3 ms·

The "Yes, And" technique is best when presenting as a team, e.g. for sales meeting or investment pitch. It supports what your colleague is saying even while y

The "Yes, And" technique is best when presenting as a team, e.g. for sales meeting or investment pitch. It supports what your colleague is saying even while you may need to make a correction. I've been automatically using this technique for years, since I have a performance and improv background. The rest of improv may not be as applicable, but performance sure does! The show must go on (despite unexpected setbacks or illness or personal feelings), how to speak in front of crowds (even while being ridiculed or ignored), being fully prepared through scripts and rehearsals until you embody the story you are trying to tell... Is an integral part of leading startups and I credit much of my success to that experience. If everyone on your team is fully embedded in the purpose and ethos of your story, than you can fill in for each other if someone drops a line or needs a stand-in. In a startup everyone is selling! And it will be much more authentic with this level of camaraderie and committment.

jdtbuchanan 7y ago
I agree this is a useful tactic when presenting if everyone is clear when to use it. However, I’ve seen the downside of this where a person answers the question then everyone else “yes, ands” until the answer is muddled or the team looks unprepared. I always go with the rule of thumb that unless the person who answered is so far off base that it materially changes the outcome it’s often better letting the answer go and moving on to the next.
- doublerebel 7y ago
  Completely agree. If everyone is "yes, and"-ing then it's clear the team is unprepared -- this would never happen in a professional performance! Better to cut losses and not come back out until better rehearsed. Anyone experienced with performing or speaking can immediately tell when the speaker doesn't know their lines/story.
gherkinnn 7y ago
I see its value when mostly in agreement. Keeps the flow going. But how does one do "yes, and ...", when the previous statement is clearly wrong? You either sound sarcastic or like a patronising twat. "It is snowing." "Yes, and I'll leave my sweater at home since it's rather warm outside."
- mntmoss 7y ago
  In an actual scene, you also have an underlying set of game rules guiding it which the actors are negotiating through. It is possible for the characters to disagree with each other if it's not blocking - it allows the scene to continue to develop instead of shutting it down. In this case, disagreement over the weather would become the focus of the action. "It is snowing." "Oh, what a kidder you are, Smith! Just look at the shorts I'm wearing, it's fun in the sun time." "Jones, my breath is visible. You are clearly on a different planet from me." "Well, as it so happens, I AM an alien!" pause for laughter -- And yes, there's a limit to the method when in a business setting. Business machinery is set up to grind out ugly, practical compromises and can't inject fantasy into the equation like that very often in the lower branches of the org, but it often benefits from this creativity when we're talking about executive leadership figuring out what the org needs to look like to succeed in the future.
  - nimblegorilla 7y ago
    > "It is snowing." > "Oh, what a kidder you are, Smith! Just look at the shorts I'm wearing, it's fun in the sun time." That’s almost a textbook example of the opposite of Yes And philosophy. Contradicting the reality established by another performer is called Negation. Disagreement within the YesAnd framework can be tricky to describe. A better example: “This sucks. It’s snowing” “Yes, and now we can finally go skiing. I’m so excited!”
- rdiddly 7y ago
  In improv, "Yes, and..." is kind of just the basics. It's to stop beginners from putting up a brick wall that kills the scene or forces someone to invent a whole new premise from whole cloth. That shit takes work on somebody's part and adds a ton of friction. You're supposed to add value, and not destroy value. ("Yes" stands for not-destroying; "and" stands for adding.) That doesn't necessarily mean agreeing all the time; in fact any half-decent dramatic scene had better involve conflict of some kind or it'll be boring. But you're supposed to find ways to do it within the reality of the scene, i.e. without negating the underlying premise. If the analogy is applicable to business at all, it's about accepting the "reality" of the place you've parachuted into. Part of that might be to start with the assumption that people are grownups who have real honest-to-god reasons for saying things. That level of respect for strangers seems appropriate, and a lost art in these days of the online echo chamber. Then your job stops being about "being right" and more about listening. This whole viewpoint seems to say it's more important to keep the "scene" going than to be right. Whereas in theatre you have the luxury of just declaring that yes indeed it IS snowing; in business it sounds like it would be more about figuring out why this person thinks it's snowing. After enough time immersed in their company culture you might see why, and you might even reluctantly agree with it. But you can "disagree without negating" by saying for example "Well I know it's probably not snowing in Cancún." In other words "When I worked at Blablacorp they had an excellent anti-snow system." Seems like maybe caution would be in order before saying anything like that though, as an outsider, because the obvious response is gonna be "Well this is YADDATRON, NOT BLABLACORP! At Yaddatron, it's goddamn snowing!!" Anyway, point is, you don't necessarily have to accept that it is snowing; sometimes just accepting that the person thinks it's snowing is enough to keep things moving along. I dunno, don't mind me, this is new to me (improv isn't, but this way of using it is), so to some degree I'm thinking by writing.

