Archive for the ‘Politics and speaking’ Category

Are You the Authority?

September 25th, 2008 |4 comments

You are speaking to a prospective client. You are making your pitch for business. As part of your presentation you quote some figures to support your argument. The question is, ‘Do you quote the source of the figures or do you leave that bit out?’

What is the answer? Well that all depends. What are you trying to achieve? Are you setting yourself up as the expert or are you after another authority to back your argument.

Today I was working with Peter as he prepared his sales pitch for new business. He is an expert in trading commodities (iron, oil, wheat etc). During his presentation he said,

‘BHP tells us that in the last 10 years, China has used more steel than the U.S. has used in the past 100 years. You need to be in commodities to be part of the action.’

So should you quote the figures as coming from BHP or leave them off?

What is the effect of quoting BHP in the figures? Quoting BHP as the source will set them up as the expert. They will be the people with the information and you will be seen as ‘the messanger’ that knows the information. This puts you in a subordinate role and not the true authority.

To overcome this, we changed the sentence to read,

‘In the last 10 years, China has used more steel than the U.S. has used in the past 100 years. You need to be in commodities to be part of the action.’

The difference is subtle, but profound. Without the reference to BHP, Peter became the expert. He was no longer playing a subordinate role to BHP. Peter was now the one to be listened too and the centre of authority. If he is pressed on where the figures come from, he could state that the figures come from BHP. This would act to further reinforce his position.

Should this be the tactic that you use all the time? Certinally not. Once you have set yourself up as the expert, you can use other authorities to support your position. By using other authorities to support your stance as an authority you are strengthening your position. However, if you do it the other way around, you will be seen as trying to achieve your authority by riding on the coat tails of others.

What if you are not an expert at what you are trying to argue? What do you do then?

This is where you can draw on other authorities to establish your credibility (as opposed to authority). By stating what you believe and then having others support your position you gain vicarious authority. Alternatively, you can state how others support what you are saying. This authority will never be as strong as setting yourself up as ‘the’ authority, but it will be better than having no authority at all.

Do you agree?

Cheers

Darren

Speak Motivate and Lead: How Real Leaders inspire others to follow

www.executivespeaking.com.au


Obamas’ New Hampshire Concession Speech

July 21st, 2008 |1 comment

You might like this 4 minute video by Obama. He has some great speaking techniques that he uses well – very well. This is his New Hampshire Concession speech

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QS_-KSuyJE&hl=en&fs=1]

The first technique he uses well is Anaphora – repeating over and over again, “Yes we can.”  There is no doubt to what his message is. The repetition draws us in to his message.

He then Draws JFK and Dr Martin Luther King Jnr in as examples to support his argument. He does not dwell on them – just mentions them in passing – but he does it very well. This gives authority to what he is saying.

He then goes on to mention specific examples to drive his message home to the audience. He mentions the textile workers in Spartanburg, the Dish Washer in Las Vegas and the little girl going to the crumbling school in Dillon – as almost to mention them by name – This helps the audience connect with his message. It helps the audience become emotionally invested in what he has to say.

He also lets the audience pay their part in the speech (granted that they are all paying supporters – but they play their part well). He lets the audience contribute to his speech through cheering, chanting and clapping. He then draws of their energy and incorporates it into his speech. What would it be like if he said “Quiet – I want to say something”? Whilst we may never speaking to this type of chanting, letting the audience laugh or stop to think is just as important.

He then ends a concession speech with the power of someone who had won the primary. This shows absolute belief in his message and what he stands for.

Cheers

Darren Fleming

Speak Motivate and Lead; How Real Leaders inspire others to follow


Speak Motivate and Lead

July 4th, 2008 |no comments

Do you want to know how to influence others at work? The you need this book.

How to influence in today’s work place. The

complete guide to speaking as the Real Leader

you are.

 

Learn how to speak to your boss, your staff and your clients so they listen,

understand and then take action on what you say.

 

If you are a Section Manager, Sales Manager, or Chief Executive Officer, connecting with your audience and getting your message across is often a challenge. This power-packed e-book is the answer you have been looking for.

 

Here is what the Head of Psychology Services for the Australian Olympic Team (1992, 1996, 2000) and Business Psychologist Graham Winter had to say:

 

“Darren Fleming has created a simple reference guide to the tricky task of getting your message across in a way that doesn’t just inform but actually engages the audience.  The many useful tips will make it a valuable tool for the busy manager and team leader.”

