As I get older, the types of movie characters I love change.
Do you find that?
Take Star Wars.
When I was a kid, I loved Han Solo. He was rebellious, popular, and charismatic.
He wasn’t everything that I was, but he was everything I admired. Everything I wanted to be.
Fast forward, and my preference has changed. Solo isn’t interesting to me any more.
Luke Skywalker in the new films is (old Luke, not young Luke).
He’s flawed, cynical, and disillusioned as to whether he can ultimately redeem himself from past failures.
Some of those parts I associate with, others I aspire to.
Why the change?
Which is why I gravitate towards him.
I’m not:
And that’s the power of empathy.
We have this ability to feel the emotions and distress of another person, even when they’re seemingly from another world.
And because I see enough in Luke’s emotions to identify with him, I lose myself in the film, rooting for him to get his desired outcome.
But there’s another critical aspect at play here too.
It’s why I don’t want to watch When a Monster Calls again.
Not for a while. I cried too much the first time.
I even cry if I hear the soundtrack on Spotify shuffle.
I’m not giving away any spoilers here, but if you have young children right now, When a Monster Calls will make you feel something.
It’s emotionally powerful.
But I doubt I’d have cried after watching the film in my mid-20s.
Because this movie is about a single mother suffering from terminal cancer and her young son's struggle in dealing with that.
I’m not single. I’m not a mother. I don’t have terminal cancer.
But being a parent and having three young sons was enough for the distress to resonate with me.
And because it resonates, I empathise.
Up to this point, you've built a story to resonate with your prospect.
They identify with the hero, the desired outcome, the monster, and the struggle.
We do the same in Act 4 but shift gears slightly.
We aimed to align the prospect with our thinking in the first three Acts.
You can’t skip this step. If our interpretations of the problem aren't aligned, they won’t consider what we have to offer.
You can’t sell the solution before the diagnosis.
But once we have sold the diagnosis in Acts 1 to 3, we can move to the solution in Act 4, and we’ll deliver it in a way that helps the audience empathise with your process of producing the desired outcome
Let’s continue with the example in previous emails.
In her TED talk, Zoë Karl-Waithaka is selling the following idea: How marketing could improve the lives of African farmers.
Here’s the fourth section of her presentation. The Process:
(I paraphrased some of the above for brevity).
Here’s the structure of this section:
Give us an example (Kenyan milk program) of someone like your hero (African farmers) who you helped to achieve a desired outcome (high consumption - high demand).
Then, in three steps, tell us your process for delivering the outcome. You’ll bring this thing to life and help your audience imagine themselves taking the steps to achieve this outcome.
At this stage, your prospect's pulse is rising. You’ve pulled them in. They feel like they believe your diagnosis and trust your solution. Now it’s a case of tying this all together, enticing them to take action.
That's what I cover in the nest article: Act 5 - Connecting the Dots
Want to become a thought leader?
Every 4 weeks, I publish deep dives into B2B thought leaders, breaking down the content strategy they used to go from unknown consultant to top tier personality.