Tommy Kramer - www.TommyKramer.net

Tommy Kramer has spent over 35 years in radio as an on-air talent, Programmer, and Talent Coach, and has worked with over 100 stations in all formats, specializing in coaching morning team shows. He was elected to the Texas Radio Hall of Fame in 2003.

Contact Tommy Kramer
Voice 972-956-0609
tommy@tommykramer.net

Coaching Tips

The oddest thing seems to be happening both on TV and in radio these days. The phony, insincere, pukey deejay delivery is rearing its ugly head ... (read more - Tip #1)

A lot of Program Directors, in trying to coach an Air Talent, jump too quickly to the second phase of coaching -- getting an aircheck, playing samples of "things done wrong," and making the process an uneasy one for the Talent right off the bat. No "foreplay." (read more - Tip #2)

Think of how many times you’ve heard an Air Talent say--more often than not, with the sound of rustling paper or a page turning in the background--"I was reading an article in this magazine yesterday," or "I saw in the paper this morning that...." My problem with this sort of thing is ... (read more - Tip #3)

I once put up a sign on the Control Room door that said: "I just got into town. I got into the car, turned the radio on, and hit the 'scan' button. It landed on your station. I don't know what station it is, what the format is, what the dial position is, or who you are. You have thirty seconds." I base everything I coach on "first time" listening (read more - Tip #4)

You hear often that someone is "funny." "He's so funny." "I love to listen to his show because it's funny." But is it "funny," or is it "fun" that we're talking about? There is a difference, from a performance and planning point of view. "Funny" is certainly "fun," but "fun" doesn't necessarily have to be "funny." The Andy Griffith Show was a great example of being both (read more - Tip #5)

Think about how many Morning Teams you’ve heard that have a decent energy level, but they just don’t seem to move very efficiently. Frankly, in many situations, the decision to have a Team Show in the morning overrides whether or not a qualified team is available, or whether the PD has the proper techniques for coaching them. If you find yourself thinking, “They just take too long” or “They’re good, but they just talk too much,” here’s a tip to help coordinate them fast: When the subject changes, the person speaking changes (read more - Tip #6)

If you want to talk about something that isn’t local, unless it’s a giant national headline, it’s likely that you’ll get a “who cares?” reaction in the mind of the Listener. Whenever I hear a Talent struggle with this, I ask, “How do I get there from here?” (read more - Tip #7)

Many air talents, even experienced ones, BROADcast. They speak too loudly, get overly exaggerated, and can’t seem to sound conversational without losing energy or enthusiasm. Usually, it’s just what they picture in their heads—the microphone as a megaphone, a device used to talk to the listener, somewhere in the distance. It’s the same sort of principle that makes many stage actors, who are used to broad, exaggerated movements, have to rein that impulse in to not appear to be chewing the scenery and over-acting when they do film work (read more - Tip #8)

Too often, an Air Talent wants to do something on the air for one of the following reasons:
· "It'll be funny."
· "It'll get ratings."
· "It'll schmooze a client."
Some Program Directors or GM's might agree that these are valid reasons. But they're not. Here's why: 1. "It'll be funny" is an aspiration, certainly not always a reality. Trying to be “funny,” besides being subjective, is really not the object. As anyone who has read my stuff knows, FUN is the operative word. "Funny" MIGHT happen, but FUN can be guaranteed if you filter it through the Listener's lifestyle (read more - Tip#9)

If you're going to get really proficient at anything, you have to practice every day. Eric Clapton is nicknamed “Slowhand” because he makes those incendiary guitar licks look so easy. Tiger Woods and other pro golfers make the game look effortless (indeed, even boringly easy) and crush the ball into orbit repeatedly because they hit thousands of balls every month to get that way. Every basketball player in the NBA can do a “whirlybird” dunk; I try it, and I find out that (1) my vertical leap is about three inches, and (2) I may need a liver transplant. I’ve often coached Air Talents, particularly in Morning Shows, who just don't want to do the MAINTENANCE. Instead, they want to "wing it," and rely on their ability to just "come up with something" instead of PLANNING a show (read more - Tip #10)

It makes me cringe to hear someone taking way too long to set up something on the air. If it doesn't affect you the same way, it should. Weak "setup" skills are like those people that prattle on telling overly long "shaggy dog" jokes at a party--sooner or later, you just want to find an excuse to join a different conversation, to avoid the five minute setup to a lame punch line (read more - Tip #11)

"Teachable" versus "Wants to learn more"

Tommy Kramer Coaching Tip #12

(click here to listen to the audio version)

As you know if you have an on-air job opening, finding talent with real skills who can also be adaptable and fit in is a huge challenge.

With the best of intentions, I keep hearing the word “teachable” from Program Directors looking at candidates for job openings at their stations. While “Is he teachable?” may appear to be a prime component, it’s also coming from the wrong end of the binoculars, a template of the PD’s hopes that he or she lays over the process of considering someone.

So here’s a suggestion. Let's replace the word "teachable" in our vocabulary with the phrase "wants to learn more." This will reverse the perspective, and make it about the talent’s attitude instead of the PD’s projections, and will take a layer of b.s. out of the equation.

A true thirst for learning is unquenchable, and people who have it, in effect, teach themselves to a degree, because they're always going back to the well.

Many talents who say the "right" things like "I'm always willing to listen" aren't teachable at all. They just want the job, so that’s what they say, knowing that it’ll sound good to the PD.

Other talents may be considered unapproachable or guarded or even “stuck up” by Consultants or PD's with a list of mannerisms and outdated technique guidelines that they want followed, but actually be quite coachable. My friends Jon Rivers (K-LOVE radio network) and Guy Phillips (Y-98 in St. Louis) are good examples. They don't suffer fools gladly. Each of them does still want to learn, but knows he can't learn from an idiot. Always keep in mind that to a degree, as much as candidates for openings are having to prove themselves to us, we're also having to prove ourselves to them.

Someone saying that they want to learn is like a kid saying he/she loves to read. You can't go wrong with that.

One other thing, while we’re talking about words that sound good, but are, in reality, “incomplete thoughts.” The word "energy" troubles me. If you specifically say you want that, you tend to only get people with a forced "up" pace. Disc jockeys. I think what we want is best described as a cheerful sound. When someone sounds glad to be here, positive and upbeat, that's all the "energy" you need. More “energy” than that is too much.

tommy@tommykramer.net