Chapter 5. Retake the Floor (Martial Art: Self-Defense)

Become one with the opponent, like an image reflected in the mirror.

Ittosai Sensei Kenpo-Sho (Teacher Ittosai Sword Manual)
By Kotoda Yahei Toshida [5.1] (1716)

When your Q&A session moves from Yield the Floor to Retake the Floor, the shift in dynamics presents another opportunity for you to exercise control. It shifts the energy exchange away from the questioner and back to you.

Let’s return our focus to that moment after you have opened the floor to the gentleman in the middle of the back of the room. He has asked his long, rambling question and you, either on your own, or through his own restatement, now fully grasp the Roman Column in his question. Being a results-driven person, you are eager to provide him with an answer, but suppose the gentleman’s question was challenging: “Wait a minute! You tell me that your product is going to save us money, and then you give me a sticker shock price that’s twice as much as your competition asks! That’s outrageous! Where do you get off charging so much?”

Then suppose the answer you give to this very irate person is, “When you consider the total cost of ownership of our solution, you’ll see that it will cost you less money in the long run.”

You would then be telling your potential buyer that he is wrong. After all, the clear inference in his question was that you are charging too much, and the clear inference in your answer was that you are not charging too much.

That irate gentleman would then perceive you as contentious …similar to the public’s perception of Ross Perot when he responded to Al Gore in the NAFTA debate by snarling, “You’re lying! You’re lying now!” For you, that perception is highly unlikely to induce your potential customer to give you a purchase order.

Another approach, widely considered conventional wisdom, is to repeat the question. However, if immediately after the question, “Where do you get off charging so much?” you were to say, “Where do we get off charging so much?” your echo would validate the inference that you are overcharging. Your potential buyer would then perceive you as having admitted guilt.

What’s worse, when you answered, you would most likely start out defensively: “When you consider the total cost of ownership…” In essence, you would be carrying forward a negative balance.

Therefore, when you get a challenging question, do not answer and do not repeat; paraphrase instead.

Paraphrase

The dictionary defines the prefix “para” as beside; near; alongside, as in “parallel.” This prefix occurs in words such as “paralegal,” “paramedical,” “parapsychology,” and “paramilitary.” All of these terms refer to alternate but correlative forms of the root words: legal, medical, psychology, and military. In that same vein, the dictionary defines “paraphrase” as a restatement of a text or passage in another form or other words, often to clarify meaning. [5.2]

The intention here is to use the paraphrase during your Q&A session to state the challenging question in another form…to deflect the challenge and to control the meaning. This is distinctly different from restating or rephrasing because the prefix “re” means “again.” “Again” implies repetition, and repetition implies carrying forward the negative inference latent in the challenging question. A negative statement creates a negative perception. To create a paraphrase of the original question, begin with an interrogative word, such as:

• “What…?”

• “Why…?”

• “How…?”

• “Does…?”

• “Can…?”

• “Is…?”

Then conclude your paraphrase with a question mark. These beginning and ending points then serve to bracket the centerpiece of the original question: the Roman Column.

Please note that the paraphrase is only a reconfiguration of the original question and not a question about the original question. Asking a question about a question, as President George H. Bush learned so painfully when he speculated, “Are you suggesting…?” is a tactic doomed to failure.

Answering a question with a question is also a doomed tactic. “Why do you ask?” is an evasive device that has inexplicably gained favor in some quarters of sales training. It is perceived as ducking the issue and produces nothing but frustration and irritation in the asker. Inevitably, irritation in the audience produces failure for the presenter.

A good paraphrase simply incorporates the words of the original question and retains the Roman Column. The paraphrase differs from a question in that the voice drops at the end of the sentence, as opposed to a question in which the voice rises inquisitively.

Now, please look at the original question again: “Wait a minute! You tell me that your product is going to save us money, and then you give me a sticker shock price that’s twice as much as your competition asks! That’s outrageous! Where do you get off charging so much?”

As in Chapter 4, “Active Listening,” the balance of this page is left blank for you to analyze the question “What is the Roman Column?”

If you said “overcharging,” “high price,” “expensive,” or “costly,” you would be focusing on the outer wrappings of the knotty ball…the questioner’s feeling or emotion about the price of your product.

