What Can We Learn from Sanna Marin's Commencement Speech?

Finnish Prime Minister Sanna Marin was awarded an honorary doctorate from New York University and she delivered a speech at the university's commencement ceremony on Wednesday, May 17th. You can watch it here, and the text of the speech can be found here.

In Finland, many people have watched the speech and have been impressed by it. The speech has a few characteristics from which every speaker can learn and by applying them, deliver more impactful speeches in the future.

1?Effective structure

The speech follows a classic structure, which, in its simplicity, has proven to be effective. In the beginning of the speech, Marin tells that she has three pieces of advice for the audience:

You have the right to want things and to want things to change.

Wanting is not enough. To change things, you have to take over.?

You have to stop being afraid.

The majority of the speech delves into these three pieces of advice in more detail, and at the end of her speech, she briefly reiterates them.

The Roman orator and rhetoric teacher Cicero stated that in the beginning of a speech, the goodwill of the audience must be won over and they must be made attentive and receptive to learning something new. A traditional way to capture the audience's attention is precisely by briefly alluding to the main message at the start, without revealing everything just yet.

Similarly, the repetition of the main message at the end, enumeratio, is a fundamental aspect of classical rhetoric. Reiterating essential elements in a speech helps to solidify crucial points in the audience's memory.?

Dividing the main message of the speech into three guidelines also follows classical principles. Tricolon, or the "rule of three," is one of the most well-known and effective rhetorical devices that can be used in various ways.

For example, the entire speech can have a three-part structure. The body of the speech can be divided into three sections. Important words can be repeated three times. Essential paragraphs can end with three significant words, and so on.?

Marin's chosen structure works effectively in speeches where it is important to convey a specific informational message to the audience. Its downside can be perceived as formulaic, but that is not a good reason to refrain from using this excellent and straightforward structure – provided it is not used in every speech.

2 Keeping the audience engaged

Following speeches requires concentration. It is common for thoughts to wander, causing parts of the speech to be missed. Hence, a skilled speaker helps the audience stay engaged by providing subtle hints or explicitly stating what they are doing.?

Marin employs both approaches. At the beginning, she prompts the listeners to consider that the speech is a result of reflection: "My dear graduates, what can I say to you on this special day?"?

Shortly afterward, she directly states what she will do in her speech, clarifying to the audience what to expect: "I will now reflect on my own answers and share some thoughts to prepare you for when you are asked similar questions in the future."

She soon does the same in a slightly more elaborate manner: "I know you have already been lectured a lot, since you were able to graduate from this very special institution, but I thought I might add to that by offering just a few small insights more. This is why I want to give you three pieces of advice about change."

When transitioning to a new topic in her speech, Marin clearly communicates it to the listeners:

My first piece of advice is about wanting things to change.

My second piece of advice to you today is that it is also your responsibility to take over.?

My third piece of advice to you, dear graduates, is about how.

Marin guides the audience through her speech very clearly, and I believe all speakers can learn from this approach.

Are there any drawbacks to this method? One might argue that what is gained in clarity may be lost in poetic expression. Directing the listeners can make the speech slightly didactic. This may not necessarily be a problem, but if your goal is to create a memorable artistic masterpiece out of your speech, guide the listeners subtly and sparingly.

3 Personal example

Commencement speeches given at American universities form a distinct genre of speeches. Such speeches provide the speaker with ample freedom, and since the speakers are usually intriguing individuals, incorporating personal narratives in these speeches is desirable.

Marin speaks extensively about herself. She shares what she was asked when she was chosen as the Prime Minister. She derives her three pieces of advice from her own experiences. Throughout the speech, she provides various personal reasons behind her guidelines.

The personal element can be introduced in a speech without being overly revealing if the speaker finds it uncomfortable. In fact, this is precisely what Marin has done. Her references to personal experience remain quite general; there are no major personal disclosures in the speech.?

Nevertheless, the aspect of personal connection enhances the speech's appeal and is, in fact, essential in this particular speech. This characteristic of Marin's speech is one that other speakers should emulate.?

Of course, one must consider the genre and the context of the speech: how much and what kind of personal content is suitable for each speech. However, when autobiographical references are fitting, they should not be overly hesitant. People, in general, are interested in others and are eager to compare their own lives and thoughts with them.?

Marin's speech encompasses additional rhetorically noteworthy elements that deserve attention. One notable aspect is the speaker's determination: she appears to stand firmly behind her words. This determination reaches a point where the speaker urges the audience to choose their side in the struggle of values – there are no gray areas. This particular section of the speech has also attracted criticism from the Finnish audience, but leaders are often expected to make strong statements, and rhetorically many find them persuasive.

?

Inspire the listeners by instilling hope

Would I have done something differently in this speech? Admittedly, my following observation is somewhat subjective, but I would argue that the speech carried a rather demanding tone towards the individual.

[Y]ou need to want things to change for better.

These are challenges that need to be solved.?And there is no one else to do that, other than you.

All of these questions are battles of values. And we all must take a side in that battle. There is no middle ground.

This, dear graduates, is the present and the future. And it is your responsibility to make sure that the change is on the right track.

[T]here is no one else to do it but you.

Is it a problem to place demands on the listener? Not necessarily. One of the most intriguing speakers in recent years has been Greta Thunberg, and her speeches are highly demanding. Many people seem to find it important that someone takes the lead and provides clear instructions on how to act.

On the other hand, we have learned from various political campaigns that hope inspires and encourages people to move forward. A speech should strike the right balance between demands and obligations placed on the listeners and the prospect of hope: change is possible, a better future awaits us, you are not alone, we are doing this together.

This aspect was also present in Marin's speech, but it became apparent only towards the end of the speech:

I also want things to change but I cannot do it alone. I need you and others with me to make the world more equal, more sustainable and more just. I know I’m not alone with this thought. I know many of you want the same and together we can make it a reality. So now we just have to do it.

And even at the very end, an interesting tension remained between individual demands and collective efforts: "Together with others you can do anything and you must, because there is no one else to do it but you." So, together we can achieve anything – but on the other hand, no one else but you can do this.

Taking these observations into account, I would like to reiterate that, on the whole, Marin's speech was a valuable presentation from which all speakers can draw lessons. If every speech had such a well-thought-out structure, kept the listeners engaged from beginning to end, and the speaker dared to bring forth personal examples, the quality of (at least) Finnish speeches would take a significant leap forward.

(This article is the English version of the original Finnish-language post, which can be found on my blog.)