 

Graham Winter, Consultant Psychologist and Director, Graham Winter Consulting.

Head of Psychology Services, Australian Olympic Team (1992, 1996, 2000)

Author of Think One Team, High Performance Leadership and The Business Athlete

Adelaide, Australia

 

In this e-book you will learn:

  • The 5 rules of PowerPoint that must be followed so you don’t send your audience to sleep
  • The 7 rules for Presenting in Boardrooms
  • How to control your nervousness when speaking
  • How to make every person in your audience feel as though you are speaking directly with them
  • How you can make any topic interesting – even statistics training can be interesting!
  • How to use your stories to connect with every person in the room
  • And much, much, much more.

 

Click here to get instant access to Speak Motivate and Lead: How Real Leaders inspire others to follow.

  

“Don’t be deceived by this seemingly thin book (of 34 pages)! It compresses many nuggets of solid speaking advice that will take you years to find in other public speaking literature. No fluff and straight to the point! Oh, and you will feel really good about yourself because you finally get to read a book in one sitting!”

 

Eric Feng,

Public Speaking Coach and Author of The FAQ Book of Public Speaking

Singapore

After reading this e-book you will know how to:

  • Press your audiences’ ‘hot-buttons’
  • Construct your message so people will want to listen
  • How to get the right mental focus for your next sales presentation
  • Connect with your audience in the most powerful way possible
  • Put forward a different opinion and have others buy into it
  • How to use stories to connect with others

And all this for just $17!!!

Here is what other speaker and business leaders have said about Speak Motivate and Lead:

  

“Effective and persuasive communication made easy. An insightful guide to motivating by speaking – a must for people who deal with people”

 

John Tindall

MLC Australia

Sydney, Australia

Click here to get instant access to Speak Motivate and Lead: How Real Leaders inspire others to follow.

In Speak, Motivate, & Lead, Darren Fleming offers a quick but effective look at many areas of public speaking. He includes examples from his personal coaching and speaking, which are effectively mixed with mini-case studies.

He also offers concrete solutions and methods to many speaking situations, including impromptu speaking, handling boardroom meetings, and appropriately tackling humour.

 

A quick read, Speak, Motivate, & Lead is an excellent resource to keep nearby to refer to again and again.

 

Rich Hopkins

Speaker – Author – Coach

Judged in the Top 100 Speakers in the World by Toastmasters International 5 times since 2002. Author of Win Place and Show

www.richhopkinsspeaks.com

 

At just $17 it is a great investment in your career.

Click here to get instant access to Speak Motivate and Lead: How Real Leaders inspire others to follow.

  

If you have to stand before any group and motivate them to follow your directions, you need to speak as a real Leader. This e-book will show you how to do that.

 

“The information is concise yet detailed with great examples that illustrate the fundamentals in presentation skills.”

 

Palmo Carpino

Applied Communications Inc

Alberta Canada

OK! Get the e-book now!


The Sales Pitch

June 2nd, 2008 |2 comments

If you want to win the business, you need to shine in front of the client!

It seems that to win business these days you have to be able to deliver a knock–out presentation to the client. And unfortunately it does not matter how good your product or service is, if you cann’t sell it and yourself in the presentation you wont win the business.

So what makes for a good sales pitch? Here are five key elements to consider.