The Roman Column is simply price. That is center of the ball, free of any other tangled strands. That, as Sensei Ittosai counsels, is a reflection of your opponent’s image in a mirror.

Now incorporate the word “price” within a paraphrase.

• What is our pricing rationale?

• Why have we chosen this price point?

• How did we arrive at the price?

Notice that when you strip the charged words, “sticker shock,” “twice as much,” “outrageous,” and “so much,” out of the original question, you neutralize the hostility. Then, when you begin your answer, you will only have to address the price itself and not whether it is too high or too low.

By becoming one with your opponent in the paraphrase, you level the playing field. This is the essence of self-defense in the martial arts: By using agility to counter force, the engagement then proceeds as a contest between equals.

When you paraphrase in Q&A, you can proceed to answer the question your questioner asked without having to deal with any latent hostility. Your questioner cannot help but concur that you have identified the issue, and therefore that person will not say…with exasperation, “What I’m really asking…” Instead, that person will nod in agreement and release you to move ahead with your answer.

The head nod from your questioner is completely involuntary. In my private coaching sessions with my clients, I engage them in an exercise in which they fire tough questions at one another. If the person who is asked the question paraphrases correctly, the person who asked the question invariably nods in agreement. If the paraphrase is wrong, there is no nod. In fact, there is often a frown or a shake of the head. When the paraphrase is correct, the nod always happens even though the exercise is a simulation and even though the participants are peers or colleagues and not adversaries.

Let’s look at another hostile question: “There are dozens of little start-ups doing exactly what you’re doing! Then there are all those big guys, with their entrenched market share. It’s a jungle out there, and you’re only just getting off the ground! What on earth makes you think that you can survive?”

What is the Roman Column? Decide before you turn the page.

I hope you didn’t say “survive.” Figure 5.1 shows why not.

Figure 5.1. Paraphrase positioning.

Think of the light area in the center of the horizontal bar as the cool zone and the outer dark areas as the danger zones. Your objective is to position the Roman Column in the cool zone.

If you were to repeat the challenging question, “What on earth makes me think that we can survive?” you would land in the dark zone on the left because you have validated that there is reasonable doubt that you could survive. Your audience would then perceive you as having admitted guilt.

If you were to reverse the challenging question in your paraphrase, “Why will we succeed in this jungle?” you would land in the dark zone on the right because you have invalidated the questioner’s concern about your ability to survive. Your audience would then perceive you as having been contentious.

The Roman Column is “compete.” The paraphrase could be:

• How do we compete?

• What is our competitive strategy?

• Where are we with our competitive strategy?

Find the Roman Column and confine it within the cool zone. Deal with only how you compete, not whether you can or cannot. Use as few words as possible in your paraphrase. Less is more. Mirror your opponent and neutralize the hostile question.

Here is one more: “You know that this is a male-dominated industry and that most of the buying decisions are made by the buddy system in smoke-filled back rooms. What makes you, a woman, think that you can penetrate that old boy network?”

What is the Roman Column? Decide before you turn the page.

I hope you didn’t say “sexism” or “chauvinism.” If you did, you would be responding to the value or emotion, the outer wrappings of the knotty ball. The Roman Column is “capability,” and the paraphrases are

• What are my capabilities to reach decision makers?

• Am I capable of reaching decision makers?

• How do my capabilities apply to reaching decision makers?

Another version of this hostile question is, “You look like a kid! I doubt that you’ve been in this business very long. I’ve been in this industry since before you were born, and now you come in here and tell me how I should run my business. Where do you get off telling me what to do?”

The Roman Column is the same as above, “capability,” not age. The paraphrases are

• What are my capabilities to offer you solutions?

• Am I capable of offering you solutions?

• How do my capabilities apply to our solutions?

All the previous long, rambling, challenging questions can be reduced to three single words: “price,” “competition,” and “capability.” The hostility in each of them is purged by the paraphrase. Also note that all the paraphrases are neutral questions, positioning you to move on to a positive answer. Contrast this approach to the negativity latent in President George H. Bush’s words when he retook the floor after Marisa Hall’s question.

Are you suggesting that if somebody has means that the national debt doesn’t affect them?

Any answer after that would be defensive. Imagine if instead he had paraphrased by saying, “How can a person of means find a cure for those who are less fortunate?”

