How to Be a Better Human - How to think fast and talk smart (w/ Matt Abrahams)

Episode Date: July 13, 2026

Matt Abrahams is a communication expert who teaches strategic communication at Stanford University, hosts the podcast Think Fast Talk Smart, and wrote the new book Think Faster, Talk Smarter. In this episode, he joins Chris to share his insights on mastering communication on the spot. From breaking down the four-step format on how to give an excellent speech to identifying which peers would be most effective as your test audience, Matt’s tips demonstrate the clues you can use to help you communicate better and deliver messages worth remembering.Featured guestFollow Matt Abrahams on Instagram, LinkedIn, and at https://mattabrahams.com/Connect with the teamFollow Chris on Instagram and at chrisduffycomedy.comBuy Chris’ book, Humor Me Watch How to Be a Better Human videos on YouTube at TEDPodsFollow TED on X, Instagram, Facebook, LinkedIn, and TikTokFor the full text transcript, visit go.ted.com/BHTranscripts Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This is how to be a better human. I'm your host, Chris Duffy. If I had to pick one skill that I think is the most important for romantic relationships, for friendships, for working, and honestly, for just being a good person overall, it would be how to communicate clearly. And I think that because I cannot tell you the amount of times that I have found myself frustrated and resentful and then realized it was because I didn't actually tell anyone else who was involved to the person or people what I was hoping for, what my expectations were,

what I was trying to do. And the people that I respect the most professionally, they're so often the ones who are able to articulate very clearly what they're going for and how they want to get there. You know what I'm talking about? I really hope that you do because it's not lost to me that it would be incredibly ironic for the introduction to an episode about how to communicate clearly

to be very unclear and poorly communicated. Now, regardless of how I'm doing, I can tell you I know one person who does not ever have any problems with communication. And that is our guest today, Matt Abrams. He is a lecturer on strategic communication at Stanford. He is the host of the Think Fast Talk Smart podcast. And he is the author of the new book, Think Faster, Talk Smarter. How to speak successfully when you're put on the spot.

Here's a clip from Matt's TED Talk. Think back to the last time you were put on the spot. Somebody asked you a question. They requested feedback. you had to make small talk, or maybe just introduce yourself. How did it feel? If you're like most people, it felt awkward, uncomfortable, and probably nerve-wracking. Planned communication, those presentations, the pitches, the meetings with agendas,

those are hard enough. But when we have to speak in the moment on the spot, that can be really tough. But the good news is, with a little point, preparation and practice, we can all get better. By changing the way we approach these situations, we can be more comfortable, more confident, and more compelling. Most of us, when we communicate, we want to do it right. We want to give the best answer, the most interesting feedback, the best small talk we can have. That pressure we put on ourselves can make it hard to do it well at all. To begin, there is no right way to communicate. There are better ways and worse ways,

but there is no one right way. So instead of looking for perfection, we need to focus elsewhere. Okay, in just a moment, we are going to talk a lot more with Matt about exactly where you should be focusing. But first, we're going to take a quick detour to the elsewhere that is podcast ads. We will be right back. Don't go anywhere. And we are back. We're talking today with Matt Abrams about how to communicate clearly. Hi, I'm Matt Abrams. I am passionate about communication.

I teach it. I write about it and think faster, talk smarter, and I host a podcast, Think Fast, Talk Smart. Matt, I'm so glad that you're on the show. I am a really big fan of your podcast and I loved your book. And because I loved your book, I have to ask you, if you were an onion and I peeled back the first three layers, what would I find? you are referring to an incredibly intense interview situation I had. I was interviewing for job when I was working in the corporate world and I made it to the round with the CEO and I walk into the room and there he was already. I mean, this is unheard of. I expected I'd be sitting there

twiddling my thumbs and all of that. And there he is. And the first question he asks is that question. And in that moment of panic in my mind, I immediately went for, for it. And I just told the truth. Unions make me cry. And I then told a story about Bambi and other things and how emotion is important to me. And I bring emotion to work. And sometimes that means I get really excited. And sometimes that means I get really frustrated. And he just smiled from ear to ear. And later I got to know him quite well. And I said, that was a weird response. He goes, I was so tired of people talking about, you know, some deep hidden thing inside them. He said, you were genuine and it was clear.

