"TOASTMASTERS INTERNATIONAL" 2017

Hi, World!

In one of the previous posts I shared my view on the winners of the “Toastmasters International” championship of public speaking, which took place in 2016. Now I’m going to analyse the Contest of 2017 and evaluate the winners’ performances. 

I will evaluate the Performers’ speech with a help of Evaluation Chart from our Professor’s book: Уроки ораторского мастерства: учебно-методическое пособие / С.П. Хорошилова; Мин-во образования и науки РФ, Новосиб. гос. пед. ун-т. - Новосибирск: Изд-во НГПУ, 2014. - 138с. [с. 81-82].

 

So the winners of the Contest are:

1. Manoj Vasudevan
2. Simon Bucknall
3. Kevin Stamper

I think I should start with the 1-st Place winner, author, consultant and coach Manoj Vasudevan, from Singapore with his speech: "Pull Less, Bend More".

Thus, my evaluation of Manoj Vasudevan’s speech is presented in the chart:

Name	"Pull Less, Bend More"	Max	Given
I	Speech Content	45	44
	Organization (comment on effectiveness of introduction; clarity of body, including both major divisions and support points; and efficacy of conclusion)	20	19
	Support (comment on speaker's use of facts, stories, illustrations, examples and/or logic to expand, explain, defend, inform the audience)	15	15
	Cohesion (comment on the speaker's ability to unify the speech and keep clear focus through use of transitions, summaries, and other unifying elements)	10	10
II	Speech Delivery	40	38
	Vocal presentation	20	18
	1) volume
	2) tempo
	3) pitch
	4) emphasis
	5) clear articulation
	Physical presentation	20	20
	1) eye contact
	2) gesturing
	3) posture
	4) facial expression
	5) movement
	6) dress
III	General Effectiveness	15	15
	Amount of time used (8 mins)
	Adherence to time requirements (comment on whether or not the speaker made good use of time, including whether the speech was too short or too long)	5	5
	Creativity (comment on art/uniqueness/individualized nature of the speech)	10	10
	TOTAL POINTS:	100	98

I belive this performance deserves a special commentary further on.

The 2-d Place winner of The Toastmasters 2017 was Simon Bucknall, an entrepreneur from London, England, with his speech “What James BullockTaught Me”.

This is how I would evaluate his speech:

Name	“What James Bullock Taught Me”	Max	Given
I	Speech Content	45	41
	Organization (comment on effectiveness of introduction; clarity of body, including both major divisions and support points; and efficacy of conclusion)	20	18
	Support (comment on speaker's use of facts, stories, illustrations, examples and/or logic to expand, explain, defend, inform the audience)	15	14
	Cohesion (comment on the speaker's ability to unify the speech and keep clear focus through use of transitions, summaries, and other unifying elements)	10	9
II	Speech Delivery	40	36
	Vocal presentation	20	18
	1) volume
	2) tempo
	3) pitch
	4) emphasis
	5) clear articulation
	Physical presentation	20	18
	1) eye contact
	2) gesturing
	3) posture
	4) facial expression
	5) movement
	6) dress
III	General Effectiveness	15	15
	Amount of time used (8 mins)
	Adherence to time requirements (comment on whether or not the speaker made good use of time, including whether the speech was too short or too long)	5	5
	Creativity (comment on art/uniqueness/individualized nature of the speech)	10	10
	TOTAL POINTS:	100	92

From the very beginning Simon Bucknall amazes the public with his expressive start, which makes the audience listen all eyes and ears to him. 

He is a real actor. He keeps audience astonished and engaged into his story. He conveys feelings and emotions so brightly, that you feel yourself a member of that story, you realize you can sympathize and convey the same emotion. 

Moreover, Simon's speech is from time to time sarcastic, it is rich in metaphors, bright epithets. It felt like Simon wasn't just performing, but addressing each of the spectators. As it seemed to me, he wasn't aiming to influence, but to reach each one's heart. I truly enjoyed listening to Simon Bucknall. 

The 3-d Place winner was Kevin Stamper, a pastor from Palm Harbor, Florida, with his speech “Speak Up”.