The answer that would follow that paraphrase would contain an action verb, and be about his ability to provide solutions in response to Marisa Hall’s resounding, “How?”

Paraphrasing positions you right in the middle of the cool zone, ready to move forward positively. You can use this very powerful technique to control other types of challenging questions.

Challenging Questions

Negative

“This is the age of mergers. Banks are consolidating. Manufacturing and pharmaceutical companies are joining forces. Everybody’s throwing their lot in with others. Instead of going out there and trying to be the Lone Ranger, why don’t you throw in your lot with one of the larger companies in your sector? You can either get acquired, merge, or partner.”

What is the Roman Column?

The sub-text of the question is this: Why don’t you do what the questioner thinks you should do instead of what you just got finished spending your entire presentation telling the audience what you are going to do, which is to go it alone, aspiring for market leadership.

The Roman Column is “independence.”

If you, as presenter, spend any time dealing with “Why don’t you?” questions, you will only invite more negative questions, and you’ll be swatting flies all day. Instead, turn the negative into a positive by addressing only why you are doing what you said you’d be doing in the presentation. The paraphrase is, “Why are we remaining independent?”

Irrelevant

“How come your logo doesn’t have a space between the two words?”

This kind of question usually results in a smile, a snicker, or a frown from the presenter, each of which represents disdain to the questioner. When you’re presenting, there is no such thing as an irrelevant question. Every question from every audience member is relevant and appropriate. If they ask it, you must answer it.

Inhibit the snicker or frown with the paraphrase, “What’s behind our logo design?” or “Why the logo style?”

Multiple Questions

Specifically, disparate multiple questions. You will have no difficulty in handling related multiple questions such as: “How much did you spend on R&D last year? What percentage of your revenues did that represent? What is your R&D model going forward?” Any financial person could easily handle all three because they are related.

The difficulty comes when one of the multiple questions is from left field, another from right field, and another from the moon. What many presenters do in these circumstances is to dive into an answer for one of them and then lose track of the rest. At that point, the presenter often turns to the questioner and asks, “What was your other question?”

The audience perception: “You weren’t listening!”

Don’t burden yourself with having to remember someone else’s right brain, nonlinear data dump. Instead pick only one of the questions…the easiest, the hardest, the last, the first, the one that surprised you, or the one that you were expecting. Paraphrase the question, answer it, and then turn back to the person who asked and, in a declarative statement say, “You had another question!”

That person will then either repeat the other question, and you can respond with a clear, unencumbered mind; or the questioner might say, “That’s all right, you covered it.” The latter response is very common in Q&A sessions because most people can’t remember their own right brain ramble. Either way, you are off the hook and free to move forward to either answer the second question or move on to another questioner.

Statement

The question that is not a question: “Your new solution appears to be very effective, but you’ve only just released it. You don’t know if it has any kinks. I’d like to see it field-tested before I commit. It’s not for us at this time.”

If you were trying to land a sale for the early release of your promising new product, you certainly wouldn’t want to leave the exchange at that point with no sale. Instead, turn the statement into a question by using the paraphrase, “Why adopt our new product now?” Your answer will then be about why your prospective customer wants to be the first kid on the block to enjoy the many benefits of your promising new product.

Presented Material

The final challenging question is the one about material covered within the presentation. You’ve probably witnessed this common occurrence: A presenter delivers a very thorough presentation about a new product, only to have a person in the audience ask a question about one of the product’s main features already discussed. At an internal company meeting, this usually results in audible groans from other members of the audience. At an external meeting, other audience members, being discrete, stifle their groans and only think them internally.

Presenters, being discrete and hopefully respectful, will also stifle groans but all too often begin their answer by saying, “As I said…” This seemingly innocuous phrase belies impatience with the questioner at best and condescension at worst.

Instead, move directly forward into the answer as if you have never covered the subject. “Absolutely! Our new product performs this function better than any other product on the market!” You are then free to recap the main features of your new product. Resist the temptation, however, to stand on the soap box and repeat the material in as much detail as you did in the presentation. Be succinct!

Avoiding back references produces three considerable benefits:

• Reinforcement of your selling points.

• Validation, rather than invalidation, of the questioner.

• Positive Perception. Because everyone in the audience heard you cover the material in question and they see you react patiently and positively, they perceive you as a person in control. Cool under fire. Grace under pressure. Effective Management.