And that just reinforces how authenticity is important. And in these moments of spontaneity, we just have to commit and go for it. You know, as a person who writes and thinks and teaches communication, I think that hits on one of the really incredible parts that you highlight in your work, which is how highlighting our emotion, the actual real emotion we're feeling, not what we're supposed to feel, but like, I'm nervous, I'm embarrassed. I might start crying. That is the key to great communication often. And I think it's really the opposite of what a lot of people think great communication starts with. So can you tell us a little bit more about that? I think you hit on something, Chris, that's really important.

And it's about authenticity, and it's about really being who you are. And we are emotional beings and allowing that emotion to come out and to really express it and to embrace it. And in a world of AI, being human and expressing those emotions really, is what makes a difference. You know, AI blunts authenticity and we have an opportunity through our communication to really connect. At the end of the day, communication is all about connection and empathy. In fact, there are people who study evolutionary biology and they believe communication is simply a tool for empathy. It's operationalized empathy. And if that's the case, that's all about emotion and connection. Okay, so I really agree with you for sure on that. And I'm

actually surprised to hear you say that about AI. One, because you're a lecturer at Stanford, which is, you know, obviously like a very tech-centric place. And two, because on your website, you have like an AI mat that people can chat with and get help with their own speaking things. So it's interesting to hear that skepticism about AI because you're obviously not like a never AI person. No. You use it in your own work. Yeah. So to me, there's an empathy paradox here. And AI can actually really help us develop empathy. It can help us to better understand those we communicate with and better understand ourselves, which is really what that connection is all about. But if all we do is rely on AI to help us in the most challenging of our communication situations,

I have to lay somebody off at work, I have to give constructive feedback, and I just let the LLM tell me what to say, then I'm not actually engaging in that deep thought and feeling process that is part of being human. So there's this notion of empathy apathy that develops when using an AI. So AI tools can be incredibly helpful. As you said, I have an AI chat bot that a former student of mine created and people find value in it. In fact, my wife prefers talking to it sometimes over me because she says it actually listens better. So there is utility for AI for sure. I use it to help in the teaching I do and in the thinking I do. But we want to make sure that it doesn't blunt that fundamental thing that makes us unique in human, which is our empathy and ability to connect.

You're someone who I really respect your work and I really respect the way you think about these things. And you've been talking about how to connect better human to human for more than a decade, right? You've been way, way longer than... I think you're calling me old, but okay... I was trying. I actually stopped myself from saying decades because I didn't want to say that, but I will say decades now. I've been doing this for a while. Yes, I've earned these gray hairs, yes. And, you know, something that I think is interesting then is you go back to the really the basics of human-to-human connection, but then you're also willing to look at new technologies

and how they can influence it without losing the core of what really matters. You have a great story towards the end of your book that's about being a karate student and getting your black belt and how you're really surprised by what happened after you got your black belt and you talk to your karate teacher. Can you tell that that story? Yes. So I have been a martial artist for four decades. I'll give you the decades there. Okay, great. Now, if you give it, then it's fine. Okay, all right. Good. Yeah, you're not calling me out. No, I, and it's a very important part of who I am, and I've learned a lot about myself and others through that training. And getting your first black belt is a big deal. You work really hard for it. And my instructor, my

Sensei, after achieving my rank, I came to him and he said, you should be very proud. You worked very hard. And then he paused and said, and now let's get started. And that blew my mind because I thought I had just summited the mountain. And in some ways I did. I mean, getting there was important, but it's just the beginning. And I think this is a great metaphor for life. There's always learning to have and to accomplish more and to really reflect on where you've come, but where you can still go. And this is many decades later since that happened. And I truly, really appreciate it. And in fact, because of my experience, I have now in a position where I award people their black belts. And I say the same thing to them. And I pass down hopefully the lesson that

I learned that accomplishment is great, but there's always more to learn. And it takes that commitment and dedication to continue. I love that story. So I wanted you to share it just because I think people are going to love it. But the other reason why I'm to bring it up right now in this conversation is because it strikes me that with AI and LLMs, but also with public speaking, people often get so fixated on the product. It's not about like getting to the end of your toast. It's about how can you write the toast and through the toast understand why your relationship to these people that you're talking to is so important.

