Improve your Competitiveness: Learn about AIIP

Posted on July 10, 2009 by ellendnaylor

 

Chris Marcy Linda

Chris Marcy Linda

 

Marcy Phelps, CEO of  Phelps Research and AIIP (Association of Independent Information Professionals) President and Linda Rink CEO of Rink Consulting and Chair of AIIP’s Industry Relations Committee were interviewed by Chris Kenneally, Director of Author Relations for Copyright Clearance Center during SLA’s 2009 Annual Conference! In the spirit of cooperative intelligence, here are some facts about AIIP that Marcy and Linda shared.

I must disclose that I am a proud AIIP member, and that I get enough benefit from our electronic community sharing forum to justify the annual membership dues: never mind the local AIIP gatherings we have in Colorado, my home state or the annual AIIP conference–all rich repositories of connection and knowledge sharing.

Another great AIIP member benefit is that many electronic providers of information give us special benefits and discounted rates. This allows AIIP members to reach information that the average person doesn’t have access to. Another reason that information vendors give AIIPers those discounts is that the reach of AIIP is huge, not only our direct clients, but we have a publication, Connections which shares many tidbits of our trade.  Numerous members are authors of books, articles and blogs.

AIIP’s has 600 members in over 20 countries, information professionals who run our own businesses and support businesses which range from start-ups to Fortune 1000 companies. Some members specialize by industry, and one that seems particularly prominent is pharmaceuticals. While many AIIP members are researchers, we also have library consultants, writers, editors, and taxonomists. AIIPers do a lot more than simply find information: many members provide analysis to help clients make sense of the information, and provide ongoing updates.

Many people come to AIIP companies since they have not done their homework, nor do they know how to do their homework or if there is a niche for their business ideas. For example, they don’t know how large the market is for their product or haven’t developed a prospect list or industries to target for marketing. Everything that goes into writing and developing a business plan needs to be researched, and many people think they can just go online and dabble around and get it, and that’s not the case.

Pertinent to the copyright world: AIIP members follow a strict code of ethics, and one of the elements of the code is that we not only have to adhere to and follow copyright laws, but we need to teach others about it.

On a personal note, I specialize in primary research–that is finding and talking to people who “know” the answers to business issues my clients seek. Most AIIP colleagues are experts in electronic research, the necessary pre-requisite to primary research. They dig up awesome information and great contacts for me to follow-up with. My firm gives clients recommendations for action and digs up opportunities for additional revenue streams, which is particularly appreciated in this weak economy.

I feel fortunate to meet my AIIP colleagues in our electronic sharing forum and you can connect with us through our AIIP member directory, which is open source, and you can research and search for an information professional by name, industry expertise, location…

Thank you Chris Kenneally for giving Marcy and Linda this opportunity to share the good news about AIIP! Check out the podcast!

Filed under: AIIP, competitiveness, connection, cooperative, Cooperative Intelligence, research | Comments Off on Improve your Competitiveness: Learn about AIIP

Todd Wille, Turnaround Leader Extraordinaire, A Cooperative Leader

Posted on June 26, 2009 by ellendnaylor

Todd Wille returned to his previous employer, Unify Corporation, a California-based application development, database and migration products company. The date was August 21, 2000 and Unify was in terrible shape.

The former CEO had committed securities fraud & the FBI was investigating.

Major international customers were taking their business elsewhere.

If current trends continued, the company would run out of cash in 90 days.

The stock had dropped from a high of $42 to $1. Employees were demoralized and afraid.

It is interesting to watch great managers rise to the occasion when events are so incredibly stacked against them. Todd adopted many cooperative intelligence practices as he delved into the company’s severe problems and seeked solutions with urgency!  Cooperative intelligence integrates leadership, connection and communication and so many of Todd’s decisions and actions blend these together.

Cooperative Leadership

Todd had to act with urgency since the company couldn’t even afford to pay legal fees to file for bankruptcy. He set his priorities to stop customer defections and earn the trust of his employees. He took immediate steps to regain customer’s trust and confidence and maintain the trust of his employees.

Cooperative Connection

First he appointed the head of customer service to be VP of sales. Who better to connect with customers since he already had earned their confidence and trust?

Second, Todd personally met with key customers and listened to their concerns.

Third, he insisted that product development connect with customers instead of just supporting old products, and use customer input to build new products.