One important footnote about avoiding back references: In my earlier book, Presenting to Win: The Art of Telling Your Story, I advocated back references as a powerful narrative technique to create continuity in any story. However, in the free fire zone of Q&A sessions, where the one-against-many dynamics are in force, the rules change. Therefore, use only forward references.

All the foregoing techniques for handling challenging questions share a least common denominator that brings us full circle back to the martial arts.

The Buffer

By reframing the inbound energy of challenging questions, the paraphrase acts as a Buffer or shock absorber by deflecting the negativity. Like the martial arts, the Buffer is the first line of self-defense. By becoming one with the opponent, the Buffer levels the playing field between unequal forces…one presenter and many audience members. Then, after the Buffer discharges the negative energy, the presenter regains balance and moves ahead. The Buffer allows you to

• Neutralize hostile questions.

• Turn negative questions positive.

• Treat irrelevant questions the same as any other.

• Manage multiple questions efficiently.

• Convert charged statements into questions.

• Handle questions about presented material with equanimity.

Buffers have a host of other benefits…

• “I heard you!” This is the sine qua non of any Q&A session. It tells your questioner…and the rest of the audience…that you listened.

• Condense. There is no need to carry forward the right brain nonlinear ramble of your questioner.

• Thinking Time. A most valuable asset any time; especially when you are in the line of fire.

• Verbalize. Drawn from a rehearsal technique, Verbalization means speaking aloud the actual words in the presentation to crystallize them. By Verbalizing the Buffer, you clarify the Roman Column in your own mind. (You will find a fuller discussion of Verbalization in the section on preparing for Q&A in Chapter 8, “Preparation.”)

• Trigger the Answer. When your mind is clear on the Roman Column, your answer follows readily.

• Audibility. Everyone in the audience hears the question you will answer.

Given all these valuable benefits, you should Buffer all questions, even those that are not challenging, such as, “Could you please describe how you plan to market your company in this competitive environment?” However, if you were to paraphrase this question by saying, “Could I describe how we’re planning to market our company in this competitive environment?” you would sound awkward. Another option is to Buffer with Key Words.

Key Words

In the case of non-challenging direct questions you can shift to a shorter Buffer, using the Key Word or Words that identify the Roman Column and roll those words into your answer. An example would be, “Our marketing plan includes…” Or you can use the Key Words as an echo…”Our marketing plan?” and then proceed with your answer.

You also can use this Key Words Buffer technique for tough questions, like the opening salvo in this chapter: “Wait a minute! You tell me that your product is going to save us money, and then you give me a sticker shock price that’s twice as much as your competition asks! That’s outrageous! Where do you get off charging so much?”

The Key Word Buffer is, “Our pricing rationale is…”

Or the second round salvo: “There are dozens of little start-ups doing exactly what you’re doing! Then there are all those big guys with their entrenched market share. It’s a jungle out there, and you’re only just getting off the ground! What on earth makes you think that you can survive?”

The Key Word Buffer is, “The way we will compete is…”

Or the third round salvo: “You know that this is a male-dominated industry and that most of the buying decisions are made by the buddy system in smoke-filled back rooms. What makes you, a woman, think that you can penetrate that old boy network?”

The Key Word Buffer is, “My capabilities include…”

Now you have two types of Buffer. One is the paraphrase that restates the question, and the other is to state the Key Words and then continue on into your answer. However, some presenters are not content with one Buffer. They feel the need to put a Buffer in front of the Buffer, otherwise known as a Double Buffer. In the section that follows, you’ll find…and most likely recognize…a collection of the most common Double Buffers used in Q&A sessions, all of which are useless fillers at the very least or counterproductive at the worst.

The Double Buffer

The most common Double Buffer is

• “The question is…”

It’s all right to use this once. It’s all right to use it twice. It’s all right to use it three times. But if you use it before every paraphrase, it sounds as if you’re stalling for time.

Two other common stalls for time are

• “That was a good question.”

• “I’m glad you asked that.”

Presenters often resort to either of these Double Buffers as a delaying tactic in reaction to a challenging question that was actually not good, nor are they glad to have been asked it.