How can you give feedback in a way that really actually helps you to understand, helps the other person to understand? So much of your book is about the process, not just the. product, not just how do you get to the thing you say? Right. And one of the things that you have broken down in such an easy to understandable and usable way is these frameworks that you can use for that process. Yeah, well, we've all been victimized by really bad toast.

Toast, toast that go on too long or about the person giving the toast, not the person who's getting the toast or such insider knowledge that it's not understandable. That's the number one thing that I think was eye-opening for me about comedy is how short a time like five minutes is. You think like I have five minutes is so long I could say everything and then a five minute spot. You're like, wow, that went by way faster. And I think that happens at weddings a lot where people think I probably spoke for 90 seconds and it was 20 minutes. That's right. No, the perception of time morphs when you're on the spot. So in a moment, I want to share one of the frameworks, one of the structures I think works really well for giving toast. But I want to also mention

that in all communication, mindset and approach matters just as much as what you say. And so we really have to work on our anxiety and anxiety management, and I'm happy to share ideas about that. We have to think about how we frame the situation. Is this an opportunity, a threat to us? All of that matters so that we can actually deliver the best, whatever the communication is, in this case, a toast or tribute. And you're right.

We do a lot of toast and tributes. So a structure to me is nothing more than a framework, a beginning, a middle, in an end. So I don't just want to rattle off a whole bunch of things and take people on a journey of my discovery of what I'm saying while I'm saying it. Rather, what we want to do is we want to have a really focused offering. In many ways, a toast is a gift that you're giving not just to the person or people or team that you're giving the tribute to, but to everybody. So I have a very simple framework. It's called what, W-H-A-T. The W-H-A-T. Why are we here? Give people some context. Now, if you're at a

wedding, you don't have to spend that much time on it. People get it, right? But if I'm at an all-hands meeting and all of a sudden I'm going to give a tribute to a team that accomplished something, I have to give that context so people know I'm about to give the tribute to the team. So you start with the context, the why are we here? And then explain how you're connected to the group, to this event. If I'm up in front of people who some know me and some don't, I need to let those others know why I'm here. Now again, if it's the all hands meeting and I'm the boss, I don't have to say, and I'm the boss,

people get that. But if I'm at a wedding, many of the folks aren't going to know why me? Why am I the one speaking? So how are you connected to the event? And once you've done that, then the next piece is to share an anecdote or two, a quick story that demonstrates something of value that you want to share. It should highlight something that is emotional and approachable and available for everyone. You should test these out with other people so they can validate. We are not the best judges of what we say and how we say it.

So an anecdote or two. And then some kind of toast or thanks that comes in the end. and that's what the T stands for. So some way of wrapping it up. And if you follow that structure, the what structure, why are we here, how are you connected, anecdote or two, and then a thank or a toast at the end, it will keep you concise, clear, and memorable.

And I have to tell you, in my class, the very last thing I do in my strategic communication class at Stanford's Business School is we teach our students how to give a toast, and they give a toast to their learning. But I show a video, and the reason I bring this up is it's a comedian, it's John Stewart, many, many years ago, and I'm taking us back to when Brombrose, Barack Obama was president. Each year the president gets to give these awards to people in the arts.

And that particular year, he gave it to Bruce Springsteen, among others. And he had John Stewart, or John Stewart was the person giving honor and homage to Bruce Springsteen. And obviously, they have a connection. They're from New Jersey, all of this. It is quite possibly the best toast I have ever seen. And I encourage everybody to find it online. But it does exactly this. It follows this structure to the tea. Yes, it's funny. Yes, it's poignant. And it really gives people a good idea of what a good toast and tribute is. I love that. And I think one of the reasons I think the what framework is so fantastic is because when I've seen toasts or tributes go wrong, the number one way they go wrong is that they lose the heart. I just think there are so few opportunities in our lives

where you get to just genuinely and emotionally and earnestly tell someone in front of a crowd how much you care about them and love them, that to waste that opportunity on like a bit feels such a, like, such a squandering on an opportunity. So I love that if you have a really funny, silly anecdote, you still are opening and closing with why you care about this person. Exactly right. And if you can take people from a place of humor and elation and also say something very poignant, that emotional shift also makes it more impactful. If all I do is tell jokes or if all I do is be emotionally poignant, that people haven't experienced there. But if you can traverse a moment, those really makes a big difference.

