While I was sitting in the Software review with the Executive Leadership Team (ELT) this week, (is that name dropping or what?) I had a few moments where my mind wandered thinking about what makes for a good presentation, and what makes for good participation at these type of meetings. I don't want to pretend that I know the answers to these questions, but I do have a few observations, open for discussion.

Later this month I'll pass my one-year anniversary with Sun, and one of the things I continue to be amazed about at Sun is that what really matters most is what you can bring to the table. Of course there's politics, as in any human organization, but so much less than anywhere else I've worked, I still remain amazed a year later. I've seen someone dressed in orange monk's robes in the cafeteria, a general counsel in gorilla get-up, Amazon warrior princesses, and, well, you get the picture. At this ELT review, at least half the presenters, and half the ELT wore jeans. This would of course be standard gear at a start-up, but Sun is not a start-up, so it's refreshing to see that what you wear is not what determines your presentation success. A bit of start-up, and the innovation and gutsiness that represents, still sits in the spiritual core of Sun.

If you've taken a presentations course, you'd be dismayed at what kinds of slides the best presenters were using. Lots of numbers, no great graphics, etc. But the credibility with which they presented, and their ability to answer any question directly, honestly, non-defensively, and sometimes with "I don't know," set the tone for the subtle signs of acceptance by the audience. That made me think of a theory called idiosyncrasy credits (Hollander, 1958 -- and unbelievably not in Wikipedia) that looked at why we sometimes let people go beyond the common expectations of group behavior, including grooming, speaking ability, and other norms. Hollander thought this was because we give people who have demonstrated extraordinary competence extra credits to have these idiosyncrasies. That would explain why we are sometimes OK with Chris being late, a brilliant developer, but not as tolerant of Pat coming in late, if Pat is barely contributing to the work group. During the presentations this week, those people who walked in the room with a lot of known credibility got a chance to use some of their idiosyncrasy credits, while those who didn't have as many may have gone in the hole. Just a theory ... since I've felt in the hole at times as well ...

So what about being a participant? If you're essentially a guest, that's tough. Do you remain silent, and out of the way, in good guest form? I once heard Colin Powell speak at a conference about what it takes for people of color, women, and anyone who doesn't fit the typical norms to make it to the top of a Fortune 500 company. His perspective, speaking from my memory, was that every CEO deserves to have 6-7 qualified people to fill every job that comes close to surrounding him/her. So first off, you'd better be comfortable being on a plane for 6-7 hours with the CEO, because that's what they're thinking about you when they decide whether you belong in a close role. If you can't imagine being comfortable with the person at the top of your organization on that long plane ride, then maybe you should be looking somewhere else to move ahead. And secondly, you should bring a unique voice to the table. Otherwise, why do you belong there? So if you're silent, how can you bring that unique voice? But don't overdo it. Heck if I know what the balance is ... but I'll let you know if I figure out a little bit more anytime soon.

Update -- starting taking the easiest Solaris course and I have to go a remedial tutor first (thank you, Charles!) since I didn't understand a number of terms on page 3 of the training. And page 1 was the title page. Bummer. That's what I get for having journalism/English, psychology, and business degrees. More to come ...