speak or put your pen to paper, you ought to have a purpose for the communication. I doubt he was big into potty training reports or recaps of century old baseball scores.

Let’s examine these communication steps one at time, starting as Cicero would have wanted us to, with CHARM. Charm can materialize in a variety of ways. Think traditional synonyms such as captivate, win over, fascinate. But consider also that charm is the act of gaining credibility or holding your listeners’ interest. A communicator can gain credibility from a remarkable introduction, a killer résumé, a naturally disarming personality, a shocking opening line or simply good humor. Maybe the audience is captivated because there exists a history or extraordinary reputation with the person doing the speaking or writing. Sometimes just seeing a person’s name in print elicits a memory of a positive experience with their work creating a sense of anticipation that fulfills the charm requirement.

As a communicator at home or the office, think of how you will charm, captivate or hold your audience’s attention. What tools or skills do you have to hold the attention of your teenager, spouse or boss? Remember not to charge right into your request or complaint without step one.

Interestingly, some of you never get to this point and others of you never get past it. You may not believe you need to be charming (or gain credibility) when you are in the role of boss, or buying groceries or coaching Little League or purchasing a dress. If so, write down the three best communicators who you know personally. And then assess each person’s method of charm. If you send these to me, we will analyze their techniques in future blogs.

Here are a few I can think of:

• Doctor—looks you right in the eye, touches your hand or arm gently, smiles as if he is really glad that you picked him as your doctor, takes a few extra minutes to warm up before he brings out the plastic models of your body parts.


• Lawyer—is demanding, confident, cocky but uses humor to make each person he comes in contact feel that he is approachable.


• Political Advisor—twinkles when she meets you, forces her energy out of her body and into yours before she even says your name.


• Old Friends—when you knock at their door, they greet you as if they had not seen you for months when it had been only a day or two. Loud “How are you?” and comments like “What a great surprise.”


• My Dad—makes the stranger or new person to the inner circle feel like you are one of the crowd by offering you a chair, food, drink, a story, giving you his full attention no matter who else is in the room.

• A Professor at UofC—when I come to her class to guest lecture every semester she does such an introduction that I am both proud and embarrassed. She accomplishes two things at once, she charms me into guaranteeing that I will do a good job for her and that I will come back next time and she creates credibility for me with the students so I can move to the teaching phase of communication more quickly.

So you are saying to yourself “that all sounds interesting, but nothing new.” I will buy that. Cicero’s writings are really old - around 50 B.C. to be exact. So, why do I still know so many who don’t feel obliged to CHARM? In part is it a lack of self-confidence. Insecure people are more likely to skip this step. Emotionally they are not strong enough to take a chance, which is what this step often requires. Some lack skills or ideas, others do not recognize that they are not bothering to engage their listener. And then, of course, there is the person we all know who feels that by the nature of who they are—the dad, the coach, the CEO, the owner, the client—that winning people over is not necessary to successful communication. They are simply incorrect and sooner or later they will either become frustrated because they think no one does what they want, listens to them or typically this person sooner or later believes they are surrounded by incompetence, disrespect or disinterest. Remember, the burden for successful communication weighs more heavily on the sender of the message than the receiver.

Next time we will talk about teach. That is unless something MOVES me to talk about something else.

See ya next week. And thanks for reading Zblog.

Email Comments