On the other hand, suppose an audience member did ask you a question that was good for you, such as, “All these new features in your product should allow us to get our product to market faster, right?” You could then gleefully use both Double Buffers: “That was a good question! I’m glad you asked that!” You could then go on to extol the virtues of your new product features.

But then suppose the next audience member asked you, “Yes, but why do you charge so much for your product?” You would hardly say, “That was a bad question! I’m not glad you asked that!” That would be judging and favoring one audience member over the other.

Another common Double Buffer is

• “What you’re really asking…”

The implication of this phrase is that the questioner isn’t capable of formulating the question correctly and that the presenter will charitably reformulate it…an insult to the audience member.

And another common Double Buffer is

• “If I understand your question…”

The implication of this Double Buffer is the fatal message, “I wasn’t listening.” And the final common Double Buffer is

• “The issue/concern is…”

If you use the word “concern” or “issue” upon retaking the floor, you will be confirming that there is a concern or an issue between you and your audience. Worse still, you will begin your answer carrying forward a negative balance.

Delete all the Double Buffers listed here from your vocabulary. If you want to use Double Buffers, insert the word “you.”

The Power of “You”

Insert a “you” in your Double Buffer before your paraphrase.

• “You’re asking…”

• “You’d like to know…”

• “Your question is…”

Contrast the first Double Buffer in this section with the last:

• “The question is…”

• “Your question is…”

The difference is one word, “you,” one of the most powerful in all human communication. A Google search of the Internet abounds with citations of a Yale University study of the most persuasive words in the English language in which “you” leads the list, ahead of “love” and “money.” A simpler proof of the power of “you” is that it is synonymous with a person’s name. Further validation comes from the branding slogans of some of the world’s most successful corporations:

• Are you ready? (Cisco Systems)

• Your potential, Our passion (Microsoft Corporation)

• Have it your way (Burger King)

Moreover, saying “you” establishes a direct interpersonal connection between you and your questioner. It creates Eye Connect between you and your questioner. Eye Connect is a more specific term than the conventional “eye contact,” which is usually done as a sweeping movement. Eye Connect means that you look at a person in your audience until you see him or her look back at you…until you feel the click of engagement.

Here is why Eye Connect is important: If you were to look at your questioner during a long rambling question and then use the first Double Buffer listed earlier, “The question is…” you would most likely turn to address the rest of the audience. This would abruptly break your Eye Connect with your questioner and make that person feel rudely abandoned.

If instead you were to use the second Double Buffer, “Your question is…” you would then remain in Eye Connect with your questioner and make that person feel attended. Moreover, you would then see how that person reacts to your Buffer. A frown would indicate that you didn’t get it right, and a head nod would indicate that you did. When you get the head nod from your questioner, and only after you get the head nod, are you free to begin your answer.

The head nod is the equivalent of Marisa Hall’s, “Well, yeah, uh-huh.” The head nod is the ultimate benefit because it sends the message, “You heard me!” And remember, the head nod in response to an accurate Buffer is involuntary.

All the foregoing control measures, starting with the moment you retake the floor and continuing up to the moment when you are ready to provide an answer, can be summarized in what is known as the Triple Fail-Safe.

The Triple Fail-Safe

First Fail-Safe. Retake the floor only after you have a complete grasp of the Roman Column in the question. This is the equivalent of successful football receivers who run for Yards After Catch only after they have a complete grasp of the ball. If you do not completely grasp the Roman Column, do not take a step forward. Instead, follow the same instructions the U.S. Postal Service stamps on mail with unclear addresses: Return to Sender. Return the floor to the questioner by taking responsibility and saying, “I’m sorry, I didn’t follow; would you mind restating the question?”

Second Fail-Safe. If you are certain that you have grasped the Roman Column, use the key word in your Buffer. During your Buffer, make Eye Connect with the questioner until you see that person’s head nod, indicating that you have identified the Roman Column correctly. Move forward into your answer only after you see the head nod.

Third Fail-Safe. If, despite your best efforts, you get a frown instead of a nod, do not move forward into the answer. Instead, Return to Sender by saying, “I’m sorry, I didn’t follow, would you mind restating the question?”

These three Fail-Safes, depicted in Figure 5.2, are check points that will keep you from rushing into the wrong answer. You will also avoid the dreaded, “You’re not listening!” perception or its close cousins, “That’s not what I asked!” and “What I’m really asking…”

Figure 5.2. The Triple Fail-Safe.