Fourth, he connected with employees weekly during this difficult period.

Cooperative Communication

The VP of sales called, listened and reassured customers that the company was putting practices in place to save the company.

Todd listened to his customer’s concerns and acknowledged them publicly. He put himself in their shoes and mentioned if they changed vendors it could be a long, complicated process.

Todd communicated the absolute truth without filters in his weekly employee meetings with the entire company. Remarkably only 1 staffer left voluntarily during this difficult 18 month period.

A key moment was how Todd handled himself when a customer told him, in front of a large group of other customers, that he was uncomfortable, “signing a $100,000 contract for the following year” since he wasn’t sure Unify would still be in business the next year. Using the full array of cooperative intelligence skills – leadership, connection and communication–Todd answered, “You’re right to feel the way you do. But if you don’t sign your contract, I will be out of business, and your worry will become reality. Then your company will have to find another supplier for database development tools, and it will unfortunately be a long, complicated and potentially expensive process.” His customer agreed to stay with Unity right in front of the group; as did many other customers in time which brought in the badly needed cash flow to survive.

In the last three years, Unify has made 3 acquisitions that have tripled its size, added software tools and solutions and expanded its customer base, which now includes a who’s who of the most admired global companies.

The American Business Association named Todd Wille, CEO of Unify Corp, the best turnaround executive for 2008. Cooperative leadership works!

Read people’s comments on this great turnaround story in Marketing Profs.

Filed under: communication, connection, cooperative, Cooperative Intelligence, leadership | 1 Comment »

Let’s Hear it for Librarians in Competitive Intelligence!

Posted on May 13, 2009 by ellendnaylor

Our CI Ning brings out so much discussion in competitive intelligence.  Here is one point I shared recently and it bears repeating: I would like to support the role of librarians in the CI field. Often in competitive intelligence there is so much confusion about what we do, that we ram our way into places where we don’t belong somewhat in desperation.

We can learn from librarians about good service, which is a lot what I believe is behind the practice of cooperative intelligence, which promotes a spirit of giving by integrating the practices of leadership, connection and communication.  Many of us in CI are very good at digging up good insightful data and providing relevant analysis.  We’re not so good at the human issues of connection and communication, which is where librarians run circles around many of us.  They learn about this in librarian school both as undergrads and in master’s programs.

Many librarians don’t have extensive analytical skills, while some do.  I have been disturbed over the years by how some in our field seem to put down the library science field, when it’s the first step in most CI projects, and the librarian can be one of the major sources of fuel to feed the CI process so we can spend more time connecting with primary sources and doing the analysis and communication to help our companies be more competitive.

I learned to value librarians back in 1985 when I started our CI function at Bell Atlantic, now part of Verizon. Our corporate librarian was an important part of my CI team, and she threw more good stuff my way…yes, this was before the Internet, email and voice mail…now librarians can do so much more, and watch a librarian connect on social networks. This is just an extension of what they already have been doing for years.

I think these are some of the reasons that SLA’s CI division is so successful.  Librarians get where their role is in the company, that it’s evolving and provide it with a spirit of service and giving. They also know what they don’t know and learn about it: that’s where CI fits in and why SLA’s CI certificate program has been so successful. Another reason is it was developed and executed by a seasoned CI professional, Cynthia Cheng Correia who understands librarian’s needs since she also has her MLS.

Filed under: communication, Competitive Intelligence, connection, Cooperative Intelligence, leadership | 2 Comments »

Dialog on Social Networking in Competitive Intelligence: Post-Conference #SCIP09 Chicago

Posted on April 29, 2009 by ellendnaylor

scip-09-chicagoThis continues my report from talks I attended at SCIP’s (Society of Competitive Intelligence Professional’s) annual conference in Chicago last week. Roger Phelps and Suki Fuller facilitated this open dialog.

Almost all attendees use LinkedIn, while not even half use Twitter. Social networks even less used are Xing, Plaxo, Spoke and Namyz. Some still use listservs within organizations like AIIP (Association of Independent Information Professionals), which alone is worth the annual dues IMO. Although it wasn’t listed, over 700 in competitive intelligence use our Ning group. I think people were confusing Xing and Ning. Xing is a Hamburg, Germany based social network group with over 7 million members while Ning is a social network that lets you create your own social network according to specific niches such as competitive intelligence.

