Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
Identify a practical obstacle to your book and choose a next step that fits your time, needs, and review responsibilities.
You already explain your best ideas to clients, colleagues, and audiences. Join Mike Giannulis, founder of Dictate, for practical 10- to 15-minute episodes on turning that spoken expertise into a published book through conversations with an AI interviewer. Each episode gives experts, coaches, and business owners one clear step to capture their ideas, shape their message, and move their book forward.
Episodes of this show are narrated by an AI-generated voice.
Your book is unfinished. But the reason it's stalled might not be what you think. Let's figure out exactly which obstacle is in your way.
Welcome to Talk Your Book Into Existence with Mike Giannulis, founder of Dictate. Learn how to turn the ideas you already share out loud into a published book, one conversation at a time. Today, you will leave with one practical step you can use on your own book.
A quick note before we begin: this episode is narrated by an AI-generated voice.
Name the Obstacle Before Choosing the Method.
Perhaps you have a document with a polished opening, a rough second chapter, and notes for everything else. Or perhaps you have recordings and no manuscript yet. Either way, an unfinished book can start to feel like a verdict on your ability. It is more useful to identify the specific task that is not moving.
In my book, I group common obstacles into five categories. They are a starting point for diagnosis, not a claim that every author has the same problem. Your circumstances, habits, resources, and chosen process all matter. Today we will use those categories to choose a manageable next step.
So let's name them, and more importantly, let's figure out which ones are yours.
The first one is time. Time may be the first constraint you notice. Drafting, revising, restructuring, and polishing require time. If your plan assumes several uninterrupted hours every morning but your calendar offers short gaps, the plan needs adjusting. Start with the time you can actually protect. That may mean a smaller book scope, a longer schedule, or shorter recording and review sessions. None of those choices removes the work; they make the next task more realistic.
The second problem is structure. You know your field. You have years of frameworks, stories, and hard-won lessons. But when you sit down to organize all of that into a sequence that makes sense for a reader, you hit a wall. Do you lead with your origin story or a case study? Does the framework go before or after the proof? How does one chapter connect to a chapter five chapters later? A possible response is to keep rearranging the outline without testing it on a reader. Try giving one chapter a single job. What question should it answer? A provisional answer gives you something to evaluate; the structure need not be final before you begin.
The third problem is prose. You sit down to write, and the words that come out don't sound like the thought you had. The idea in your head was sharp. The sentence on the screen is flat. You delete it. You try again. Same result. You conclude you're not a writer. That conclusion may be premature. Writing prose is a separate skill from having deep expertise. If you explain ideas more easily on calls or in workshops than on a blank page, speech may be a useful starting format. Some people prefer typing, and others use both. You can test which format helps you capture a specific idea without declaring yourself good or bad at writing.
The fourth category is uncertainty about the process and your responsibilities when using outside help or AI. Do you know what the service will do, what you must review, and what questions remain unanswered? Write those questions down. A sales promise is not a substitute for a clear explanation. If a rights question affects your decision, take it to an appropriately qualified professional rather than guessing from a tool's marketing label. We are diagnosing an obstacle here, not deciding a legal question.
And the fifth problem is not knowing what happens after the manuscript exists. Publishing mechanics, cover design, distribution, launch strategy. The whole downstream process feels like a second project layered on top of the first, and for a busy professional, that's often enough to stop the whole thing before it starts.
These categories help you separate different kinds of work. You may face more than one, and changing a method will not solve every constraint. But naming the next obstacle is more useful than treating the whole book as one impossible task.
If you want to work through this process in more detail, my book, Talk Your Book Into Existence, is at startdictate.com/talk-your-book. The link is also in the episode notes.
Match the Help to the Work You Need.
Once you have named an obstacle, match the help to the problem. Writing it yourself, working with an editor or coach, hiring a ghostwriter, and using an AI interviewer can each play a role. None guarantees a good book. The question is what work the approach helps you do, and what responsibility stays with you.
Suppose time is the obstacle. Buying a new tool may save time on one task, but it also introduces setup and review. Before committing to a process, ask what you will need to provide in a typical week. Will you write pages, record answers, review a transcript, or comment on a draft? Put that work on a realistic calendar. A plan that depends on time you do not have is still a poor fit, however appealing the demonstration looks.
Writing it yourself gives you direct control over the wording. If you enjoy drafting, protect a small, repeatable block and give it one job. For example, explain one common client question without editing the introduction again. If writing feels slow, test a short recording before concluding that the whole project needs a different production method. You may discover that speaking helps with capture while typing works well for revision.
An editor or coach may help you make decisions about scope, sequence, and accountability. Ask which of those tasks is actually included. Feedback on completed pages is different from interviewing you before a draft exists. A regular meeting can help you follow through, but you still need a clear task between meetings. Ask for a sample of the feedback you would receive, not just a description of the service.
A ghostwriter can start with interviews and help turn those conversations into prose. That can be useful when you want substantial writing support. Voice and accuracy still need attention. Before a long engagement, agree on the reader, scope, review process, and how disagreements will be handled. A short sample can reveal whether the writer captures your phrasing and reasoning. If it does not sound like you, identify a specific sentence and show how you would say it. That is more useful than asking for the entire manuscript to feel different.
