Skills & Strategies to Structure & Moderate Any Panel Discussion

By Michael J. Jordan

BEIJING– I’m no expert on drones. Especially not on Swiss innovation. Or Chinese aviation regulations.

But I’m certainly a curious guy. I also love a good story. And I relish a communications challenge – aimed at a foreign audience. Plus, I have my own storytelling skills and strategies, which I collectively call The MJ Method. I apply it to nearly all my written and verbal communications, almost every day.

That’s why I recently agreed to serve as moderator of a panel discussion, hosted by the Embassy of Switzerland in Beijing. The panel event – part of the embassy’s Swiss Innovation Week 2019 – brought together experts from the frontlines of both the Swiss and Chinese drone industries, to discuss the emerging “drone economy” in each nation. Particularly, the regulations needed to nurture growth.

The Swiss organizers didn’t make my task any easier: Beyond my non-expertise, I had to juggle seven panelists, all non-native English-speakers – for an audience already familiar with drones.

However, to make a long story short, the event was hailed a great success. Along the way, I devised a new methodology, which I’d like to share here: a do-it-yourself guide for how even a non-expert can structure, prepare for, and carry out an expert-level panel event. For a foreign crowd, too. To illustrate my tips, I present them through the prism of this drone discussion. As a case-study.

*****

In the essay below, I’ll first describe how I applied my broader MJ Method to the specifics of panel-moderating; next, my batch of lessons-learned throughout this process. Namely, before an event, the need to: know your audience; become an “insta-expert” of the content; grasp the client’s core objective; structure panelists in “storytelling” fashion; and exert “quality control” over their material.

Then, once in front of our audience, how to “manage their expectations.” From there, become like an attentive interviewer: listen closely to each panelist; allow our curiosity to form relevant follow-up questions; jot a few notes to remind us of these queries; then pose them at opportune moments.

But be forewarned: while others there are free to daydream, for us it’s an intense intellectual challenge to remain so riveted – as I did, for two straight hours. That said, this isn’t rocket-science. The key to successful panel-moderation lies in our advanced preparation. For more, please read on.

*****

Whenever I’m about to write or say anything – for any audience – I view it as an opportunity for Strategic Communications and Effective Messaging. That means I should first think through my strategy, organize my thoughts, and hone my message … to justify all of my content-related decisions.

The process must begin with this: consider our target. Without that, we’ll fire blindly – and ineffectively. So, here’s my four-step formula, which I’ve shared with countless colleagues and students:

·       1) WHO exactly is my audience? Why are they my audience? Why would, or should, they read or listen? What can they learn from this? Or in what way can they benefit? Or else, why care?

·       2) WHAT exactly do I want to write (or say)? What point, or argument, do I make? What idea do I propose? What message should I deliver, directly to their heart, directly to their mind?

·       3) WHY exactly do I want to make this point or argument? Why exactly do I want to deliver this message? Why exactly would my audience find this point/argument/idea/message interesting? If not important? Or, ideally, both interesting AND important? To answer this pivotal question, here’s my filter: My audience should at least find my words interesting, because … WHY exactly? Finish this sentence. Let’s make our case for why we should even write (or say) this!

·       4) HOW exactly do I want to make this point or argument? How exactly do I want to propose this idea, or deliver my message? Supported by which facts, evidence, details, examples, anecdotes, insights, interviews, photos, graphs, etc.? Why exactly include those elements?

*****

With this strategy in mind, I met for lunch with the two Swiss Embassy staffers responsible for organizing the event. Corresponding online, I’d already pitched them a mini-budget that outlined why, for me, this gig would require two days’ worth of work. Including the time to moderate. They’d agreed.

I’d also already begun to read up on the topic, preparing for this first face-to-face meeting: material about the Swiss Innovation Week itself; its objective; its past activities; the range of events that would be held this time around; how my panel fit into that; the background of our invited panelists; etc.

Next, I read through a few reports about trends within the drone industry, globally, and the Swiss and Chinese drone industries, specifically. Some of this I’d surfed for myself, but I’d also asked the organizers to send me whatever content they considered most relevant. In collecting this material, I highlighted key points and jotted questions that popped to mind – and I might ask during the discussion.

With this advanced preparation, though, I didn’t aim to pass myself off as an “expert.” Instead, to at least be conversant on the issues with the organizers. (Later, with the audience, too, since I’d have to present some sweeping introduction to our event.) In fact, when we eventually met, they expressed appreciation that I was doing my “homework” – and approaching this gig with professionalism.

That said, I still didn’t know who exactly would be sitting in the audience; what exactly the Embassy’s objective was for this event; why exactly that was their objective; and so on. The staffers would explain that, fully, during our lunch meeting – which came two days before the actual event.