One person boycotts all forms of social networking and differentiates himself by only using email, phone calls and meetings. Others use several social networks as a relationship builder towards email, phone calls or in-person meetings. I prefer to use SN as a relationship builder and use more personal communication with individuals I resonate with. Suki builds relationships to get introductions within a specific industry. The point is: be creative with your connections and cooperative to help others connect.

Spoke is mostly used for obtaining contact information, especially email since it’s an impersonal way to get some competitive data.

Linked In is used by CI pros in collection. It’s the fastest way to find niche experts. You can get names off Linked In and warm up your phone call by asking for a person by name, and know something about them beforehand. You can also use Linked In’s Advanced Searching to find former employees at companies you’re researching who are more likely to share information, although be aware it might be dated or they might be jaded if they were laid off.

Another great use of Linked In is to pose questions within specific groups, whether within a discipline like competitive intelligence, an industry like legal or former employees if you or a friend used to work there.

To be found, create a group to draw on, such as Competitive Intelligence Software within Competitive Intelligence. Answer questions in industry or discipline specific forums. Write e-zine articles which link to your blog and website. Track your industry, company name and key individuals and comment on other’s blogs or connect with them through LinkedIn or Twitter, for example. As with Google Alerts, you can set up Twitter Alerts through Twilert or through Twitter. You can have the results sent to your RSS feed or emailed. Actually you can “find” using many of these tactics too.

Another great source of intelligence in consumer marketing is epinions, which are consumer/loyalty panels, basically unpaid advertising. You can find out if your competitors are developing new products and perhaps why through this channel.

Issues around ethics were discussed since it’s easy to misrepresent yourself through social media. People might have several Twitter accounts, for example and don’t use their name or actual photo for some of them. The usual issues of: “Do I connect only with people I know or everyone who asks?” were brought up. In general I notice that consultants are more likely to connect with anyone, while corporate managers are more conservative and connect mostly with people they know, even if only slightly.

I was interested in learning how you can protect yourself within the social networking space. Apparently Beth Shankle, Chief Research Librarian at the National Press Club’s Library is a great resource and teaches courses on the various social media.

How do you use social media for competitive intelligence?

Filed under: AIIP, Competitive Intelligence, connection, cooperative, LinkedIn, SCIP, social networks, Twitter | 5 Comments »

Are We in a Rut in Competitive Intelligence Innovation? #SCIP09 Post-conference

Posted on April 27, 2009 by ellendnaylor

scip-09-chicagoKen Sawka of Outward Insights led this dialog for our friend, Bill Fiora at #SCIP09’s annual conference in Chicago last week.  Bill had a bike accident which kept him home in Boston. The dialog was a follow-up discussion from Bill’s post on our Competitive Intelligence Ning.

We listed many of the common competitive intelligence tools and techniques such as Porters 5 Forces, 4 Corners, War Games, Scenario Planning, SWOTs and competitor profiles.  There hasn’t been much innovation among competitive intelligence tools and techniques that anyone was willing to share.

The innovation that people shared was around process which involved social networks and more sophisticated monitoring and analysis tools. The cost of information acquisition is really inexpensive today even compared to 10 years ago, so companies can afford to text mine and use tools that provide visualization at a reasonable cost.

Another discussion was around trust: management listens to individuals they trust to get strategic intelligence, such as McKinsey.  This is the kind of relationship we in competitive intelligence need to develop with our management through dialog where we become valued. We need to deliver high quality products that address business needs. Ken told a story about a consultant who listened and advised one of the company’s executives on the Friday before the executive held his Monday monthly briefing. He didn’t charge for this time, but he did gain the executive’s trust. This relationship building supports the practice of cooperative intelligence which integrates leadership, connection and communication.

Ken shared another story where a Best Buy manager openly shared that each of its 983 stores used Web 2.0 technology such as a wiki to share day to day store operations, mystery shopping observations, sales results, and all kinds of good scoop, and how this became part of the company’s DNA. I wasn’t surprised since this is how the retail industry works: it’s more of an open book since you can freely walk into your competitor’s store and buy products and assess their service. Another attendee suggested that Best Buy might have implemented more advanced Web 2.0 processes since sharing their story. A participant in the pharmaceuticals was reluctant to share his company’s Web 2.0 practices since this industry is more secretive due to long lead times to get products approved by the FDA and out to the market place.