jdtbuchanan 7y ago

I agree this is a useful tactic when presenting if everyone is clear when to use it. However, I’ve seen the downside of this where a person answers the question then everyone else “yes, ands” until the answer is muddled or the team looks unprepared. I always go with the rule of thumb that unless the person who answered is so far off base that it materially changes the outcome it’s often better letting the answer go and moving on to the next.

doublerebel 7y ago
Completely agree. If everyone is "yes, and"-ing then it's clear the team is unprepared -- this would never happen in a professional performance! Better to cut losses and not come back out until better rehearsed. Anyone experienced with performing or speaking can immediately tell when the speaker doesn't know their lines/story.

gherkinnn 7y ago

I see its value when mostly in agreement. Keeps the flow going. But how does one do "yes, and ...", when the previous statement is clearly wrong? You either sound sarcastic or like a patronising twat. "It is snowing." "Yes, and I'll leave my sweater at home since it's rather warm outside."

mntmoss 7y ago
In an actual scene, you also have an underlying set of game rules guiding it which the actors are negotiating through. It is possible for the characters to disagree with each other if it's not blocking - it allows the scene to continue to develop instead of shutting it down. In this case, disagreement over the weather would become the focus of the action. "It is snowing." "Oh, what a kidder you are, Smith! Just look at the shorts I'm wearing, it's fun in the sun time." "Jones, my breath is visible. You are clearly on a different planet from me." "Well, as it so happens, I AM an alien!" pause for laughter -- And yes, there's a limit to the method when in a business setting. Business machinery is set up to grind out ugly, practical compromises and can't inject fantasy into the equation like that very often in the lower branches of the org, but it often benefits from this creativity when we're talking about executive leadership figuring out what the org needs to look like to succeed in the future.
- nimblegorilla 7y ago
  > "It is snowing." > "Oh, what a kidder you are, Smith! Just look at the shorts I'm wearing, it's fun in the sun time." That’s almost a textbook example of the opposite of Yes And philosophy. Contradicting the reality established by another performer is called Negation. Disagreement within the YesAnd framework can be tricky to describe. A better example: “This sucks. It’s snowing” “Yes, and now we can finally go skiing. I’m so excited!”
rdiddly 7y ago
In improv, "Yes, and..." is kind of just the basics. It's to stop beginners from putting up a brick wall that kills the scene or forces someone to invent a whole new premise from whole cloth. That shit takes work on somebody's part and adds a ton of friction. You're supposed to add value, and not destroy value. ("Yes" stands for not-destroying; "and" stands for adding.) That doesn't necessarily mean agreeing all the time; in fact any half-decent dramatic scene had better involve conflict of some kind or it'll be boring. But you're supposed to find ways to do it within the reality of the scene, i.e. without negating the underlying premise. If the analogy is applicable to business at all, it's about accepting the "reality" of the place you've parachuted into. Part of that might be to start with the assumption that people are grownups who have real honest-to-god reasons for saying things. That level of respect for strangers seems appropriate, and a lost art in these days of the online echo chamber. Then your job stops being about "being right" and more about listening. This whole viewpoint seems to say it's more important to keep the "scene" going than to be right. Whereas in theatre you have the luxury of just declaring that yes indeed it IS snowing; in business it sounds like it would be more about figuring out why this person thinks it's snowing. After enough time immersed in their company culture you might see why, and you might even reluctantly agree with it. But you can "disagree without negating" by saying for example "Well I know it's probably not snowing in Cancún." In other words "When I worked at Blablacorp they had an excellent anti-snow system." Seems like maybe caution would be in order before saying anything like that though, as an outsider, because the obvious response is gonna be "Well this is YADDATRON, NOT BLABLACORP! At Yaddatron, it's goddamn snowing!!" Anyway, point is, you don't necessarily have to accept that it is snowing; sometimes just accepting that the person thinks it's snowing is enough to keep things moving along. I dunno, don't mind me, this is new to me (improv isn't, but this way of using it is), so to some degree I'm thinking by writing.