Annette Simmons

  • About
    • About Annette
    • Annette in Action
  • Books
    • Territorial Games
    • A Safe Place for Dangerous Truths
    • The Story Factor
    • Whoever Tells the Best Story Wins
  • Services
  • The Six Kinds of Stories
  • Storytelling 101
    • Blog
    • Q & A
    • Metaphor Maps
  • Clients
  • Contact

May 6, 2020 by Annette Simmons Leave a Comment

Stories with a Moral Blueprint – Part 2 of 8

towwn5

Meaning Makers

Any storyteller can train herself to ensure her stories support meaningful feelings. The first step is to acknowledge the numbers won’t always reflect the emotional payoffs of deferred self-interest. The second step is to decide to do it anyway. This kind of storyteller actively practices meaningful personal strategies that balance the needs of her circle of moral concern as well as her own needs. This is the sweet spot where we find meaning. Supporting others is an inside job that offers intangible rewards we collectively refer to as a meaningful life. This isn’t a new idea and it isn’t new to call ourselves out when we sense that meaninglessness might be reaching dangerous levels. Sixteenth-century poet John Donne started his famous poem with the phrase “no man is an island” and ended with the admonition “therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.”

It has always been the storyteller’s job to make the world feel more meaningful and help people feel more connected. Humans have intuitively understood the danger of isolation, and many cultural stories teach us specific ways to avoid being left alone. Most of these cultural lessons are variations on the theme: “Don’t be a jerk.” Maurice Sendak’s book Where the Wild Things Are uses only 338 words to illustrate the need to balance personal freedom with love of family. Nobody needs an evidence-based definition of a jerk supported by cost-benefit analyses. For a long time, the stories we shared ensured that most people knew a jerk when they saw one—particularly if he or she was staring back from the mirror. Now, not so much, which means more jerks, more loneliness, and more isolation.

Medical science proves our intuitive fear of isolation is well founded. Our bodies treat isolation like a mortal threat, fueling inflammation for autoimmune diseases just as our supercharged technology-mediated culture creates even higher levels of isolation. It is possible that placing all our faith in technical solutions temporarily stole our faith in social norms that have for centuries taught us—not all, but enough of us—to protect ourselves from isolation by practicing tolerance, forgiveness, and empathy. Well-intentioned efforts to evangelize the power of technical reasoning may have inadvertently starved our cultural faith that protecting family time and other rituals that preserve meaningful connections are more important that the profits we gain by forfeiting connections.

Faith in the inherent value of moral motivations is either sustained with personal experiences and stories that keep that faith alive, or it isn’t. There must be a good reason that we crave stories that show how suffering is meaningful. The cherished Charlotte’s Web is, after all, about a spider who places her friend Wilbur’s life above her own. Nietzsche’s observation that “he who has a why can endure any how” sustained Viktor Frankel as he recounted his suffering in concentration camps in his book Man’s Search for Meaning. Humans crave stories that show how love, trust, honesty, and justice prevail in spite of selfishness or greed. We crave these stories like we crave water—and they may be just as important for our survival. The stories we tell become the maps we use to chart our lives. If we perpetuate stories that unintentionally send the message that money can buy love, people act accordingly. Lucky for us, it doesn’t take long to realize substituting money for love is a pretty lonely story.

Excerpt from Chapter 12, 3rd ed. of The Story Factor (2019)  AUDIBLE VERSION HERE

Filed Under: Annette's Blog, Big T Truths Tagged With: Annette Simmons, business storytelling, leadership, Moral Blueprint, narrative, storytelling, Storytelling Moral Survival System, The Story Factor, Whoever Tells the Best Story Wins

April 29, 2020 by Annette Simmons 4 Comments

Storytelling Moral Survival System: part 12 (suggestions)

Make sure your stories always make your own heart sing.

Make sure your stories always make your own heart sing.