We concluded that industry norms can be a deterrent to sharing innovation.  However, as we build our human networks and develop trust, we often share our innovation with others, either one on one or among a smaller group. The Council on Competitive Analysis and Liam Fahey’s Knowledge Leadership Forum were sited as two examples of groups with trusting relationships where innovative competitive intelligence practices are shared.

One fear that some expressed is that we could be replaced by artificial intelligence as described in Jeff Hawkins and Sandra Blakeslee’s  book On Intelligence.

We concluded with a couple of questions:

1. How do we more effectively improve our value?
2. How do we quantify and communicate the benefits of competitive intelligence?

What do you think?  I’ll be blogging about #SCIP09 sessions this week.  Speaking of innovation, look for a summary of Competitive Intelligence Foundation’s book on Competitive Technical Intelligence (CTI) just released at SCIP 09.

Filed under: communication, Competitive Intelligence, competitive technical intelligence, connection, Cooperative Intelligence, CTI, leadership, SCIP, social networks | Comments Off on Are We in a Rut in Competitive Intelligence Innovation? #SCIP09 Post-conference

Think Before Win Loss Analysis: Stay Connected with Your Customers Before the Sales Event!

Posted on April 17, 2009 by ellendnaylor

I’ve been talking about the sales intelligence practice of win loss analysis a lot lately. It’s the process of interviewing your customers to find out why you REALLY win or lose business, and is one of the best values for collecting market intelligence from your customers. You can get ideas for product development, competitive intelligence, changing account reps, realizing that customers don’t value what you thought they did…the list is as endless as your imagination if you stretch it.

However, many people just interview customers when they have lost business. Be practical: How long will it be before you can do business with them again, unless this loss just represents a portion of the business you do together?

Interview wins since they will give you ideas for product development, and they are interested in maintaining a relationship with you, especially if you can offer products that better meet their needs over time.

Especially in these tough economic times, take the time to develop even deeper relationships with your customers to boost retention rates. This is a key cooperative intelligence practice since your account reps or inside sales will be seen as leaders, connectors and communicators, while the competition won’t since they may be operating with a reduced sales headcount.

If you have the cashflow, don’t lay off your sales force or inside sales: keep them busy connecting with your customers. Here are some processes that you might include in their hardship job description in addition to their periodic account visits:

1. Interview customers one month or a reasonable interval after implementation of the product or service. Keep them happy and engaged, right from the beginning. Work with your marketing and product development people to include some open ended questions so they can vent and you learn what’s on their minds without the bias of closed ended questions.

2. A year after implementation, interview your customers again. They will have had a chance to use the product or service enough to have formed some strong opinions. Listen to their ideas, and let them know that you are considering or have made changes to your product or service based on their feedback. Include open ended questions about market trends, new technology and the competition so you don’t get blind sided.

3. Six months to a year before the contract expires, come back to the customer with another set of questions concerning the product/service, your customer service, you know the drill. Your goal is to influence them to stay with you, and they will be more tempted since you’ve been staying in touch with them…and this is not a last ditch effort just before the sale.

The point it: don’t wait for the sales event and then conduct win loss analysis interviews afterwards to find out what you’re doing right and wrong. Include this as part of the account planning and sales follow-up processes and watch your customer retention soar!

What have you included in your sales intelligence process to increase customer retention in these tough economic times?

Be notified when our book, Win/Loss Analysis: How to Clinch and Keep the Business You Want is published.

Filed under: communication, Competitive Intelligence, connection, Cooperative Intelligence, D. Sales Intelligence Articles, leadership, win loss analysis | Comments Off on Think Before Win Loss Analysis: Stay Connected with Your Customers Before the Sales Event!

Persuading through Competitive Intelligence Tools: the Cooperative Angle

Posted on March 30, 2009 by ellendnaylor

Using Tactical Competitive Intelligence for Decision-Making alluded to the chart below, minus the weighting scales of this Company Comparison analysis. Recall this analysis portrayed and compared the top 3 PBX manufacturers according to customers’ top reasons for buying PBX equipment. These comparisons addressed the strengths that our key dissenter claimed for ROLM, but also illustrated some of the weaknesses that he was not previously aware of. The analysis supported the key dissenter showing that customers were very impressed with ROLM’s technical features. But since ROLM’s architecture differed from the other systems on the market, our installation, maintenance, and repair crews would have to be specially trained to support it, at additional time and expense—news to our key dissenter.

customerweightfeatures

This chart weighted each reason for the customer’s buying criteria. 1 is the highest or most important reason for buying. Customers highly valued Northern Telecom’s (Nortel) reliability and good service, which were perceived as average for ROLM. Our dissenter changed his mind when shown that customers’ buying decisions were minimally swayed by technology but hugely influenced by service and reliability, Northern Telecom strengths, not ROLM’s. With this presentation, the dissenter realized that his reasons for acquiring ROLM were not accurate from a customer’s perspective.

