I think I'm mainly concerned about the situations involving a speaker who can't be sure which course of action will bring about “the most constructive outcome with the least possible damage to players along the way.”

Extending the sports analogy further, I ask you to consider that an athlete makes their living by understanding every nuance of the way their body works and by spending a great deal of time conditioning it for peak performance. If someone this well attuned to the intricacies of their physical capabilities can't always be depended on to make an accurate decision, what chance does a mere presenter have?

I think I'm mainly concerned about the situations involving a speaker who can't be sure which course of action will bring about “the most constructive outcome with the least possible damage to players along the way.”

Extending the sports analogy further, I ask you to consider that an athlete makes their living by understanding every nuance of the way their body works and by spending a great deal of time conditioning it for peak performance. If someone this well attuned to the intricacies of their physical capabilities can't always be depended on to make an accurate decision, what chance does a mere presenter have?

I think I'm mainly concerned about the situations involving a speaker who can't be sure which course of action will bring about “the most constructive outcome with the least possible damage to players along the way.”

Extending the sports analogy further, I ask you to consider that an athlete makes their living by understanding every nuance of the way their body works and by spending a great deal of time conditioning it for peak performance. If someone this well attuned to the intricacies of their physical capabilities can't always be depended on to make an accurate decision, what chance does a mere presenter have?

Given a presentation when not at my best? Yes, but thankfully, most of the time it's not been quite so dramatic an experience as the architect you cited above (garbage can and all!).

I've known people who have presented right after hearing devastating family news, been handed their pink slip earlier that day, or learned something disturbing about the condition of the company that made their topic totally inappropriate.

I've been taught “the show must go on” unless it is so serious that proceeding would distract the audience from the subject at hand. I would say that if I were King, I'd try to decide which would results in the greatest distraction – allowing the speaker to continue, quickly finding a replacement, or postponing the session.

Just like all things in life, judgment calls are based on a minute-by-minute “playbook”. You strive for the most constructive outcome with the least possible damage to players along the way!

Nicely done article! Laura B.

You might not have been hallucinating. I think one of the things that makes it tough is that an attributes valuable to both high performance athletes and high performance speakers is a highly developed “can do” or even “do or die” attitude. Left to themselves, they will almost always make the call to to go in. That's why a team that is presenting needs to identify someone with enough power and common sense to both make the call and to make the decision stick.

Maybe it's possible for solo presenters to come up with a well thought out list of no-go situations that will help guide them to the right, not just lucky, decision. As much as it is possible, These no-go situations should be ones that can be measured accurately and objectively (i.e., I will not present if I have a fever of more than 103 degrees two hours before the presentation is scheduled to start).

I have to admit, committing even that one no-go rule to “paper” somehow makes me doubt how effective this tactic will be in actual practice.