What are the most common mistakes that people make? It sounds like one of them is just timing, like going on for too long. But what are the other ways then which people mess this up? So I think the biggest difference is accessibility, right? How available is what I'm saying to everybody? Am I tapping into something that people can connect to? I don't have to have been in your elementary school class to understand the awkwardness that this anecdote has.

But if I get really detailed in things and I get lost, then I'm missing out and I'm excluding people. We don't like to be excluded. And a lot of the accessibility issues that I see are people are excluding folks from the audience.

They're talking about experiences or using terminology that people just don't get. Now, the ones who do appreciate it really enjoy it and the rest don't. So you really want to be as open as possible. And that to me is probably the single biggest differentiator between an okay toast and a really good toast is can everybody appreciate it.

So when I am thinking about how to test my toast or my anecdote against another person, how do I pick that person? Who's the right person to test my anecdote against? I think everybody should in their lives have a couple different, people who fulfill a couple different roles for you. There should be the person who is supportive beyond belief, right? They're going to be the person who when you have a bad day and you just need to vent, they're going to be there for you. And you need the person who's going to be your ideation buddy,

the person who's going to help you think through things and challenge you when needed but also support you. And then you need the person who's the devil's advocate, the person who is just, you know, they're going to question you. When I was in graduate school, there was this woman who we were good friends, we got along great, but she saw the world almost directly opposite from me. And at first it was frustrating as heck. But over time, I came to really appreciate it because it made me a better person. My thoughts and ideas were better because of the challenge. And so I think if you can identify those three people

or those people fulfilling those three roles, those are the people you go to. Go to the person who's going to say, yeah, that's great. I really see how you're pulling out the best parts of yourself and go to the person who's devil's advocate and saying nobody's going to understand that or everybody else is going to talk about that.

And that's how you get better. What do you do if one person says, this is fantastic? Another person goes, this is terrible. Well, let me ask you this. I assume you test your jokes out with people. what do you do? And somebody says, oh, that's the funniest thing I've ever heard. And somebody else says, I didn't even get it. I think what you do, I mean, I'll answer the question. I'd like to hear you answer it, too,

is I think you think about it. And you say, why is there this tension? What could I do to bring it so that they both agree or am I comfortable with them not agreeing? Maybe that's okay. Maybe I want to leave it out there where not everybody likes it or gets it. But at least it's a conscious choice. At the end of the day, Chris, I tell all my students, all the people I coach, my whole job is to turn habits, into choices. Most of us just communicate out of habit. And I just want people to make different choices or at least consider the choices before them. Okay, we're going to take a quick break to present you with some choices in the form of podcast advertisements. We'll be right back. And we are back. We've talked about like making toasts and giving positive feedback,

but I think the stakes are even higher when you are perhaps giving a back. And, bad information. Like you said, you're announcing a round of layoffs or you are apologizing because you did something wrong. These are things that you talk about in your book as well. So how do you think about communication in the same way in those kinds of negative or more loaded situations? And how do you think about it differently? The fundamental principles apply to both positive negative situations. It's really about being other focused and appreciating what's going on. Often in these times of apologies or constructive feedback, emotion, negative emotion, looms large, and we do have to think about that

and what that means. To ignore the emotion is to work against yourself. So we have to be mindful of that. But in both of those circumstances, you really need to think about what's most important for the other in this moment. And how can I best articulate the information so that they benefit and the relationship will continue. If we knew we weren't going to interact with these people again, then we would feel much differently about how we give that information. So let's take constructive feedback first. You know, I always talk about it's both approach and messaging. When it comes to approach, I like to see constructive feedback is a problem to be solved. One of my colleagues at Stanford's business school, her name's Michelle Gelfin, she's amazing studies conflict. She likes to say we have to

mind our metaphors, the way we approach communication, the way we see it affects how we have it. So if in a negotiation I see it as a battle, that affects how I'm going to approach it, then if I see it as a dance, right? So I see constructive feedback as a problem to be solved, which means I have to invite you to see the problem the same way I do and invite you to help me solve it. If constructive feedback is about making an invitation, then that's going to affect how I approach it versus I'm a teacher and my job is to teach you how to do something right. I'm going to approach it very differently. So to me, constructive feedback is finding the right way to make an invitation that doesn't

make the other person defensive. And I think the best way to do it, again, a structure that I have has, I call it the four eyes, because each step starts with the four eyes plus glasses, four eyes helps you see it more clearly. First is information. You have to have a level playing field. Here is what the feedback is about. So I have to be very clear. So when you're receiving the feedback, you know it's about this. It's not some generic thing.