Art Your Heart into Storytelling

I worry that people who promise to science the shit out of storytelling haven’t been doing it long enough to understand how linear reasoning can ruin the flow of the creative process. Wise mystics used stories precisely to capture life’s mysteries intact, so anyone who promises to de-mystify storytelling needs to either explain how to re-mystify these paint-by-number stories or stop oversimplifying the process. If you agree, I believe the answer is to always put your heart into every story you find, develop, and tell. Not someone else’s hypothetical heart, but yours, the one that beats inside your chest when you feel inspired and suffers when you see others suffer. Now that storytelling ideas and advice are increasingly translated to suit the goals of technology and digital media, protecting a few primary concepts from being sliced and diced will help storytellers stay in touch with centuries of storytelling wisdom that is impossible to accommodate in linear binary formats. Novelist Haruki Murakami explains it this way: “In many cases, it’s because works that critics see as analytically excellent fail to win the natural empathy of readers.”

Excerpt from Chapter 11, 3rd ed. of The Story Factor (2019)  AUDIBLE VERSION HERE

Filed Under: Annette's Blog Tagged With: Annette Simmons, business storytelling, communication, influence, inspiration, narrative, storytelling, Storytelling Moral Survival System, The Story Factor, Whoever Tells the Best Story Wins

April 28, 2020 by Annette Simmons Leave a Comment

Storytelling Moral Survival System: Part eleven (templates)

Design thinking is a form of story thinking.

Design thinking is a form of story thinking.

 

User Experience Stories: As <Persona> I want <What?> so that <Why?>

I remember teaching storytelling to Microsoft engineers in the early 2000s and explaining what I thought of as “story thinking” only to be told “no, that’s design thinking!” And it is, sort of. For me story thinking has always been agile enough to examine, test, and respond to intangible beliefs, values, emotions, as well as measurable feedback. Design thinking and Agile methods (project management processes that incorporate frequent reassessment and adaptation) simply formalize the sequence that best leads to functionally and perceptually rewarding goals. Developed to improve software design, User Experience (UX) templates and methods blend the work of a team of designers in ways that keep conclusions flexible and responsive as situations change. One way they keep things flexible is to pursue goals that feature users’ perceptual interpretations as “user stories.”

UX designers combine interviews (stories) and data to categorize consumers into personas, so they can fill in the blanks: “As <Persona> I want <What?> so that <Why?>” This template definitely keeps technology responsive to subjective human needs. The UX definition of a user story applies to the specific purpose of design, but the design-thinking process that goes with the idea of UX stories is exactly how I teach executives to find stories that connect and communicate a message. It introduces the discipline of testing whole stories in realistic circumstances rather than evaluating bits and pieces of a story against hypothetical scenarios. The Agile process encourages us to spend more upfront time in discovery (observing and listening to existing stories), and finding current patterns, before establishing guidelines (what is most important), so we can test and retest new stories until they click. The UX process puts first things first when it comes to storytelling.

The only danger with UX philosophy from my point of view, is the habit of characterizing all emotionally driven behaviors as “cognitive biases” (systematic errors). Putting all emotional reasoning into a basket labeled “systematic errors” makes it hard to reinforce moral biases that are only irrational in the short term but represent centuries of emotional reasoning for when, where, and how to override short term quid pro quo expectations in favor of long-term goals. Discrediting emotional reasoning creates emotion-less systems. To the overly rational, moral behaviors look like errors in judgment. We must be wary of people who suggest we “change the story,” when what they really mean is for us to change the morals that have put a dent in short term profits.

Emotion-based decision-making can be wrong, but that does not mean it is always wrong, or that emotions aren’t absolutely necessary for human decision – making. For instance, seeing a packed parking lot at a restaurant might make you decide to eat there, even though your emotions are biasing you to treat a correlation called social proof as if it were cause and effect. Packed parking lots do not cause good food. You were right for the wrong reasons. But jumping to the conclusion that cognitive biases like trusting social proof, basing choices on availability, or habits of loss avoidance are irrational and therefore wrong, ignores the fact that these habits have proven useful for centuries. When systems exploit rather than support cognitive biases, they potentially undermine critical reservoirs of social trust. For instance, social proof is a bias that encouraged cave men to drink water others had already tested. Categorizing “social proof” as a systematic error sidesteps moral concerns over manufacturing social proof by say, buying millions of Twitter followers. This betrayal undermines long-term trust in social proof to the point that collaboration becomes less and less likely.