  1. Cast Your Team.Do you have the right person in the right spot. Just as you would not put a salesman on-site to run a project, consider if it is best to have your leading project manager leading the sales presentation. While it will be essential to have their expertise when developing the presentation, consider if they will be able to sell your vision to the client. If they are not, replace them with someone who is. Then use the project managers skills on the day as the ‘expert’ on the technical issues.
  2. You are On Before You are On. From the moment you engage the client you are being judged. This is true for the day of the presentation as well. From the moment you leave your office to visit the client and make your pitch, you are being watched. When you pull up in the car park, are waiting in the reception and setting up your presentation you are being watched and judged. Act as though the client is with you always.
  3. Dress as They Expect You to Dress. Have you ever seen a politician in the outback talking to the locals? They usually have their shirt and tie on. This is the way that the locals expect to see their politicians, so this is the way that they dress. So how do you dress? Whilst I do not suggest that every person appears in a 3-piece suit, it is important that each person dresses for their role. If you are leading the presentation from a sales or ‘Company’ perspective it will probably be best to wear the suit. However, if you are the project manager you will probably be best suited to wearing a polo shirt and long pants to reflect your ‘hands on’ approach. Even if you never wear long pants on-site you will need to wear them for the pitch. Long pants show respect where short pants will not.
  4. Do You Need PowerPoint? If you consider that every company making a pitch will use PowerPoint, how will the client feel at the end of just 4 presentations? This is real Death by PowerPoint! To stand out from the crowd, construct a presentation that does not rely on PowerPoint. Use stories, word pictures and elicit emotions to get your message across. If you need to convey data intensive information then PowerPoint is fine, but just leave it at that. You want to stand out with your presentation, not become one of the herd.
  5. Remember it is About the Client.Even though you are there to sell yourself, the presentation is all about the client. Work out what they really want and then sell them that. If you are pitching for a $500,000 computer system upgrade, know what the customer wants … And I will guarantee you that they don’t want a new computer system! What they want faster, more reliable processing; they want systems that work together and they want to automate their processes. They don’t want a new computer system, they just know it’s the best way to get what they want.

Good luck with your next pitch!

Til next time,

Cheers

Darren Fleming

 


Arguing with Whiskey

March 17th, 2008 |no comments

Have you ever struggled with how to structure your message so you will get buy-in from your audience? If you are in a management position you will know what I mean. T0 truly get full buy-in from your audience, you need to get inside their heads and understand what they want and what they are thinking.

One of the greatest examples of understanding your audience comes from the 1933 Mississippi Lawmaker Noah ‘Soggy’ Sweat. During the debate about prohibition he was asked for his thougths on Whiskey. This is what he had to say:

If when you say whiskey you mean the devil’s brew, the poison scourge, the bloody monster, that defiles innocence, dethrones reason, destroys the home, creates misery and poverty, yea, literally takes the bread from the mouths of little children; if you mean the evil drink that topples the Christian man and woman from the pinnacle of righteous, gracious living into the bottomless pit of degradation, and despair, and shame and helplessness, and hopelessness, then certainly I am against it.

If when you say whiskey you mean the oil of conversation, the philosophic wine, the ale that is consumed when good fellows get together, that puts a song in their hearts and laughter on their lips, and the warm glow of contentment in their eyes; if you mean Christmas cheer; if you mean the stimulating drink that puts the spring in the old gentleman’s step on a frosty, crispy morning; if you mean the drink which enables a man to magnify his joy, and his happiness, and to forget, if only for a little while, life’s great tragedies, and heartaches, and sorrows; if you mean that drink, the sale of which pours into our treasuries untold millions of dollars, which are used to provide tender care for our little crippled children, our blind, our deaf, our dumb, our pitiful aged and infirm; to build highways and hospitals and schools, then certainly I am for it.

This is my position, and as always, I refuse to be compromised on matters of principle.

This is a classic example of how to structure your message to include certian parts of your audience.

The strength of this speech lies in the listeners opinion. For example, if you are against whiskey then you would love the first half of his speech. If you were for whiskey, then you would hold on to the second part of his speech. But the clever part is that the speech shows the strength of the opposing views. This helps to bring the two sides together.

How can you use this in the workplace?

If you are presenting an argument, consider the opposing sides view. This is often called playing the Devils Advocate. By understanding where you audience is positioned, you will be equipped to present an argument that they will accept and adopt.

‘Til next time.

Cheers

Darren Fleming – Australia’s public Speaking Coach

https://executivespeaking.com.au


Who is Frightened of Obamas Speaking Skills?

March 5th, 2008 |1 comment

Election time brings out the most unusual of campaign tactics. If your opposition is not bring skeletons out of the closet, they are trying to plant some in there.

But the current battle between Hillary and Obama seems to have found another angle to attack. Hillary is attacking Obamas strength. She is attacking his ability to stand and deliver a strong message that the people want to hear.

It is clear that Obama has great public speaking skills, and this (in part) has hurt Hillary. But why should this be seen as a target for attack? If he had great economic skills, or great military skills, would they be attacking him for that?