Second, I have to talk about the impact of the behavior or lack of it on me. What does it mean for me? So I don't say you're always late. I say when you're late, I feel this way. Because sometimes you're being late, you might not think it has consequence. So I'm educating you. Third is the actual invitation. Here, what can we do to make sure you show up to the next meeting on time? That's an invitation. Or it could be an invitation. I need you. you to show up to the next meeting five minutes earlier. That's a declarative invitation. And then finally, our implications. What are the positive and negative consequences of you changing the behavior? So I might give constructive feedback like this. I might say, hey, Chris, this is the third time you've been more than five minutes late to our meeting. I feel you're not prioritizing this to the same level the rest of us are. What can we do to make sure you show up to the next meeting on time? Because if we're all together and we start on time, we'll get done sooner and get another really cool project. Information, impact, invitation, implication. So again, it's all about asking you to help

me solve this problem. So approach leads to the message. It also requires a level of like honesty and directness, right? Like you can't actually have a conversation where you're giving feedback if you are afraid to state the fact of you've been late three times. If you say, hey, you know, sometimes people have been kind of late and it's not always starting on time. That's a much weaker way of having the conversation and it's it's actually much less likely to help the other person or to lead to a real invitation. So you also have to be really clear and declarative about just the truth of this situation. Absolutely. And you need to be very sure what it is you want to get out of it. I have a I have a friend, a dear friend who he's a very tall person. He's like 6-8, has a really deep

voice. And his boss came up to him once and said, stop being so intimidating. I want you to think about that is constructive feedback. What does my friend do with that? It's not specific, right? There's nothing there. So you as a feedback giver, you need to think about what the real issue is. It turns out, you know, my friend came to me and said, oh my gosh, what do I do? And when he went back and talked to us, the problem was when my friend spoke, everybody would stop because he has such a big physical presence. And by the way, he's really smart and his contributions are really important. What the boss wanted was to make sure he heard from everybody else. So imagine if he would have gone to my friend and said, what can we do to make sure everybody else in our meetings feels comfortable

contributing? And now do you see how they can get to a real solution there? But we have to know what we want when we give constructive feedback and we have to be comfortable being vulnerable and at least sharing. Here's a problem I have. Help me solve it. And when you do that, you get to better solutions that both parties are willing to support. It seems like also that what you said about moderation being so hard. One of the things that makes moderation a little bit easier if it can be is if it's ahead of time. Because if you if you wait for people to speak and then you start saying actually here's how we're going to do things, it feels a little bit like an attack. Like, oh, the reason we only talk for 30 seconds is because I talk too long. I guess I was really boring everyone. Versus if you before anyone speaks, you say each person is going to speak for 30 seconds. You know, I live in Los Angeles and I work in the entertainment industry. And so often I'll go to an event that has a Q&A at the end. And the Q&As are so. frequently just people saying things. There's no cue. It's just a, hey, I'm here and here's a lot of A's. Yeah, a lot of A's. And I find that it's a dramatically different if the person who is hosting or moderating says some version of, we've all been at one where someone just talks for a long time, doesn't ask a question. So every question here should be a real question. It should be a short, answerable question or some version of that. You notice that afterwards people don't feel like they're personally attacked, but the questions are much, much better. So there's that expectation, says, up there. I think expectation setting is critical. And by the way, the best expectation setting I've ever had for, heard for a Q&A session, the person said, everything you say when you ask a question should end with a

question mark. If it ends with a period, you have not asked a question. And that does exactly what you're saying. Expectation setting is critical for communication. And we are not really good at it. I think the single best expectation setting tool that we have that nobody really uses is the calendar invite. Think about all the things you can do in advance of the meeting, the presentation, the pitch that could be put in the calendar invite. You could put the ground rules. You could put what the potential outcomes should be, what you want people to come prepared to discuss. You can catalyze and accelerate your communication by setting expectations in advance. But if you're in a situation where you're being interviewed or you're doing a Q&A or you're in the situation where

