A standing ovation, also known as a "standing o," is a type of audience recognition of a public performance in which audience members stand up and applaud, or clap their hands together, at the end of the performance to show their approval and enjoyment.
A standing ovation is a form of high praise and special appreciation from the audience for the performance. It frequently indicates that the audience would like an encore performance, or a repeat or additional performance at the conclusion of a concert or event.
Originally, the concept was attributed to an ancient Roman practice in which victorious returning military commanders would receive ovations or rejoicing from the populace.
A spontaneous standing ovation may occur prior to a performance in rare cases where a well-known performer is entering the stage. Such ovations may sometimes last until the performer expresses his or her appreciation to the audience through words of gratitude or gestures, at which point the applause usually fades and everyone returns to their seats. Psychology is divided on how long a standing ovation lasts and what causes one.
It is commonly assumed that a certain critical mass or minimum percentage of the audience must first stand and initiate the willingness of others to follow suit. This percentage has not been quantified, but what is most likely to compel an individual to participate in this audience participation process has been determined. According to psychology, when seeking approval from peers, a person is more likely to go along with the crowd. If an audience member is surrounded by people his own age who dress and look like him, he is more likely to leap to his feet and give a standing ovation.
Every executive wants to give speeches that impress their audiences, but the majority of corporate presentations are downright boring.
Here are three pointers to help you get over the hump and earn applause the next time you take the stage:
- Concentrate on the end result.
Rob Friedman, a former Eli Lilly speechwriter, warns that a presentation tied to specific outcomes will be ineffective.
That is why he advises against immediately scripting a speech. Instead, begin by answering the question, "What exactly am I attempting to achieve?" Is it, for example, to sell, boost morale, defend an organization, or provide a vision of the future?
Then, ask yourself, "What do I want my audience—employees, customers, investors, or the general public—to know, think, feel, or do?"
Only after you've decided on those can you decide on the information, arguments, and supporting elements that will help your speech achieve your goals.
For example, despite declining revenue during Friedman's final five years at Eli Lilly, the company wanted its communications to instill confidence in its employees.
"We focused our speeches on 'reasons to believe' in that future, such as a solid survival strategy and a pipeline of new Lilly medicines that would lead to future growth," Friedman says.
As a result, trust in senior leadership increased during the crisis.
- Make use of the power of numbers.
Statistics are particularly effective in speeches because they transform abstract ideas into something concrete and tangible.
In a 2010 TED talk, Sheryl Sandberg stated, "Women are not making it to the top of any profession anywhere in the world."
She backed up her claim with statistics showing that only nine of the world's 190 heads of state are women, and that women hold only 15% of corporate executive positions globally.
According to Friedman, the key is to find statistics that are most relevant to the argument at hand. "It's critical to be on the lookout for statistics that stand out—and that make your point precisely and powerfully."
He also emphasizes the importance of contextualizing the statistic to ensure that your audience understands the point you're making.
For example, if you say, "America's total health-care bill in 2014 was $3 billion," you might wonder if that's a high or low figure. However, if you follow up with, "That's more than the next ten biggest spenders combined—Japan, Germany, France, China, the United Kingdom, Italy, Canada, Brazil, Spain, and Australia," your audience will understand that the United States is an outlier among developed nations.
Analogies, like numbers, help us understand the world. "We make comparisons all the time to help us see the unfamiliar in new ways," Friedman says.
In presentations, analogies can be used in three ways. According to Friedman:
As an example. Analogies can be a fun and memorable way to say something that would otherwise be boring.
The quote "Life is like a box of chocolates" by Forrest Gump is a perfect example.
To convince "Analogy plays an important role in persuasion by stating a similarity between two things and then getting an audience to agree to something that may not be obvious," Friedman says.
He gives the following example: Dr. Lawrence Gage uses an analogy in a recent letter to The Wall Street Journal to counter the idea that we can prevent gun violence by effectively screening people with mental health problems. Gage claims that despite decades of research, cardiologists are still unable to prevent sudden cardiac death because many of those who die are not considered high risk.
"Similarly," Gage writes, "it is absurd to suggest that any conceivable set of 'common-sense' mental-health laws will identify, let alone meaningfully detain, shooters before they kill."
"Regardless of your feelings on the issue, you can see the technique's power," Friedman says. "If you agree with Gage's first point, it's difficult to disagree with his second."
To structure an entire speech. Malcom Gladwell once gave a TED talk titled "The Unheard Story of David and Goliath" in which he provided new insights into the famous biblical story.
Only in the last two lines of his speech did he offer the analogy's lesson: Gladwell concluded, "Giants are not as strong and powerful as they appear." "And sometimes the shepherd boy has a sling in his hand."
Ovations are also more common when people are confronted with new or novel positive experiences that require them to make somewhat ambiguous judgment decisions. Personal memories of how one should react in new social situations are regarded as more suspect than direct perception of events. Standing ovations are thus influenced by both the desire to conform to the crowd and the desire to show affection for performers or speakers on stage.
Because standing ovations are a type of group thinking that, to some extent, suspends moral judgment in the presence of group pressure, the performers on stage must recognize that what they are witnessing is often as much a desire for solidarity among audience members as it is a desire for solidarity among performers.