*****

For the sake of confidentiality, I won’t divulge too much about the strategic details or objectives. But broadly speaking, by the end of that lunch, I could fill in the gaps of my four-step formula:

·       1) Who exactly is our audience? An intimate crowd of about 30, from both Switzerland and China. Each person somehow affiliated with the drone industry or aviation. As the lead organizer jokingly put it: “In the room, you and I will know the least about drones.” When preparing for a more knowledgeable, rather than a general audience, I knew I’d have to prepare even more.

·       2) What exactly should we discuss? Not an overarching conversation about drones, or even the “drone economy.” More specifically: since the global drone industry is basically in its “infancy,” highlight the Swiss and Chinese experiences with industry regulations; test-zones; and the challenges to creating a regulatory system that protects the public while enabling innovation.

·       3) Why exactly discuss that? On a government-to-government level, share relevant knowledge with a partner. China could one day adopt “the Swiss drone-regulatory system, with Chinese characteristics” – and adapt it to “the Chinese regulatory system, with Swiss characteristics.” As for my filter: Our audience might find this interesting, because … In the world’s largest consumer market, sharing the Swiss experience might open the door to future economic opportunities.

·       4) How exactly to present these ideas? They threw me a curve. I was initially told five panelists – already a hefty number to juggle. (I managed four for the European Union Chamber of Commerce in China, and its panel on the China-US trade war.) Yet two more just agreed to attend. I suggested we present their expertise, and this entire topic, as an overarching story. Like, A World with Drones: how this fledgling industry is taking flight. Moreover, I’d introduce the drone as a symbol. As any new product, entering the market, it needs tests and rules, to strike a balance between protecting the public and enabling business to flourish. I’d make it a symbol of China, too: the drone industry opens a window onto the evolution of the world’s second-large economy.

*****

They liked this storytelling potential. But how to do it? How to bring it to life? How to make it flow logically, cohesively and comprehensively? First, we agreed to allocate roughly five minutes to each speaker, during which they’d present their expertise, experiences and insights. However, they should only present the sort of content that would be relevant (ie., clearly connected) to our central focus.

Moreover, it shouldn’t just be talk-talk-talk. We would offer each panelist a chance to illustrate their words with images: perhaps two or three compelling photos, and/or a 1- to 2-minute video.

Now, to further refine our focus, I pressed the organizers to explain why exactly each panelist was invited: What exactly is their “value-added” to the event? As we hammered that out, what also became clear was the order in which to arrange them: who should speak first, second, and so on.

By now, the three of us were on the same page about both the focus and the flow. The next obstacle: How to ensure that our seven speakers would also be on-board with our blue-print

This is where I injected the term “quality control.” When time is precious, we can’t leave too much to chance. I agreed to email each panelist, individually, to convey our precise plan for them.

*****

After that lunch, we were about 48 hours away from the actual panel discussion. As a professional courtesy, I wanted to give these panelists at least 36 hours to ponder my emailed guidance.

That night, I crafted a letter-template for all seven panelists, but personalized each: beyond introducing myself, and laying out our vision for the event, I specified how exactly they fit it – and how exactly they could contribute. For this part, I essentially copied-and-pasted the short justification that we’d hammered out over lunch, about each expert’s “value-added” to the event.

I imagined that each of the seven could easily present an hour-long PPT about their work, if they hadn’t already done so in the past. But to speak for 5-10 minutes, they’d need a guiding hand. (In fact, several told me later that they appreciated my guidance. They’d been wondering what exactly to say at the panel, so I brought them a bit of clarity – and some peace of mind.)

Besides, this individualized outreach was a human touch that helped personalize our relationship. Each had replied to my email, so when we actually met, face-to-face, we weren’t quite strangers. Not surprisingly, it made for a slightly warmer, more relaxed exchange during the discussion.

*****

As for the panel-event itself, it went about as smoothly as we’d hoped. I opened with my sweeping introduction, explaining the focus, as well as the broader symbolism. For the audience, I also “managed their expectations” – laying out how the discussion would unfold, from speaker to speaker. Plus, how they themselves could contribute: by noting questions of their own, to ask afterward.

Each of the panelists went on to speak for about 10 minutes, as I followed-up with short questions, to draw out more relevant details, analysis and anecdotes. Several panelists also deployed visuals, to enliven the talk. After 90 minutes from the experts, the audience peppered them with another 30 minutes’ worth of questions. A healthy balance, overall.

Afterward, I heard nothing but satisfaction from the hosts, the panelists, and the audience itself. I won’t relate all the praise, but the words of a top Swiss Embassy official were most gratifying: “The panel was well prepared, and the discussion very interesting.”

It reminded me of the keys to success: the need for advanced legwork, strategy and structure.

If you yourself are curious to learn more, feel free to contact me!