With an AI tool, consider the material you give it. A broad topic alone gives it little of your specific experience. Recorded explanations, carefully chosen examples, and your own distinctions provide a stronger starting point. That does not make every generated sentence reliable. Review for invented details, missing qualifications, and claims you would not make. Keep the original recording available so you can compare the draft with what you actually said.
An AI interviewer is one way to structure that capture. Its usefulness depends on the questions it asks, your answers, and the review that follows. It can prompt you for an example; it cannot decide whether that example is accurate or appropriate to publish. Those decisions remain yours.
For a hypothetical example, imagine a consultant who can explain a process clearly but struggles to arrange the chapters. More raw recording might create a larger pile of material without solving the order. A short outline review could be the better next step. Another consultant may have an outline but no concrete examples. In that case, an interview focused on one example could help more than another outline revision.
Match the next intervention to the missing work. You do not need to choose your entire publishing process today. Choose a small test that will tell you whether a method addresses the obstacle you actually have.
Separate Capture from Review, Then Name Your Next Step.
Once you've identified which obstacles are yours, there's one more distinction worth making before you decide what to do next. It is worth testing even if you already know which problem you want to address.
It's the difference between capturing an idea and reviewing it.
Capture is the act of getting the knowledge out of your head and into some recorded form. Review is the act of evaluating that captured material: Is this accurate? Is it useful to the reader? Is it in the right place? These tasks ask different things of you. Trying to perfect every sentence while first explaining an idea can make it harder to finish a usable draft. Separating the sessions is a practical experiment, not a rule that everyone must follow.
Imagine you're a team leader explaining how to hand a project to a colleague. You know the idea cold. You've explained it dozens of times, and when you explain it verbally, it's clear and useful and sounds like you. But when you sit down to write it, you start second-guessing the word choice before you've even finished the first sentence. You wonder whether you've sequenced it correctly. You worry it's too technical for some readers and too basic for others. You're simultaneously capturing and reviewing, and those two modes conflict badly enough that neither gets done well.
Now separate them. Capture first: explain the idea out loud as if you're talking to a client who needs to understand it before their next meeting. Don't worry about whether it's perfectly organized. Don't worry about whether a particular phrase is exactly right. Just get the explanation recorded. That's capture. Then, separately, review: listen back or read the transcript and ask whether the explanation is accurate, whether it's as useful as it could be for the reader, and whether it belongs where you placed it.
Separating those modes may make starting easier. If speaking still feels difficult, narrow the question or ask someone to interview you. You are testing a working method, not proving that you should be able to speak effortlessly. A recording can be useful even if you need to pause, restart, or check a fact.
Perfectionism and the absence of a deadline make this collapse worse. If there's no date by which a draft needs to exist in reviewable form, the perfectionism that's supposed to serve quality ends up preventing quantity. And without quantity, there's nothing to review, nothing to improve, and nothing to finish.
So here's the practical move this episode is building toward. Go back to those five problems: time, structure, prose, uncertainty about the process, and publishing. Identify the one that's most in your way right now. Not all five. One. The one that would matter most to solve first.
If it's time, your next step isn't finding discipline. It's finding a format that fits the time you actually have. A short recorded conversation, even fifteen minutes, may be a more manageable starting point. A brief written answer is also useful if that suits you better.
If it's structure, your next step isn't inventing an architecture from scratch. You can compare a few nonfiction structures, such as a sequence of steps or a set of common questions. Use a provisional map, then test whether a reader can follow it.
If it's prose, try separating capture from review. Record yourself explaining your central idea to one specific reader. Don't edit while you record. Do the review after. Notice whether that changes how the material feels.
If it is uncertainty about a tool or service, list the specific questions you need answered before choosing it. Separate workflow questions from rights questions and direct each to someone qualified to answer. Do not assume that labels such as extraction or generation settle every concern.
And if it's the publishing process that's freezing you at the start, that one belongs to a later conversation, because it's genuinely a downstream problem. You can learn the basic requirements while keeping today's task focused on capture.
Identify your main obstacle. Then schedule fifteen minutes to take one action that addresses it directly. Not to finish the book. Not to outline all twelve chapters. One action, one obstacle, fifteen minutes. That gives you a concrete starting point.
An unfinished book can involve several different obstacles: time, structure, wording, uncertainty about the process, or the practical steps of publication. Treat these as questions to investigate rather than a verdict on your ability. Choose the one that matters most right now.
Before the next episode, write down that obstacle and schedule fifteen minutes for a small test. Record one explanation, sketch the job of one chapter, or prepare one specific question for a potential collaborator. Decide what you will review afterward. The goal is not to finish the book in that session. It is to leave with a clearer next step and something concrete to work on.
Take the next small step on your book today. For more guidance, find Talk Your Book Into Existence at startdictate.com/talk-your-book.
Visit startdictate dot com slash talk your book.
Next time on Talk Your Book Into Existence: Choose a Book-Making Process That Fits You. Compare writing, coaching, ghostwriting, and an AI interview process by the work each asks of you and the review each provides. Follow the show so the next episode is ready when you are.
Thanks for listening to Talk Your Book Into Existence. Follow the show for your next practical step, and share this episode with someone who has a book in them. Your next conversation could be the start of a chapter.