you're having to be like this, where people are going to ask you things and you're going to have to answer. And you don't know ahead of time. So you can't script. You have a framework ADD, ad. Yes. Yes. How does someone apply ad when they're in a Q&A situation? What is it? So again, I want to talk about pre-work, what we do in advance. The most counterintuitive thing in the work I do is that you can prepare to be spontaneous. There's a whole bunch of stuff we can do to prepare in the moment. Think of an athlete. They do lots of drills and they work out so that when they're in the game, they can respond. in the moment. And we can do the same in our communication. So if I know I'm going into an event where there are going to be questions or could be questions, I could think about what are some of the key themes and ideas I want to get across? And I can even think of some specific examples,

stories I want to tell, maybe some data I want to bring. A chef in a restaurant does not open up the refrigerator and take out the lettuce when you want a salad. Things are washed and pre-chopped and already, and they just assemble it. So we can do the same thing. Now, in the moment when the question comes in, I think to myself, oh, that's a question that relates to this theme. And I know I have a few things all ready to go. And that's where the ADD approach comes in for adding value. Again, it's a structure. Answer the question, give a detailed example, and explain the relevance. Why it's important. So answer, detailed example, describe the relevance. I've tried to demonstrate this in the answers to your questions and people can go back and listen and watch again and

say, oh, there, now I see it. But essentially, you give the the answer. Somebody had a question, you give the answer, and then you give a concrete detailed example of it. We remember, our brains are wired to remember concrete detail better than high-level gist, so it's a way of reinforcing. And then we have to explain the value that it brings so people can really understand it, they connect the dots. We assume that if I say something, you're going to figure out why that's relevant or important. The very first psychology professor I ever had in school said something that stuck with me all these years. He said, the funny thing about common sense is it's not so common.

You know, so just because I say this, dot one and dot two, you might not connect them the same way. So, for example, well, let's do this. Chris, I'm going to put you on the spot. Please, I love that. Imagine you're interviewing me for a job. Okay, so you're the hiring manager. I'm the employee.

Let's say you're interviewing me to be a professor of communication because that's why I would show up for this. What might be a reasonable, I know asking a comedian to ask questions to get dangerous. You don't want me to get too far off. That's a good framework. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So ask me a reasonable question to decide if I'm qualified to do the job that actually is my day job. What's a time when you were able to use your communication skills to achieve a positive result outside of the classroom?

So I'm a parent and there are lots of opportunities with kids to leverage communication to help them in whatever the situation they find themselves. give them guidance, have them avoid things. There was a time where one of my sons wanted to play football at a level that was above his skill level. And rather than saying, no, you can't do that, I asked a couple questions. Inquiry is a very valuable tool in communication. And so I asked him some questions that ultimately led him to the decision that it was not the right choice for him at that time.

If you were to hire me, I would bring those same skills of inquiry, of leveraging what I've learned in other areas of my life to help our students learn and grow in the way that they need to. The thing that always comes up with these frameworks is people are going to say, doesn't it feel like you're walking me through a framework? Well, when you know the framework, yeah, because you're looking for it. But if you don't know the framework, what do you think? I mean, I answered the question. You might remember, oh, Matt has two kids and one wanted to play football.

Okay, great. That makes me stand out versus the person you don't remember anything from. And you see that I have an understanding of what the job of a teacher really is, which is empowering students to make their own choices, right? So ADD helps you, again, just like a recipe, go through the steps so you can focus on what to say, not how to say it. To me, the reason why we teach essay writing like that is because when you actually get good at that, that actually is a very compelling way to present an idea. You just don't do it in the most obvious possible form. You make it a little more invisible. But having a structure to our ideas, it saves us from these rambling non-answers, which are the – that is the default. Right. Absolutely. Yeah, listing and itemizing.