Even with the Triple Fail-Safe, there is the possibility that, because the Roman Column straddles two related issues, you might not fully address both of them in your answer. At that point, the worst that can happen is that the questioner will ask you a follow-on question, “Yes, but what I’d also like to know is…” which is a lot milder than the dreaded, “You’re not listening!” reaction.

Figure 5.3 is a graphical summary of this entire chapter: A question and an answer can be bridged by any of three Buffer options:

Figure 5.3. Buffer summary.

Paraphrase. A simple interrogative question.

• “Why have we chosen this price point?”

• “What are my capabilities to reach decision makers?”

• “How do we compete?”

A “you” phrase before the paraphrase.

• “You’re asking, ’Why have we chosen this price point?’”

• “Your question is, ’What are my capabilities to reach decision makers?’”

• “You’d like to know how we compete.”

Key Words.

• “Our pricing is based on…”

• “My capabilities include…”

• “The way we compete is…”

The first two Buffer options, the paraphrase and the paraphrase preceded by a “you” phrase, buy you thinking time. However, if you use these Buffers too often in your session, you will sound stilted…particularly with the “you” phrase. Although “you” has the many benefits as discussed, it can become too much of a good thing. Starting every Buffer with “you” will make you sound like a hoot owl.

Key Words, the third Buffer option, allows you no thinking time at all. You must have the ball firmly in your hands before you take a single step. Make sure that the Roman Column is crystal clear in your mind when you utter the first word. However, when you respond without a moment’s hesitation, with the Key Word embedded in your answer, you will appear very sharp, very much in control. The Key Word option is the most advanced form of Buffering.

An outstanding role model of Key Word Buffering is Colin Powell, one of the best presenters or speakers ever to stand at a podium. As the U.S. Secretary of State, Mr. Powell held a press conference for foreign journalists on April 15, 2003, at the Foreign Press Center in Washington, D.C., shortly after the start of the Iraq War (Figure 5.4).

Figure 5.4. Colin Powell holds a press conference.

During the session, Mr. Powell fielded 11 questions. Never once did he paraphrase or use a Double Buffer. In every case, he began his answer with the Key Word or Words inherent in the reporters’ questions. Consider his challenge: Most of the foreign journalists spoke English as a second language, and so they phrased their questions with syntax and accents that were not native to Mr. Powell. Moreover, as professional journalists, they all tried to cram in multiple questions when their turns came.

In the following section from the transcript of the conference, we’ll look at several of the reporters’ questions and then how, in each instance, Mr. Powell promptly retook the floor with only the Key Word Buffer to start his answer. Although his thorough answers continued well beyond his Key Word Buffer, in the interest of illustrating this powerful technique, we will examine only the front end of his answers…the inflection point at which he retook the floor and exercised control.

Mr. Powell made a brief opening statement and then opened the floor.

I would be delighted to take your questions.

The first question came from a Russian man.

As the chief foreign policy advisor to U.S. President, do you think the UN is still relevant and important from the point of view of prevention of military conflicts, not only humanitarian assistance, and do you think the organization needs to be reformed?

What is the Key Word? Certainly not the last word, “reformed.” If Powell were to deal with that issue, he would land in the dark danger zone on the left of Figure 5.1 because he would be validating the reporter’s assertion that the United Nations is irrelevant and in need of reform. Any answer would then be an uphill fight to justify the U.N., which was the very opposite of the United States’ stated supportive policy. Instead, the Secretary’s first words upon retaking the floor were:

The UN remains an important organization.

These Key Words served as a neutralizing Buffer that allowed Powell to go on to offer supporting evidence.

The President and other leaders in the coalition…Prime Minister Blair, President Aznar, Prime Minister Berlusconi and many others, Prime Minister Howard of Australia…have all indicated that they believe the UN has a role to play as we go forward in the reconstruction and the rebuilding of Iraq.

His answer continued beyond this point, but let’s move on to another question, this one from an Egyptian woman.

Thank you. Sir, the Israelis said that they presented to you their modification on the roadmap. Have you received anything from the other side, from the Palestinians? And is it still open for change? You have told us before that it is not negotiable. And now on the settlements, on the settlements, as part of the roadmap, eh?