Another bias called “loss avoidance” may also play a critical role to encourage “better safe than sorry” patterns that help us over-ride short term impulses in favor of living to fight another day. When storytellers exploit this bias by discouraging delayed gratification with threats of loss (“act now, offer ends soon!”) it erodes our emotional system for moderating unwise impulses. Stories that frame not voting as a way to avoid loss erode faith that voting—imperfect as it is—will allow us to avoid much bigger losses down the line.

Excerpt from Chapter 11, 3rd ed. of The Story Factor (2019)  AUDIBLE VERSION HERE

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: Annette Simmons, Big T Truth, business storytelling, Design thinking, narrative, storytelling, Storytelling Moral Survival System, The Story Factor, UX, Whoever Tells the Best Story Wins

April 23, 2020 by Annette Simmons Leave a Comment

Storytelling Moral Survival System: Part eight (templates)

South Park writers Trey Parker and Matt Stone popularized the application of “And, But, Therefore” as good storytelling advice.

South Park writers Trey Parker and Matt Stone popularized the application of “And, But, Therefore” as good storytelling advice.

“And, But, Therefore”

Contrast is key to the structure of any story. For example, characters with a recognizable internal struggle provide the most engaging points of reference. It is actually easier to visualize a CEO who takes paternity leave, a hero who stutters, or an enemy who loves dogs than it is to imagine a one-dimensional character. Contrast in storytelling reflects the effect of painting red and yellow stripes side by side. The contrast makes both elements more vivid than they are when seen in isolation. The “and/but/therefore” template is a good way to keep contrast lively. In this framework, rather than progressing smoothly through narrative with only “ands,” a storyteller is encouraged to revisit conflict and consequences in the form of “buts” and “therefores.” For instance the character who hears a hotel’s fire alarm and grabs his briefcase and runs outside is less memorable than a character who hears the alarm and runs outside, but then remembers he left his briefcase containing $50,000 and therefore runs back into the smoke-filled lobby.

South Park writers Trey Parker and Matt Stone popularized the application of “And, But, Therefore” as good storytelling advice. This template reminds us to refresh a story’s core contrast by illustrating wins and setbacks that make the core conflict feel more tangible. Parker and Stone suggest “whenever you can replace your ‘ands’ with ‘buts’ or ‘therefores’, it makes for better writing.” These writers know deep in their bones how to keep a cartoon TV series interesting. And this is great storytelling advice as long as we don’t invent random conflicts. Adding random “buts” unrelated to a story’s core conflict dilutes the realism and coherence of a story in ways that shift perceptions away from the true conflict.

Good storytellers come to understand that the “but’s” and “therefores” they seek already exist and only need to be emphasized. Margaret Atwood even demonstrates how “and, but, and therefore” can exist within a single sentence in her book, A Handmaids Tale: “Ignoring isn’t the same as ignorance, you have to work at it.”  Which I take to mean that you may force me to say you didn’t hurt me, but you did hurt me, therefore I work to hide my hurt as well as work to endure the hurt.

Of course, the whole book goes into much greater detail about the price women pay when we remain silent about injustice. A Handmaids Tale vividly imagines the long-term emotional and physical consequences of silence in a way that makes the long-term consequences of “therefore I stay silent” demonstrably worse than the short-term consequences of the implicit alternative: “therefore I speak up.” Atwood affirms that every event and character in A Handmaid’s Tale was based on real people and real events. “If I was to create an imaginary garden I wanted the toads in it to be real. One of my rules was that I would not put any events into the book that had not already happened.” Storytellers like Atwood understand that the best way to ensure a narrative feels real is to base it on reality, and reality is full of contrasts.

Excerpt from Chapter 11, 3rd ed. of The Story Factor (2019)  AUDIBLE VERSION HERE

Filed Under: Stories Help, Uncategorized Tagged With: And, Annette Simmons, business storytelling, But, communication, leadership, narrative, storytelling, The Story Factor, Therefore, Whoever Tells the Best Story Wins

April 21, 2020 by Annette Simmons 2 Comments

Storytelling Moral Survival System: Part six

Photo by cjphoto.com

Photo by cjphoto.com

Defining Story as a Significant Emotional Experience

My current teaching definition of story is:

“the narration of a significant emotional experience that feels meaningful to both teller and listener.”