There is a clear reason why they have attacked Obamas great public speaking skills, and it is this: Great speakers are seen as great leaders. If you can stand at the front of the room and speak, you are automatically seen as a leader. Why? It’s because no-one else wants to stand up and speak. If you can confidently stand there, speak with composure and enunciate a clear message, you will automatically be seen as someone to follow. This is why the Hillary camp is so afraid of his speaking skills; they know that he is a better speaker than she is, and therefore more attractive to the swinging voters.

‘Til next time.

Cheers

Darren Fleming – Australia’s public Speaking Coach

https://executivespeaking.com.au


Kevin Rudd Vs. Obama

January 23rd, 2008 |no comments

There was a great article in the Sydney Morning Herald by Stephanie Peatling analysing the public speaking skills of the Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd with those of US Presidential Hopeful Barack Obama.  It’s a great article that highlights the different styles of speaking of recent Australian political leaders and compares them to Obama.  They are like chalk and cheese!

The full article can be found here.  I have also copied the full article below as I do not know for how long the link will work.

Obama offers hope for the art of speechmaking

Stephanie Peatling
January 21, 2008
Cast your mind back to election night. It’s not that long ago, not even two months. It’s hard, because to go there is to remember the speech Kevin Rudd gave as he claimed victory for the Labor Party after 11 grim years in Opposition.An occasion, one might think, for a rousing, stirring, passionate speech full of hope and optimism.Instead, there was a lengthy dissertation on the task ahead and a short, sharp reminder that even though the night was one for celebration it would be followed by an early morning of work – a none too subtle hint to staff not to let frivolity get in the way of a clear head.For months before that night Rudd had kept the media entertained with his frequent use of metaphors – the bridge too far, the fork in the road, the base camp of Everest. He is a far cry from the walking thesaurus that was Kim Beazley, a Labor leader who would never say “unquestioning underling” when “myrmidon” would do; would never use “wordy” when “prolix” could be dusted off; or “useless activity” when “boondoggle” was there for the taking.A press gallery favourite was “termagant”, which Beazley once hurled at Tony Abbott, who no doubt scurried to check its meaning (“an imaginary Muslim deity portrayed as a violent and overbearing character in medieval mystery plays”) before responding.

But although Beazley tossed out words not used by the average person for several decades, it was done with delight and love for language. He would never have told journalists he did not want the gathering of federal, state and territory leaders known as the Council of Australian Governments “to become a sort of dead horse”.

“I want it to be a workhorse, not a dead horse. I don’t want to whip it. I just want to stroke it gently … Just lately the poetry’s lacking. But my intention is to meet it regularly and actually turn it into a real workhorse of the Federation,” Rudd said in one of his first press conferences as Prime Minister.

John Howard ushered in a new era of no-frills speaking and there is not yet much evidence to suggest the new Prime Minister wants to return to the sweeping verbal landscapes of Paul Keating. Rudd’s use of language so far is functional and administrative. In English, at least. In Mandarin he seems to get a far more appreciative response.

Rudd does have a staffer whose job includes speechwriting but not someone whose only job is speechwriting. Keating had the lyrical Don Watson as his speechwriter. Before him went Graham Freudenberg, the great Labor speechwriter who wrote Arthur Calwell’s 1965 censure of the Vietnam War, Gough Whitlam’s “It’s Time” speech of 1972 and also wrote for Bob Hawke, Neville Wran, Barrie Unsworth, Simon Crean, Bob Carr and Sir William Deane.

Freudenberg wrote in his elegant autobiography, A Figure Of Speech, that his retirement at the age of 70 allowed him to take a new interest in the role of political language and speeches. He attributed much of his interest to George Bush, whose presidency, he wrote, is “being defined by the speeches and the phrase-making of his speechwriters”.“The United States seemed to have become a rhetocracy, ruled by professional wordsmiths: ‘axis of evil’, ‘war on terror’ and ‘shock and awe’ are all speechwriters’ phrases … Despite my professional admiration for the craftsmanship of Bush’s speeches, the whole process seemed to me an absurd and dangerous separation of rhetoric and emotion from substance, argument and reason.”Freudenberg goes on to cite a 2004 essay by the philosopher Raimond Gaita, who speculated that the running down of political language was due to the fundamental cynicism among voters, who, instead of seeing the possibilities for good in politics, saw only the chances for personal gain and self-protection.Maybe the language of Australian politics merely reflects the broader popular culture, with its Big Brother participants and Corey Worthingtons and seeming lack of room or desire for elegance and subtlety.