She was clearly rambling, so Powell tried to get her to clarify.

The what?

She tried to explain herself.

On the settlements, which is part of the roadmap, we see the Israelis are…the activities of building settlements is really very high. We saw it on television. We saw reports…

He tried to get her to finish by interjecting.

Thank you.

She continued,

So what is your remarks on the settlements?

What is the Key Word? Certainly not her last words, “the settlements.” If Powell were to deal with that issue, he would he would again land in the dark danger zone on the left of Figure 5.1 because he would be validating the reporter’s concern with an obstacle to the United States-sponsored peace efforts. Any answer would then focus on only a subordinate aspect of the U.S.’s larger initiative: the roadmap. Instead, his first words upon retaking the floor were:

With respect to the roadmap…

By using “the roadmap” as the Key Words rather than “the settlements,” Powell created a neutralizing Buffer. This allowed him to move on to a substantive rather than defensive statement.

…the roadmap will be released to the parties after Mr. Abu Mazen is confirmed, and it will be the roadmap draft that was finished last December.

He continued his answer to her, but let’s proceed to another question, this one from a Lebanese journalist.

Mr. Secretary, a lot of fears have been made about who is next. And some people believed to be close with the administration said that the regimes backing Cairo and in Saudi Arabia should be nervous right now. How do you address that point? And does the U.S. has a plan to spread a set of values at gunpoint, in your view, at this point?

“A plan to spread a set of values at gunpoint…” This question accused the United States of acting as a villainous bully, and Powell could not give credence to this charge! When he retook the floor, he immediately countered the accusation by applying the noted anti-drug slogan, “Just say, ’No!’”

No, of course not.

Neither Colin Powell, nor you, nor any presenter is under any obligation to respond to an accusation that is untrue in any other way than with a complete refutation. If you are attacked with a question that contains or implies an inaccuracy, do as Colin Powell did; skip the Buffer and come back immediately with a rebuttal.

After his rebuttal, Powell went on to support his position:

The President has spoken clearly about this, as recently as two days ago, over the weekend. We have concerns about Syria. We have let Syria know of our concerns. We also have concerns about some of the policies of Iran. We have made the Iranians fully aware of our concerns.

He concluded with a firm restatement of his rebuttal.

But there is no list.

This exchange was a variation of the common, “When did you stopping beating your wife?” question. The correct response to that implied charge is, “I never started beating my wife.” Counter the false charge on the spot. Stop it in its tracks. Just say, “No!”

Colin Powell then had another accusation fired at him by a Mexican reporter, who asked,

Mr. Secretary, I have a question on Cuba. Can you give us an assessment of what is your advice to the countries that are near to both in terms of the human rights situation in Cuba, especially to Mexico that has been too close to the Cuban Government? And a quick second question. There is some countries that are calling the United States the “police of the world.” Do you agree with that?

“The police of the world…” Here was another question which accused the United States of acting as a villainous bully! It was another variation of “When did you stop beating your wife?” Here again, Powell could not give any credence to this charge in his reply. However, because it was a double question, he fielded them in order, with Cuba first.

First of all, with respect to Cuba, it has always had a horrible human rights record. And rather than improving as we go into the 21st century, it’s getting worse.

Then, after a few supporting points about Cuba, he countered the accusation by just saying “No!”

With respect to the United States being the policemen of the world, we do not seek war, we do not look for wars, we do not need wars, we do not want wars.

So it went with every other question in the press conference. Powell listened carefully and answered as each of the reporters challenged him with multiple questions, until he came to an Australian reporter.

Mr. Secretary, there seems to be some hopeful sounds coming out of your administration and North Korea on a settlement there. Do you think that there is likely to be a meeting soon between the administration and North Korea? And what sort of forum do you expect to attend? And how much do you think this is a flow-on from what happened in Iraq?

Powell broke into a big grin.

Very good. You’re trying to get it all at once, aren’t you? [5.3]

Powell then did go on to provide an answer about U.S. relations with North Korea. As with all the others, he began his answer with the Key Word Buffer and then went on to state his position consistent with United States policy.

In each case, the Key Word Buffer technique provides the major benefits of the Buffer:

• Identifies the Roman Column

• Condenses the ramble

• Levels the playing field

• Tees up the answer

…all of which tees you up to learn how to answer in the next chapter.