Teaching non-professional storytellers helped me realize that it is much easier for them to find a great story if I ask them to think about a significant emotional experience from real life or existing literary and film stories. I never suggest a beginner try to construct a story from scratch. The best storytelling advice in the world will not help you describe something you have never experienced. Coming from the arts, I favor Tolstoy’s perspective that the role of any art (including story) is to communicate emotion. He wrote that art begins when a person, “with the purpose of communicating to other people a feeling he once experienced, calls it up again within himself and expresses it with certain external signs.” (By external signs he means dance, images, and other arts, including storytelling.) I strongly believe the stories that resonate most with others always reflect experiences of truth and beauty that connect us to what Tolstoy calls the “oneness of life’s joys and sorrows.” In War and Peace, for instance, Tolstoy showcases the kind of extreme experiences that change people forever and how love changes the trajectory of our lives.

Once people learn to mine genuine memories of significant emotional experiences, they learn to recognize stories that ring true and represent the way life actually works, they learn how to avoid inventing stories that misrepresent or mislead. This isn’t new advice. This is the same advice that suggests writers write what they know. Creative storytellers may invent fantastical worlds to illustrate core truths but they don’t try to invent new core truths out of thin air. Unfortunately, some of the popular templates for storytelling don’t always prioritize this.

Excerpt from Chapter 11, 3rd ed. of The Story Factor (2019)  AUDIBLE VERSION HERE

Filed Under: Stories Help, Uncategorized Tagged With: Annette Simmons, business storytelling, communication, definition of storytelling, leadership, significant emotional experience, The Story Factor, true stories, Whoever Tells the Best Story Wins

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • …
  • 14
  • Next Page »

Storytelling 101

Ray, Rosa, Ted and me sharing dinner and stories.

Stories with a Moral Blueprint – part 8 of 8

May 14, 2020 8:43 am

  We need a Magic School for Storytellers Thirty years before J. K. Rowling created Harry Potter, Ursula Le Guin’s... Read more →

Posted in: Annette's Blog, Big T Truths
BIg T Truths make stories come alive.

Stories with a Moral Blueprint – part 7 of 8

May 13, 2020 7:37 am

  Truth in Storytelling When I wrote the first edition of The Story Factor twenty years ago, I began with the... Read more →

Posted in: Uncategorized
oz

Stories with a Moral Blueprint – part 6 of 8

May 12, 2020 6:48 am

The Moral Dilemmas of a Lion, a Scarecrow, and a Tin Man Frank Baum’s original introduction to The Wizard of... Read more →

Posted in: Annette's Blog, Big T Truths
We need trust to survive and thrive.

Stories with a Moral Blueprint – part 5 of 8

May 11, 2020 8:38 am

  Blueprints for Building Trust Learning to drive was fun until I hit the mailbox. I burst into tears, blaming... Read more →

Posted in: Annette's Blog, Big T Truths
"Believe in something, even if it means sacrificing everything."

Stories with a Moral Blueprint – Part 4 of 8

May 8, 2020 8:13 am

  Brand Stories: Trust Based on Trustworthy Behaviors Nike has employed corporate storytellers since the 1990s. Their decision to illustrate... Read more →

Posted in: Annette's Blog, Big T Truths

Subscribe to Annette's Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Like us on Facebook:

Like us on Facebook:

Contact Us

Group Process Consulting, LLC
phone: 318.861.9220
email: annette@annettesimmons.com
facebook: www.facebook.com/thestoryfactor

Group Process Consulting, LLC

Group Process Consulting provides keynotes, workshops and personal coaching to CEOs, senior executives, sales staff, fund-raisers – anyone who wants to use stories to motivate groups and/or individuals, via personal interactions or personally delivered presentations.

DIsclaimer, Safe Harbor & IP Notice

click here for details.
© Copyright 2021, Group Process Consulting, All Rights Reserved.
Based on the ·Executive Pro Theme/Genesis Framework by StudioPress · Built using WordPress · Log in