The Cooperative Angle

Our analysis allowed our key dissenter to change his mind with dignity, and illustrates cooperative intelligence practices as follow:

Cooperative Leadership: We acknowledged the leadership of our key dissenter by finding out his reasons for preferring a ROLM acquisition. On the flip side, our leadership skills were valued by our management since they trusted us to conduct the acquisition analysis.

Cooperative Connection: We connected with the key dissenter and addressed each of his reasons point by point, showing respect and acknowledgement. We connected with the right people both within our company, Sales; and outside the company, a reputable consultant, to gather the right information to put together a persuasive analysis in “executive speak”.

Cooperative Communication: The presentation to our executives consisted of just 3 charts which told the story persuasively and understandably: The BCG Matrix Share, The Telco Company Analysis Chart and lastly the Customer Weighting Chart. We could tell a story with each chart which built upon the preceding chart. People like stories, and I notice stories make it easy to avoid ego conflicts. Using the customer’s decision-making criteria rather than our opinions, was a gentle, yet persuasive way to communicate our analysis.

Don’t be so persuasive that you forget about the dignity of the people you are addressing. Tell a good story that leads them to your conclusions, as though your audience had thought them up themselves. This works with everyone I have ever addressed regardless of profession or culture.

Filed under: communication, Competitive Intelligence, connection, cooperation, cooperative, Cooperative Intelligence, leadership | Comments Off on Persuading through Competitive Intelligence Tools: the Cooperative Angle

Capture Competitive Intelligence from Sales: Switching Cost Analysis

Posted on March 16, 2009 by ellendnaylor

How do you extract precious competitor and customer tidbits from Sales? The first rule with Sales is “You must give what they need in order to get.” Giving is one of the key principles of cooperative intelligence. It’s also helpful if you put yourself in Sales’ shoes. I was lucky in that I sold for a few years before I started our competitive intelligence initiative at Bell Atlantic, now part of Verizon. Thus I had credibility since I knew the challenges that Sales faced first-hand.

However, you who have no sales experience, can gain insight by accompanying Sales on customer calls. Other ways to connect with Sales include listening in on their challenges through Sales conference calls, attending Sales rallies, and perhaps getting on the agenda to speak at such a rally. It’s great if you can connect with Sales just as they’re hired by conducting some competitive intelligence training as part of Sales orientation. That way you can meet Sales people who may have come from the competition.

You gain sales intelligence and learn why customers do or don’t buy through win loss analysis. However, even though you include Sales in win loss, they may feel threatened when someone else calls their customer, treading on their precious relationship.

switchingcostanalysis

One tool that been very popular with Sales forces over the years is “Switching Cost Analysis.” The goal is to help retain your customers! As a competitive intelligence professional, you can help Sales boost their creativity in using this tool.

Often the purchase price for your product is more expensive than the competitor’s. However, once you identify all the hidden costs, the cost for the customer to switch to the competitor’s product might be more expensive than if they stayed with your company’s solution.

When I sold telecommunications systems, for example, my competitors only included the cost of the phone equipment and conveniently left out all the network fees required to make their phone system work. I included that cost. They also downplayed the cost and time to train people how to use new technology, not just the user’s but also the customer’s installation and maintenance people. You can help your sales force be more creative about what costs your competitor may be omitting, and perhaps cast a shadow of a doubt about the competition. If they forget to include too many costs, the customer might wonder what else the competitor is not telling them!

Filed under: Competitive Intelligence, connection, Cooperative Intelligence, creativity, D. Sales Intelligence Articles, win loss analysis | Comments Off on Capture Competitive Intelligence from Sales: Switching Cost Analysis

Take a Cooperative Approach to Conflict Resolution

Posted on March 11, 2009 by ellendnaylor

Many in my fields of competitive intelligence and research have lost their jobs in this tough economy.  While cooperative intelligence skills of leadership, connection and communication don’t guarantee job security, they will help you stand out since many people have lower emotional intelligence: that is they have weak people skills.