But maybe there is hope.

Thousands of Americans are responding to the speeches of Barack Obama, whose emotive use of language is propelling him towards the White House.

“Years from now, you’ll look back and you’ll say that this was the moment, this was the place where America remembered what it means to hope,” Obama told people gathered to hear him claim victory in the Iowa primary earlier this month.

“For many months, we’ve been teased, even derided, for talking about hope. But we always knew that hope is not blind optimism. It’s not ignoring the enormity of the task ahead or the roadblocks that stand in our path. It’s not sitting on the sidelines or shirking from a fight. Hope is that thing inside us that insists, despite all evidence to the contrary, that something better awaits us if we have the courage to reach for it, and to work for it, and to fight for it.”

If Americans can respond so enthusiastically to such flair there is no reason to doubt Australians would do the same.

All we need is for someone to start speaking.


Top Tips for Nailing that Speech

December 17th, 2007 |no comments

I came across this article on public speaking today.

It opens with a great point, if you want to make a speech, have something to say.  Too often people get up to speak because they feel they have too, or they simply want too.  This bores the audience!  (the classic example of this is the Boss that stands up at the Christmas party and goes on and on and on and on about nothing, all because he feels that he has to make a speech.  They’d be much better to say “Merry Christmas and have a good drink” and be out of there in 30 seconds than to crap on for half an hour!  Trust me, those at the party will appreciate it more.  After-all, what do you want to do at a Christmas party – listen to the boss go on, or have a drink and relax!

So here is the article.  It is well worth a read. http://www.forbes.com/home/entrepreneurs/2007/08/01/sun-microsystems-nokia-ent-sales-cx_ll_0801byb07_publicspeaking.html

Merry Christmas!

Cheers

Darren Fleming

https://executivespeaking.com.au


Howard might have lost, but he is still the better speaker

November 26th, 2007 |no comments

For the international readers, on Saturday night, Australia had a change of government.  While John Howard and his party leave office, we have lost  one of Australia’s greatest Orators.  I believe that his skills at the lectern are what kept him in power for so long.

So what was so good about Howard’s public speaking style?  Well have a look at his last public speech where he concedes defeat in the 2007 election.  Here are some points:

  1. Spoke without notes.  You gain enormous amounts of credibility when you can speak without notes.  Even in such an emotionally charged atmosphere as being kicked out of public office, Howard was able to speak off the top of his head.
  2. Great pace.  When Howard came to announce that he had spoken to Rudd, he spoke with great clarity and confidence.
  3. Projection.  Even though he was using microphones, Howard projected his voice to the whole room.  He has always used this technique to ensure that his voice fills the room.  This gives him power and power to his message.
  4. Audience interaction.  There were plenty of Howard support willing to express their undying love for him and kept interrupting his speech.  Howard was able to control them and quieten them down and not talk over the – though I think he wanted to.  This shows that he was in control of his stage and could handle what he was encountering.
  5. Showed a small amount of emotion.  While Howard would not like that he showed emotion on the night, when he announced that he would probably lose his seat, you could see the emotions build up.  While he kept the emotions under control, they were present enough for us to feel sympathy for him.  This small amount of sympathy helps us accept him and listen to his message.
  6. Did not care that he forgot something.  Did he forget?  Who knows, but there is a good chance that he did; after all, he had been PM for 11 years.  He was bound to forget something.  However, when he finished his message, he finished his message.  He did not come back for a second bite at the cherry.  This showed that he was in control of his message.  This added strength to what he had to say.
  7. Finally, he was gracious in Defeat.  Unlike Keating, Howard went out accepting the decision of the Australian people

How did Rudd fare?  Unfortunately not as well.  However he has not been at this for as  long as Howard was.  Where can Rudd improve?