Name	“Speak Up”	Max	Given
I	Speech Content	45	37
	Organization (comment on effectiveness of introduction; clarity of body, including both major divisions and support points; and efficacy of conclusion)	20	18
	Support (comment on speaker's use of facts, stories, illustrations, examples and/or logic to expand, explain, defend, inform the audience)	15	14
	Cohesion (comment on the speaker's ability to unify the speech and keep clear focus through use of transitions, summaries, and other unifying elements)	10	5
II	Speech Delivery	40	34
	Vocal presentation	20	16
	1) volume
	2) tempo
	3) pitch
	4) emphasis
	5) clear articulation
	Physical presentation	20	18
	1) eye contact
	2) gesturing
	3) posture
	4) facial expression
	5) movement
	6) dress
III	General Effectiveness	15	14
	Amount of time used (8 mins)
	Adherence to time requirements (comment on whether or not the speaker made good use of time, including whether the speech was too short or too long)	5	5
	Creativity (comment on art/uniqueness/individualized nature of the speech)	10	9
	TOTAL POINTS:	100	85

Kevin made use of various catching technics and ice-breakers in the beginning of his speech. He demonstrated the rich usage of gestures and other displays of non-verbal language. However, the means of semantic representation, in my opinion, were exaggerated, which made his speech a bit heavy to perceive. It was loaded with jokes, which were probably not as valuable as the speaker intended them to be. It seemed like he was more excited about  his stories, than he wanted his audience to be. Some of the jokes, I must admit, were suitable on his speech line, which produced a positive effect. 

In the end you come to understand what actually the talk was about and what it really aimed. However, as his speech went on from the beginning, it was hard to understand the main idea or the general message he was developing, probably because the cohesion between the stories he was telling was not perfect. To make a long story short, I enjoyed his non-verbal representation more, than I did the verbal one. 

What I really liked about his performance (or traits of personality) was his charisma and absolutely positive delivery of the information, which made him able to emotionally connect with the audience. 

All in all, I believe that one should watch Kevin Stamper's performance to learn from being "a little bit critical" and at the same time enjoy the emotional coloring of  precious life stories that Kevin kindly shares with us. 

My evaluation chart and general impression of the speakers suggests the following rank list:

1.        Manoj Vasudevan

2.        Simon Bucknall

3.        Kevin Stamper

To my surprise, the list coincides with the Toastmasters committee’s.  

No doubt, Manoj Vasudevan deserves the 1st Prize. I will clarify my point.

Manoj Vasudevan's performance impressed me most. 

His beautiful humorously-build tale about the value of flexibility in relationships was based on his own marriage experience.   

"Pull Less, Bend More" - the title itself conveys the main idea of his speech and epitomizes the concept of Cupid’s arrow, where a string and a bow have a strong connection: when one pulls, the other bends. 

The organisation of speech. The speech was highly organized. The introduction, the main body and the conclusion followed each one naturally corresponding his thoughts flow, and the spectator went alongside with speaker as the storyline proceeded. The way he displayed his wide smile before starting the performance, surely enchanted the spectators. It is definitely a unique attention-getter. The speech was also well-structured thanks to the Cohesion. 

Every line succeeded another, which made the succession of thoughts logical and the emotional content holistic. He would repeat his main idea several time during his speech, thus keeping the audience focused. He managed to link each thought to another wisely, choosing the appropriate means.

Support. Manoj was mentally and emotionally connected to the message he was sharing with the audience. With the help of rhetorical questions he kept the audience attracted and concentrated on his speech, reflecting Manoj’s saying on themselves. 

He managed to adjust his speech according to its reception. His language was simple and well-understood. Manoj’s speech was more like a conversation, rather  than a performance, actually. He cared about the audience he approached. He didn’t just share his thoughts or personal life stories, but he found it important, that the audience achieved his message and adopted the rule of “Pull less, Bend more” into their lives. For this purpose he insisted the audience to repeat the vital rule of all relationships.

Vocal presentation.  The articulation was quite good, despite him being a non-native English speaker. He managed to vary his pitch, volume and intonation wisely, accompanying his emotional expression, to produce the emphasis or highlight the most important thoughts.

Physical presentation.  Manoj didn’t fake his body language, movement. He let it flow naturally, supporting his emotional speech. The most remarkable and memorable was the gesture of pulling a bow’s string, which he demonstrated several times throughout his performance. 

He looked presentable, wearing smart suit, choosing right posture. Manoj maintained a constant eye contact with the spectators, addressing them, displaying open gestures, and thus making the audience trust every word he uttered. 

His facial expressions conveyed his feelings and emotions as he mentioned some significant moments of his life. His speech was full of energy, but it wasn’t at all exaggerated. This kept the audience  engaged and focused on his message.

Adherence. Manoj carefully managed his time according to the limit. He spoke for 8 minutes, which was enough time for him to convey his deep but simple message.

Creativity. Combining both humour and sincerity in his speech Manoj illustrates the mechanism of relationship, which vital means of sustainability and harmony is following the simple rule: "Pull less, bend more" - “No matter what our differences are, when choosing to pull less and bend more, we can stay together.”

The message of the speaker covers different spheres of relationships and is able to touch each one's hearts and minds.

To conclude, I should say that I loved all three performances. 

Ibelieve, these speakers deserve to be considered the role-models to look up to, for us, passing through our way to becoming effective public speakers.