Stephan covers personal finance, business, and economics at NPR. You can hear him frequently on All Things Considered and The Indicator from Planet Money.

He also performs at Faraway Theater in Birmingham, AL., which is where we met.

In this episode we talk about his career in journalism and how he approaches writing for radio.

When he was studying journalism, he discovered the power of people’s voices.

It started when he listened to an episode on Radiolab called “Falling.” In it, there’s an interview between two people, Sarita and Simon, who broke up. The moment that struck Stephan was when Sarita shares that after her break up with Simon, she would walk by his restaurant. Because he had ‘face blindness’, he never recognized her. And you can hear him learn about her habit live (19:10 — 20:37) — his voice cracking, his quiet reflection.

Throughout his career, he has centered the protagonist’s voice in his reporting.

Putting people back into the data

One quality of someone’s voice is that it’s humanizing. In this episode, Stephan talks about this concept of re-humanizing data. Polls, stats, and surveys come from human beings. They’re about people.

We can get used to reporting numbers — 50k users, 900 responders, 1mm site visitors — and forget that they are real people with, as Morrissey said, “loves and hates and passions just like mine.”

Our job is to put life back into the figures so that our work is about the people we’re seeking to serve. One way to do this is to include the stories behind the numbers.

Writing Without is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Side bar - you haven’t listened to Planet Money?

In this episode, Stephan talks about NPR’s the Indicator and Planet Money.

If you haven’t listened to this show, it’s the best business podcast that does not feel like a business podcast.

I highly recommend listening to ‘Why Is The Milk In The Back Of The Store?’ and ‘The Fondue Conspiracy.’

What’s your favorite narrative podcast?

Kim is a professor at the Darden School of Business at the University of Virginia.

She was my professor at Darden and in my second year I was her research assistant.

One thing I’ve always appreciated about her was her practical advice. One of her strengths was bridging the gap between theory and practice.

She came into academia with a wealth of experience. She spent most of her career at Procter & Gamble, served as the general manager of the Breakfast Division for Aurora Foods, and was the CMO of David’s Bridal, the country’s leading bridal apparel retailer.

In addition to being a prolific academic researcher, she publishes regularly in Forbes. I’ve included some recommended articles at the end of this post.

In this episode, I talk to her about writing for different audiences, P&G’s writing culture, and dissecting writing.

Here are my top three take aways from my interview with her:

Writing Without is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Reverse-engineering writing:

When Kim started writing for academic journals and then mainstream publications like Forbes, she learned how to write in those distinct styles by mirroring the structure and tone of those articles.

She approached her writing by reverse-engineering what worked in those various publications. This is similar to this idea of ‘reading like a writer’, one of the core concepts that my wife Caroline talked about on her episode.

Once you discover the patterns or structures of writing you admire, you can add those techniques to your own writing.

Adapting to the audience’s preferred style:

It’s basic marketing, as Kim puts it. How you talk to one audience is not how you would talk to another audience. Yet we tend to have one approach – our style, what we know, what we like – and want people get on board with that.

Instead, to be able to reach and engage with a particular audience, you need to adapt to their preferred style.

Representing your thinking and your logic:

One of the parts I enjoyed hearing about was how P&G revered writing. As Kim shared about her time there, P&G were aware that stylized PowerPoint decks could influence decision making. They stripped out the noise of formatting or visuals from their One Page Reco so that the ideas would be the star of the show.

The logic needs to be there, plain enough to grasp in that small format.

Style cannot cover for faulty logic or no logic.

Hope you enjoy the episode.

Check out these articles to learn more about Kim’s research:

* The CMO Role is Broken. Here’s How to Fix It.

* Working At These Companies May Be Your Stepping Stone To CEO

* New Research Indicates CEO Perception Of CMO Performance Is Improving

Are there writers or journalists that you frequently draw inspiration from?

Brian Barrett is the Executive Editor at WIRED. He’s worked in journalism since 2006. We also do a monthly improv show at Faraway Theater in Birmingham, Alabama, called Pigeons.

In this episode, we talk about his career in journalism and his thoughts on reporting and managing journalists as the Executive Editor of WIRED.

If you write in your job, you can benefit from learning how journalists approach their work. Journalists write for a broad audience and have to relay facts in a logical and plain way.

One of the key stills you can practice as a writer is reading like one. Take an article you enjoyed and ask yourself:

* What are the choices this journalist makes?

* How does s/he convey information, even technical information?

* How does s/he bring in sources?

Then you begin to notice what you like and can incorporate those techniques into your style.

Writing Without is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Find good examples of journalists and emulate their style. If you don’t have a favorite journalist, try reading these two writers that I enjoy:

* Jason Gay, sports columnist at the Wall Street Journal. Here’s a great example of his work.

* David Brooks, opinion columnist at the New York Times. Start by reading this.

And check out Brian’s work!

What is the last best article you read?

Marshall is a freelance film journalist whose writings, interviews, and reviews appear in Slant Magazine, Decider, the Playlist, and other outlets.

He also has a newsletter that he’s been writing over 16 years called Marshall and the Movies. I highly recommend you subscribe to it and check out his monthly streaming recommendations (‘The Upstream’ and ‘The Downstream’).

In addition to that, he’s been working in marketing for over 10 years, including working at the ad agency Ogilvy in New York.

Thanks for reading Writing Without! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

We met in New York through my wife, Caroline, because they both went to Wake Forest together. He’s a delightful, affable human, so I was excited to interview him for this newsletter.

In this episode, we talk about journalism, covering films, marketing, and how his two careers intersect (a subject he has covered in his newsletter, too!).

Enjoy.

What is a passion of yours that you like to write about?

In this episode, she shares tips on how to tell a story that connects with your audience and your customers.