Having a structure that is not overt can be really helpful. The example I use with my students, most people know Martin Luther King Jr.'s, I have a dream speech. Amazing speech. A lot of it was improvised in the moment. But it has a structure. There's a clear structure if you listen to it. It is a problem, solution, benefit speech. Just like an advertisement on TV. Most advertisements are problem, solution benefit. But in terms of his speech, it is covered up in great rhetorical devices, in passion, and storytelling. So you don't have to see the structure. to take advantage of the structure. It feels like people can get really into the frameworks and the plan, and then they can kind of miss the forest for the trees because they don't actually read the room. And you talk about how context really matters. You give a great example of how when you were teaching in a high school,

the difference in presenting the same material right before lunch versus when you're right after lunch. And so can you talk to us about how your class changed, even though it was the exact same class, when you were the last period before lunch and when you were the first period after lunch? So when I left high tech, I've always been passionate about teaching. I took a job teaching in high school because I had some really influential high school teachers, and I think that's a really critical period. And so I taught high school for two years. And I don't think my principal liked me very much because she gave me freshman right before lunch and right after lunch. And that's hard, right? right so right before lunch they've been going for four hours straight we only had a little small break in there so they're coming in exhausted and tired and then after lunch they've seen their friends they've had their caffeine their sugar they're bouncing off the walls and my job is to teach the same curriculum so you have to adjust to what you've got so i would and i hope nobody judges me as overly manipulative but when i would reconfigure my classroom situation context matters so i had them all sitting in a circle

It's really hard. You take 14-year-olds, 15-year-olds, and you put them in a circle where others can see them. They're very vigilant because they don't want to look bad. So we sat in a circle, and I cranked the air conditioning up just a little bit because when you're cold, it's hard to sleep. And then after lunch, everybody's in rows, heats on a little bit. Now, the idea, I mean, what this is showing is that context really matters and it's part of the communication. Let me give a really simple example. All of us can practice tonight when. when you go home and have a conversation with a loved one. Put your chairs facing each other. So both chairs directly face onto each other and have a conversation. And then move the chairs slightly, so they're at a 45 degree angle. So I'm not square onto you. I'm just off to the side. How does it feel?

Well, most of us will say it is much more intense when we're directly shoulders facing each other. That's something that is important and can matter. When I was a manager and I was working in the corporate world, again, I don't want people think I'm manipulative. But if I had a serious conversation, I would move the chairs so we were facing each other. So people knew, hey, this is serious without me having to say it. So how you use the context and what's happening in front of you matters. You know, if you, if you, you're in a company and you have a really important idea and you get your five minutes with the executive team, look at their calendars. Are you the last meeting after they've had five before you? Might that

impact how they feel about your communication, regardless of how great it is, maybe the best thing to do is to take the first meeting the next day. Context matters. People show up as a result of the context, and we often don't think about that. Last thing I'll say, Stanford has an amazing design school, D-School at Stanford, really creative people. In the classrooms, at the end of every class, the teacher has to put all the tables and chairs against the wall. They all have wheels and they all fold up. So the next teacher has to purposely come in and think about how do it, I want to use this space instead of having the room just set up the way it always is. That's lovely, because what that means is you have to think about the way the room is configured and how it's

going to impact what you want to do. We all need to be thinking about that. I think it is really the difference between an exceptional speaker and just an okay one is to understand what the audience is feeling or the potential for it. If the room is hot and you acknowledge that the room is hot, or if it's not changeable, at least you bring more energy so that then people have the energy. It also strikes me that in a personal way, one of the biggest things I had to unlearn in communication in my marriage was going into a tough conversation, having scripted both sides. Like I'd say, I want to talk to you about something that I'm really upset about. And in my head, it was like, and then you'll say this.

And then I'll say this. And then I'll say that. And this is why your argument isn't actually good. And then I wasn't actually listening to her. And also, she wasn't following my script and what she said. So then I was like, but that's okay. But I have this comeback. And you didn't actually, you said you're just listening in a thoughtful way instead of arguing

with me. So what do I do next? And it took a long time to kind of get into the zone of let me actually respond to what is happening versus what would be easier for me to plan for or what I would like to script my way into. Presence is critical in communication. I mean, again, if it's about connection, in order to connect, you have to be present. Now, there is value to planning, to thinking about things, just like an athlete has plays.

