I’ll take on the next two elevator speech entries at once because the first one is a joke – but one that makes a useful point.
Mark says:
"What floor do you want?" This is my classic elevator speech. Gets the other person talking – because no one cares about you and your product or service – only their own problems and needs.
Mark, that’s precisely why an elevator speech has to have 3 critical elements:
1. The word “you” where you is the audience
2. A need or problem the audience has
3. An emotion
You should attend my speech because I will show you how to have rock-hard abs with only 5 minutes of daily exercise.
You see, Mark, that is about the audience.
OK, the next one is from Stephan:
In the first seven minutes you will learn how to take the pain out of managing Corporate Social Investment, AND how to get a guaranteed return of more than 100% in media coverage. Best of all, of course, is that the money and expertise that you invest will help thousands of people in your city lead happier, healthier, and more productive lives.
If I’m looking for help with my corporate social investment, this is an answer. The claims may be a little strong (“more than 100 %” – can that be true?) and I would tone that down a little to something more believable, but that’s a relatively minor point. So overall it’s a great elevator speech – it addresses me and my needs, and it has emotion.
Here’s the only thing I would add, Stephan. When you offer to help someone navigate through confusing terrain, you’re telling one of the 5 basic stories in Western culture: the ‘Stranger in a Strange Land story (I talk more about this in my new book, Trust Me: Four Steps to Authenticity and Charisma). The power of that story is that your audience’s problem is feeling lost and confused. You’re offering to be a guide. So rather than say “take the pain out of managing CSI,” I would say, “mystery” or “confusion” because that more directly addresses the emotion you’re trying to tap into. You might even underline that with "..take the mystery out of managing the often bewildering terrain of CSI…" or something along those lines.
Thank you, Nick! I have incorporated your ideas into my pitch and, although too early to tell to what degree, it seems to be having a positive impact.
The question of believability is an important one. Although the claim of “more than 100%” is in fact true (various media owners partner with us), it does seem to open the door more easily when a more credible sounding claim – like “more than 72%” – is made.
Thank you, Nick! I have incorporated your ideas into my pitch and, although too early to tell to what degree, it seems to be having a positive impact.
The question of believability is an important one. Although the claim of “more than 100%” is in fact true (various media owners partner with us), it does seem to open the door more easily when a more credible sounding claim – like “more than 72%” – is made.