We heard a lot of positive and thought-provoking responses from our community and the public at large on GK founder Michael Chad Hoeppner’s article in TIME on The Lost Art of Eye Contact.

One particular response merited a more fulsome comment, and this blog piece is it! A responder brought up the topic of how eye contact varies for people with neurodivergence or with visual disabilities. And the specific question our reader asked was about autistic speakers needing to break eye contact in order to be more present in the crucial skill of active listening. So we thought this was a good chance to address both that specific example and also examine variation in communication more broadly (and post our response here).

We’re quite proud of the GK Training definition of Executive Presence, which is the same in all our curriculum: Executive Presence is YOU, when you are at your most other-focused. What that means is we don’t teach a one-size-fits all, normative ideal of presence. Presence is not a possession; it is not something you have, or don’t. It is something you do. It is the amalgamation of the behaviors humans naturally execute when they are at their least self-conscious and most other-focused. All the components of what you might call the “behaviors of confidence” are rooted in being other-focused: eye contact is to notice the other person; gestures are to illustrate your point for them; posture is necessary to allow room for breath to enable speech to reach them; enunciation is to sufficiently differentiate sounds to be understood; etc.

Eye contact is one physical manifestation of being other-focused, but there are many ways humans indicate other-focus.

For all these behaviors — including eye contact — what is relevant is not the comparison between a speaker and some idealized norm. What is relevant is the comparison between that speaker and that same speaker when they are communicating better or worse. In other words, don’t compare yourself to an archetype, compare yourself to yourself in different states.

In the neurodivergent example our reader brought up, the consistency, duration, and frequency of eye contact might be dramatically different from a neurotypical speaker. What to aim for then in terms of improvement is achieving the same ratio or patterns of specific behaviors that are present when the speaker is entirely engaged in the subject matter or the audience, rather than when the speaker is mired in self-consciousness, anxiety, or self-focus (as all of us are at times). If in that state of other-focus the speaker’s eye contact is 20/80 (20% of the time looking at the audience; 80% away) then that is the relevant baseline against which to evaluate.

What this pedagogical approach and viewpoint substantiates is that anyone can demonstrate executive presence, and presence will look dramatically or subtly different in different people. The idiosyncrasies of human communication are as nuanced and multitudinous as the ~8 billion humans that inhabit the planet.

Our hope is that this definition of presence is helpful and liberating in terms of considering how anyone can reach anyone else. We hold that hope at a macro level in all of the training we deliver around the world, and at a micro level in this single post.

Whenever possible, we endeavor to make this point in our teaching. But it’s an essential one and it’s always good to be reminded to do so, and we thank the reader for prompting us! As an example, in chapter 5 of Don’t Say Um: How to Communicate Effectively to Live a Better Life, author Michael Chad Hoeppner offers that all the exercises of the book may be adapted to the reader’s given circumstances. Here is that excerpt:

DIFFERENT STROKES FOR DIFFERENT FOLKS

The drills you are about to learn are physical, for all the reasons you now understand from the first five chapters of this book. Because physical bodies are different, various drills may be more or less feasible and more or less relevant to you than others. If some are not feasible for you, no matter! Others will be. Moreover, even the ones that don’t seem immediately feasible or relevant may be adjustable or adaptable. Apply the lessons and drills to whatever physical patterns define your life.

As an example, in Chapter 14 on stance and movement, I primarily teach the topics with an assumption of standing on two feet. If you use a wheelchair to move, it’s unlikely that you’ll relate to some of the descriptions of speakers who endlessly shift their weight or rock back and forth when presenting. But other aspects may still resonate. One example might be the principles of stillness and movement when onstage, in this case manifesting as a chair moving from one portion of the stage to another. Professors use the physical practice of “anchoring” when giving a lecture to symbolize the structure of a topic they’re exploring. They may discuss three specific components of a subject standing in three different parts of the lecture hall, respectively. By occupying these distinct locations, the professor helps their students retain the three-part structure of the subject area. Locating ideas in space like that is not limited to those who stand on two legs. The deliberate, methodical movement of a wheelchair across a stage can unlock the same dynamics that a similar move powered by bipedal locomotion can. So I encourage you to challenge yourself to apply the lessons and drills as broadly and creatively as possible.

For those who want to go deeper on the issue, chapter 12 of Hoeppner’s book Don’t Say Um is all about eye contact.