Doesn't mean the play is going to unfold the way you want it to, but it gives you a pattern to look out for. So it's important to plan. It's important to think through these things. It's when you get attached to them to the point that it's blinders, that it doesn't let you respond to what's happening, that really causes the problem. So seeing that, hey, I'm going to start this way, and I suspect she's going to respond this way. But if she doesn't, okay, I've thought through some ideas. Maybe I can get to my point in another way. I'm going to try to match her level of intensity and connection. That's important. And that's where the juice and the communication really comes from is that being present and knowing where you want to take it and being responsive to what the others give. So I think we all have to figure

that out with our close, anybody who's close in our lives. We figure out how to do that communication. It's so clear to me why people who have good ideas and meaningful things to contribute should become better at communicating. That's very obvious to me. But there is also a flip side, which is that often people who are dangerous and have bad ideas or are manipulative or abusive, oftentimes those people can be really good at communicating. how can we think about being maybe a little wary or at least aware of what people are saying even when they are great at communicating it?

I really appreciate this question because to me, communication and critical thinking are intimately linked. To be a good communicator is to think critically. To be a good critical thinker is to be able to communicate well. And to learn to communicate better is to become aware of what others do in their communication. And so we need to see and understand what's happening. How are they framing that? What kind of data and evidence are they using? I notice how they're going down this path and avoiding that other path.

This meta-awareness is really critical to all of our thinking. And in fact, the very first day on my strategic communication class, one of the foundational principles I tell my students is we're going to be developing meta-awareness, which requires us to not only focus on what we're doing, but to be able to observe what others are doing in their communication and understand or try to understand where it's coming from and where it could lead. So it's an awareness that causes us to step out of the moment while we're in it. And this is hard to do. But I think anybody who develops any kind of expertise has the ability to do this. So honing and developing that meta-awareness. And it starts with ourselves. You can develop

meta-awareness by reflecting. At the end of the day, at the end of an interaction, think, what worked, what didn't work. Train your brain to begin looking for what, it's not just I said the wrong thing. It's maybe I said the wrong thing because I didn't have lunch before I went into that meeting. So it's trying to figure these things out. I have a practice every night before I go to bed. I write down one thing that went really well in my communication that day and one thing that could get better. And at the end of every week, every Sunday, I spend a little bit of time reflecting on what worked what didn't, and I make a plan for the next week to work on one of those. I'm not saying I'm a great communicator, but I am a better communicator because I do that practice.

And that reflection, I believe, has helped me and will help others to have that meta-awareness. So we don't necessarily fall victim or prey to people who have malintent. And we can see what's going on and then make a better, more thoughtful decision about how we want to respond. Matt, this was such a pleasure. What an incredible episode. I really, I'm so glad that you made the time to be on the show. Thanks for being. Chris, thank you so much, and I really appreciated the insightful questions.

Okay, that is it for today's episode of How to Be a Better Human. Before I read the credits, we are in the middle of running a listener survey, and we really need more responses to get enough data to really dig in and have good ideas about what to do in the future of this show. We would love to hear what topics you think we should cover, what you think is working, what you think we could do better on. You can answer the short questions at BitBet. That's bitly slash BH survey 6.

That's Bitley slash BH Survey 6. Or there is a link that you can click right in the episode description. It should take you right there. Thank you so much. Again, that link is in the show description or it is Bitley, BH, Survey 6. It would make a huge difference and really help us to make the best show we possibly can, which is what we are trying to do. On to the credits.

Thank you so much for listening to this episode. Thank you to today's guest, Matt Abraham's. He hosts the podcast, Think Fast. Talk Smart and his new book is called Think Faster Talk Smarter. I am your host, Chris Duffy, and my new book is called Humor Me. You can find out about my book, my projects, and everything that I do online at chrisduffycom. This episode was put together by a team who communicated so clearly that this episode ended up actually being put together without clear communication.

That would not have happened. On the TED side, that's Daniela Baleigho, Ban Ban-Chang, Michelle Quint, Chloe Shasha Brooks, Valentina Bohanini, Laini Latt, Tansigasung Mennibong, and Tony L.A. and Joseph DeBryne. Ryan Lash is visually communicating with you right now through his video editing. And Matea Salas is fact-checking everything that has been said to make sure that it is not just clear, but also correct. That's a very important other thing for it to be. On the PRX side, they're making sure that you can hear this communication at all. And that is Morgan Flannery, Norgill, Patrick Grant, and Jocelyn Gonzalez. Thanks to you for listening. Please send this episode to

someone who you think would enjoy it. We will be back next week with even more How to Be a Better Human. Until then, take care.