I find Otto's talk to be very compelling. His message is complex and often requires more than one listening to full understand. I would also recommend a period of reflection after listening to one of his lectures. I have heard him now on several occasions and his message is very consistent and I believe he deeply understands his framework. If you are looking for the gloss and glitz of a TED talk you won't find that with Otto.
Prof. Scharmer was speaking to an audience who is familiar with his Theory U, if you read first his book and then listen with your heart you will easily get everything☺
This lecture opens up our eyes to save Mother Earth and all beings by inner leadership by observing by paying attention to mind head and heart coordination.its very very essential to listen deeply and take we actions discarding "i"
I keep telling this to the presencing team. Turn the beam on yourself, join Toastmasters or Agora speakers and learn to craft and present the best story ever for your audience.
I'm surprised at just how unclear Otto seems to be when presenting. His constant use of the first person plural "we" is ambiguous and confusing. His presentation style seems as though he is making his talk up as he goes. His graphical aids are unhelpful as well. They demonstrate inconsistent and arbitrary labels applied to complex concepts, without any sort of clear communication of what is ultimately a simple message along the lines of "Be mindful, open your heart to perspective shifts, and try to take everyone involved into account." The talk lacks structure, and it is clear he didn't take the time to prepare that he should have given the subtlety of his subject matter. Compare this talk to Sean Carroll's talk "The Big Picture" and you will see that when the speaker has a cohesive understanding of their subject, and the ability to present a narrative that articulates it clearly, it makes a world of difference.
Scott, I see you point. Yes, Otto's talks are not sparkling like a Guy Kawasaki, Peter Diamandis or other. Yet, the underlying knowledge and learning foundation is not to be underrated. Keeping away from judging the presentation style, and seemingly lack of structure focusing on the facts that he is bringing across to the audience (in the room and on the Web watching the talk) in a non-judging and open way bring out the insights.
I find Otto's talk to be very compelling. His message is complex and often requires more than one listening to full understand. I would also recommend a period of reflection after listening to one of his lectures. I have heard him now on several occasions and his message is very consistent and I believe he deeply understands his framework. If you are looking for the gloss and glitz of a TED talk you won't find that with Otto.
Prof. Scharmer was speaking to an audience who is familiar with his Theory U, if you read first his book and then listen with your heart you will easily get everything☺
This lecture opens up our eyes to save Mother Earth and all beings by inner leadership by observing by paying attention to mind head and heart coordination.its very very essential to listen deeply and take we actions discarding "i"
I keep telling this to the presencing team. Turn the beam on yourself, join Toastmasters or Agora speakers and learn to craft and present the best story ever for your audience.
I am wondering if Mr. Scharmer is fully conntected and identified with what he is saying.
Me too, cause he used too much superficial descriptions. But, he seemed hit something big.
I'm surprised at just how unclear Otto seems to be when presenting. His constant use of the first person plural "we" is ambiguous and confusing. His presentation style seems as though he is making his talk up as he goes. His graphical aids are unhelpful as well. They demonstrate inconsistent and arbitrary labels applied to complex concepts, without any sort of clear communication of what is ultimately a simple message along the lines of "Be mindful, open your heart to perspective shifts, and try to take everyone involved into account."
The talk lacks structure, and it is clear he didn't take the time to prepare that he should have given the subtlety of his subject matter.
Compare this talk to Sean Carroll's talk "The Big Picture" and you will see that when the speaker has a cohesive understanding of their subject, and the ability to present a narrative that articulates it clearly, it makes a world of difference.
Scott, I see you point. Yes, Otto's talks are not sparkling like a Guy Kawasaki, Peter Diamandis or other. Yet, the underlying knowledge and learning foundation is not to be underrated.
Keeping away from judging the presentation style, and seemingly lack of structure focusing on the facts that he is bringing across to the audience (in the room and on the Web watching the talk) in a non-judging and open way bring out the insights.