  1. Body language:  Rudd seems to have very stiff body language and staged movements.  (The two hands opening out for the “new pages in Australian History”, and the hand over the shoulder for the fair go going out the back door). These have the affect of weakening his strength as a speaker and leader.
  2. Dull text.  Rudd has a great message, and that is partly why he was voted in.  However, it does not matter how good your message is if you cannot deliver it in a way that does not engage your audience to its fullest.  He should work on a more punchier sentence structure that will allow his message to be more easily integrated.
  3. Keep the rule of 3.  Keep examples to only 3 points.  There is something about only citing 3 examples to make your point.  Making 4 points is too many, and only 2 is not enough.  On occasions Rudd gave 4 and 5 examples and this slowed the flow of his speech.
  4. Add emphasis:  Rudd had a great line of, “Today many people voted Labor for the first time.  Today many people voted Labor for the first time in a long time.”  However, he was not able to emphasis that he has won back many of the swinging voters that have voted for Howard recently.  If he had added a pause for “……Today many people have voted labor for the first time………in a long time”, the Pause would have driven home the point that he has won back the disaffected voters.  When you pause you add emphasis!

However, there was one shinning light in is speech.  He positioned himself very well to achieve what he has plans to achieve.  He appealed to all interested parties, from wider the Australian community, Liberal voters, International Allies, trade unions and the State Govts.  By including these entities in his first speech, he brought the different factions and interest groups together, and after all, isn’t this what a leader has to do?

While Howard is certinally the better speaker, I look forward seeing Rudd improve and potetnially surpass Howard during his time in office!

Here is a link  to a BBC article that showcases both Rudd and Howard.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvK9zklvnXg

Til next time,

Cheers

Darren Fleming

Australian Public Speaking Courses


Election Communication

October 29th, 2007 |1 comment

With Australian Politics in Federal Election mode, I thought that it would be a good time to look at the communication style of our leaders John Howard and Kevin Rudd.

Firstly, I would like to say that I am not endorsing either side on this blog.  Rather, the entries here are to help voters see past the Politician to the message.  Further, these observations are made from my rare opportunities to see the leaders on the TV, or to hear the sound bites  on radio.

John Howard 

For the international readers, John Howard is our current Prime Minister, and has been in power for 11 years.

By all measures, John Howard is a great orator.  He has the ability to stand behind a lectern and deliver his message in a clear and concise way.  He rarely uses notes.  He is a confident speaker.  He has the ability to control his delivery in such a way as to engage us to listen.  He uses his rate of speaking, tone, and emotion in his voice to take control and keep control of a room.  He commands an awesome presence when speaking that tells us that we should listen and obey.  These skills have ensured that he has remained in control with no official threat to his position as the leader for 11 years.  Even during a recent party room challenge for his leadership, he was able to stare down any challengers.  He is a man who truly commands the lectern.

However, recently, there have been some chinks appearing in his armour.  During the “Great Debate” he seemed to become flustered when pressed on certain issues.  When Rudd put to him the points about Nuclear reactors, his speech became confused and he appeared to lose his train of thought.  He even went on to announce his own “education revolution” in his closing remarks – a point missed by the media! Today, when asked on radio, “Did Mr Turnbull ask you to sign up [to the Kyoto Protocol], Prime Minister?”, his response was, “We are not willing to be, look, I’m not talking about discussions inside the government. Forget it, you’re wasting your time asking me about that.”  This type of response is most out of character for Howard.

Kevin Rudd 

For the international readers, Kevin Rudd is the leader of the opposition party, and has been in the position just short of 12 months.

Rudd does not have the same commanding presence at the lectern as Howard.  However, this does not mean that he does not have the ability to match it with Howard.

Rudd is very controlled in his speech.  He does not lose his temper and is able to stick to his carefully developed responses as per the script. 

Rudd controls his presentations by speaking in a calm and constant manner that shows confidence and control.  When he is put on the spot, he bears his soul, and seems to say, “Well, what we have currently is not working.  Our plan is….”  This method of being open and honest (or at least appearing to be) is a strong way of building a connection with the audience.  He does not come across as the slick politician that has all the answers.  He espouses his vision and dream, and asks us to join him.  He does not have the same grumpy speech pattern that Beazley had, the arrogance of Latham nor the perpetual whingeing that Crean had.  This may be a factor as to why the electorate has taken to him so warmly!

As the election progresses, keep an eye on how their speaking styles change and give a glimpse into the pressures that both of the men are facing.

I’d be interested to get your thoughts on this. 

Cheers

Darren Fleming


Newer Entries »

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

0422 670 659

call now!

Make an Enquiry

Please contact me to discus how you can help our team

Get This!