Key highlights include:

* The Platinum Rule: Give the audience what they want. To do that, you need to be a good listener, know what type of information resonates with them, and understand what their level of knowledge about the subject is. Do they like high-level information? Do they like all of the details? Are they industry experts?

* Making Slides Digestible: Random facts without context or sources are distracting for your audience and can work against your messaging. Helping your audience visualize your ideas by mocking it up can reduce their cognitive load.

Thanks for reading Writing Without! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Who is the best story teller you know at work? What do they do effectively?

Dr. Brodsky is a management professor at McCombs School of Business at The University of Texas at Austin. He is an expert on how technology affects how we work and communicate. He also has years of experience consulting and training organizations across the world such as PricewaterhouseCoopers, Amazon, Dell Technologies, Novo Nordisk, and GuideWell Connect.

In his book, he shares advice that helps you navigate workplace communication – whether you’re fully remote or in person.

We are all virtual communicators. We call each other over the phone or via Zoom, text, email, and IM. In fact, the average worker spends about five hours a day on email and ninety minutes IM’ing– on top of virtual calls.

We therefore need to know how best to use these tools.

I highly recommend this book. In fact, I have already encouraged many of my coworkers to read it and we’re doing a book club on it (I know, I know).

Thanks for reading Writing Without! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Here are my top 3 take aways from Ping:

I. Be explicit about expectations

So much of Dr. Brodsky’s book is about understanding each other’s perspectives (it’s the ‘P’ in the PING framework). However, we all struggle to understand where people are coming from and what’s on their mind.

This is evident, for example, when it comes to how quickly we think someone needs us to reply to their email. This is called email urgency bias.

We assume that when someone emails us, they expect a response sooner than they actually do. This keeps us tethered to our phones, constantly checking emails. We interrupt our tasks to respond to every new email right away.

However, in a lot of cases, the sender is fine with a response within a reasonable time frame.

One thing we can do to reduce this stress is to be explicit about our expectations.

As the sender, you can help by writing something like “If you could let me know by X date, I’d appreciate it” so that the recipient doesn’t feel like he/she has to reply back immediately.

Or you can talk to your manager and teammates about norms like:

* If you expect a quick answer, send me an IM instead of an email

* Or if I don’t respond to your email in 48 hours, feel free to follow up via chat or in email

Dr. Brodsky’s site has resources to help your team have open conversations about this.

While we’re on the subject of emails: we may worry about over communicating via email but quick replies like “Thanks for letting me know” are less harmful than no replies.

Dr Brodsky highlighted research that showed how under-communicating made leaders seem less qualified because they’re seen as less empathic.

A quick messages can show that you’re attentive and acknowledging the other person’s message.

II. Cameras off or on?

There has been plenty of articles and research about Zoom fatigue.

We know that one of the causes of that is that when we have a video of ourselves, we tend to look at what we’re doing. Our posture, our facial expressions, our backgrounds. It’s exhausting constantly reevaluating how one looks every few seconds.

One way to fix that is to turn our ‘self view’ off, so you’re not sucked into watching yourself.

While there is a place for cameras being on – it is helpful earlier on in a working relationship – there is less benefit for established relationships. When you’re already familiar with your coworkers, you don’t get any incremental value by switching your cameras on during meetings.

In the book, Dr. Brodsky shares one study that looked at audio-only vs video and found that there wasn’t much difference when there was already a history of working together.

If you are starting to get to know people, shorter one-on-one videocalls are going to be more effective for building a relationship and trust.

Interestingly, when it comes to virtual video calls, fake backgrounds (like a stylish hotel) worsened the first impressions as they seem less professional. Plants and book cases are good.

III. A better way to brainstorm

Dr. Brodsky shares research on how brainstorming in meetings is ultimately less effective, especially with three or more participants.

They tend to produce fewer ideas in general and fewer high-quality ideas.

There are a few reasons why:

* People get anchored to one idea and any subsequent comment is influenced by it, so these groups tend to get less surprising/innovative ideas.

* People can get self-conscious about throwing out ‘bad’ ideas in group settings, especially if they’re junior.

* Obviously, only one person can talk at a time so getting everyone to contribute a few ideas in a 30–45-minute meeting is challenging.

A more effective way is to brainstorm is to:

* Have people submit ideas independently (and anonymously).

* Collect everyone’s responses, scramble them up, and send them back to the group to rank.

* Select the top 5 ideas for the group to then discuss together.

The smaller the group, the better. Also, the more concentrated the list, the better.

Again, I recommend you check out Ping.

Enjoy the episode.

What is your email/IM/video call pet peeve?

I’m excited to share my first interview with you.

I will publish new interviews periodically. These episodes will feature experts and practicioners from various backgrounds. They all bring years of experience with writing and have insights that can help you sharpen your writing skills at work.

Who better to be my first guest than my wife, Caroline?

Thanks for reading Writing Without! This post is public so feel free to share it.

Caroline is an adjunct professor at Samford University in their core writing classes. She has also taught middle school and high school students.

We met at the Upright Citizens Brigade theater (famously) and she has helped me become a better writer — both in comedy and at work.

Episode highlights

In this episode, Caroline talks about:

* Efficiency culture: The reason we struggle with writing is that our culture is — and has been — obsessed with trying to maximize efficiencies in every area of our lives. Writing is, however, slow and often messy work.

* Time-bound writing: Set a defined time limit for when you need to start writing. You can use free writing to not get stuck when you’re doing rough drafts.

* Reading like a writer: To start honing your voice, look for inspirations in what you like to read (newspapers, magazine articles or non/fiction books) and study what attracts you to the way he or she writes.

It was a fun conversation so I hope you enjoy!

If you like this new format or if there is a topic you’d like to hear more about, let me know!