I recently purchased some Leaf Bags from bagcorpstore.com and used them for my daughters birthday party. They were great because they held a lot of trash and they were stiff so they could be filled easily and most importantly they looked way better than trash bags.

Just as a chef is attuned to the subtleties of flavor and trends in the culinary arts, a presentation coach is attuned to the subtleties of language and trends in the communication art. One trend I’ve noted recently is the expression, “Does that make sense?” often used by a speaker during a conversation — or a presenter during a presentation — to check whether the listener or audience has understood or appreciated what the speaker has just said. Unfortunately, the expression has two negative implications:

• Uncertainty on the part of the speaker about the accuracy or credibility of the content
• Doubt about the ability of the audience to comprehend or appreciate the content.

“Does that make sense?” has become so pervasive, it joins the ranks of fillers, empty words that surround and diminish meaningful words, just as weeds diminish the beauty of roses in a garden. Most speakers are unaware that they are using fillers, and most audiences don’t bother to think of their implications. The phrase has attained the frequency — and meaninglessness of:

• “You know…” as if to be sure the listener is paying attention
• “Like I said…” as if to say that the listener didn’t understand
• “Again…” as if to say that the listener didn’t get it the first time
• “I mean…” as if to say that the speaker is unsure of his/her own clarity
• “To be honest…” as if to say the speaker was not truthful earlier
• “I’m like…” the universal filler which says absolutely nothing

Responsible speakers or presenters, in their well-intentioned effort to satisfy their audience, have every right to check whether their material is getting through. However, instead of casting negativity on the content or the audience, all a speaker has to say is:
“Do you have any questions?”

While all of the preceding cast doubt on the competence of the presenter or the audience, another group of phrases and words casts doubt on the content itself:

• “Sort of”
• “Pretty much”
• “Kind of”
• “Basically”
• “Really”
• “Actually”
• “Anyway”

These, too, have taken on the frequency of fillers. Sometimes these words can have a purpose. Writer Maud Newton recently analyzed the late David Foster Wallace’s predilection for “qualifiers like ‘sort of’ and ‘pretty much.’” She deemed it a “subtle rhetorical strategy” to make a critical point and defuse it with irony. As a prime example, she cited the title of one of Wallace’s collected essays: “Certainly the End of Something or Other, One Would Sort of Have to Think.”

Presenters do not have the luxury of indulging in irony or — with all due respect — the literary talent to engage in such artful wordplay. Qualifying words lessen the importance and the value of the nouns and verbs they accompany. Those nouns and verbs represent the products, services, and actions of the business — the family jewels — that the presenter is pitching, and a presenter should not diminish their worth. Parents do not describe their children as “sort of cute.”

Instead, follow the advice of the Strunk and White classic, The Elements of Style: “Use definite, specific, concrete language.” To accomplish this you must diligently delete meaningless words and phrases from your speech, a task easier said than done due to their pervasiveness. One way to kick the habit is to capture the narrative of your next presentation with the voice record function on your smart phone, then play it back post mortem and listen to your own speaking pattern. (You’re in for a surprise in more ways than one.) You will have to repeat this process several times before you start correcting yourself, but do it you must.

I didn’t think Groupon’s business model was all that robust for the long term. Just to prove that I’m not a complete Grinch when it comes to Internet-based business models, let’s put the same test to Angie’s List — a members-only business review site that (unlike Yelp and TripAdvisor) charges membership fees. While the community of subscribers is smaller than some of its review-website brethren, 820,000 people have subscribed.

Two business-model elements set Angie’s List apart. First, rather than reviewing neighborhood spas or restaurants, members review “high cost of failure” segments — plumbers, roofers, contractors, and doctors. Membership creates value by providing subscribers with a greater sense of confidence when springing for a high-risk purchase. Second, Angie’s List has multiple sources of revenue to draw upon, including advertising revenue from highly rated providers. The Wall Street Journal reported that their sales were $59 million in 2010 and rose 40% in the first half of 2011, with the company reportedly heading toward an IPO in the near future.

So let’s apply my business model diagnostic (first published in the European Financial Review) to the Angie’s List business. It rates various business model elements on a seven-point scale.

The first question has to do with switching costs. Unlike Groupon, which is purely transactional, Angie’s List creates stickiness. Having paid for Angie’s network, a customer is unlikely to want to pay another network. Next up is whether the model is based on a single transaction or a series of transactions. Again, the Angie’s model is stronger because a customer is likely to use the service for more transactions, having paid the membership fee. Then we consider the user interface — again, Angie’s is stickier because, once a user has gotten accustomed to the site, it is easier to stay with it than to switch to a different advice provider. Then consider the benefits. The more optional a service is, the weaker the model. Here, the right issue to consider is that the categories Angie’s List reports on are not discretionary. Leaky roofs and hip replacements are not “nice to do”; they’re necessary. Then we look at network effects, and again the Angie’s model gets high marks: the more professionals are represented and the more customers score them, the more valuable the membership becomes. Next we question whether the customer has a one-time problem that gets solved, or whether it is ongoing. Again, the need for finding trusted professionals is likely to be ongoing. Finally, we look at whether the model builds a relationship. I would argue yes. A good experience creates trust. The model also changes the customer experience, and creates a platform others can use to accomplish their goals. And finally, the model is co-created, with users adding value to the views of other users.

So, even though Groupon and Angie’s List are both part of the recent crop of Internet darlings, my bet would be on Angie’s List. And no, I haven’t taken the plunge to join, but so far I haven’t needed to replace my roof either.