I like the cooperative approach shared in Hot Buttons to solve conflicts with colleagues as it’s objective, focuses on constructive communication, and not “who dunnit?:

How did our conflict start? What hot buttons were pressed? Yours? Mine?

Which of your needs are not being met? What are your goals?

What do I need?

What am I doing, saying or not saying that is preventing your goals>

What is the cost of not solving this problem? Specifically…

What are the benefits of resolving the problem? What can I do?

How can we start?

At the heart of any organization is the connection between manager and reporting employees.  To improve the relationship and demonstrate cooperative leadership and promote loyalty consider the following 4 attributes:

Trust – is a two-way street.  Managers and employees need to express confidence in each other.

Respect – recognize your employee’s competence. Show thanks and appreciation for your employee’s work, in a note, a conversation…

Inclusion – include employee’s opinions and welfare in decisions that affect him/her.

Fairness – give all an equal opportunity to be successful. Be even handed, impartial and objective.

Another pet peeve I have is that many managers don’t give good feedback to their employees during their quarterly or annual review process.  Lousy feedback, lack of feedback or the destructive delivery of feedback is a form of disrespect and maddens people.

I had a difficult employee who I had to provide feedback to outside of the annual review process.  She wasn’t pulling her weight, and was certain that her contribution–based on her straight A’s in a decent college–was excellent.  I was at my wit’s end to get her to produce.  How could I cool my heels and get through to this woman?  I started with her place of strength: I complimented her on her wonderful grades and high IQ which caused her to relax and smile.

Then I asked her for the date to get her to realize she was now out of school and while the grades got her this job, production would be the key to keeping it since her co-workers completed their projects in less time.  I also implored her sense of fairness since the other workers had to stay late to finish work that she wasn’t, and she knew she didn’t want that.

We turned it around since we started with her strong point and built on it, and I knew she had a strong sense of fairness towards her co-workers.  She started to produce great work once she had time to digest that I valued her intelligence, and wanted her to apply it at work.

What stories do you have where you turned around a difficult situation?

Filed under: communication, Competitive Intelligence, connection, cooperative, Cooperative Intelligence, emotional intelligence, leadership, research | Comments Off on Take a Cooperative Approach to Conflict Resolution

Conflict Resolution: Know Your Hot Buttons & Be Aware of Other’s!

Posted on March 9, 2009 by ellendnaylor

I’m still visiting my folks in VA and my Dad is failing. As I ponder his life, I recall what a great attorney he was, and how he could chew right through conflict. Case in point: he started his legal career defending Japanese war criminals after WWII.

I had the good fortune to read Hot Buttons: How to Resolve Conflict and Cool Everyone Down by Sybil Evans and Sherry Suib Cohen.

The mind and the body are twins. Poet Algernon Swinburne

What happens in your mind and spirit gets to your stomach and your heart.

A Hot Button is an emotional trigger and when someone pushes one of your hot buttons, you know it since it make you a little crazy. Self awareness of what makes you crazy and an awareness of others’ hot buttons—is very useful in business. It is important to know your conflict style. Before you can diffuse your hot buttons you must be clear about what inflames them. This sounds a lot like emotional intelligence to me!

The book describes 5 conflict styles:

Avoider – Make “it go away” is the goal when conflict intrudes your life

Slash-and-Burn – Tough guy who is “in-your-face”

Peace at all Costs – Harmony is the goal here

Problem Solver – No problem is insurmountable if you work at it

Exploder – Into high drama, emotional and demonstrative

This bleeds right into cooperative intelligence’s leadership, connection and communication.

Leadership – Good leaders are self-aware and observant enough to notice what triggers other’s hot buttons.

Connection – This sensitivity helps develop trusting and lasting relationships.

Communication – Hot button awareness helps us be better observers, listeners and communicators.

So how do you resolve conflicts which stem from Hot Buttons? The book outlines 5 steps:

1. Watch the Play – as though you’re the audience, not a participant. “Watch & play” creates a mental attitude of detachment and objectivity.

2. Confirm – the validity of the other person’s anger. You let them know you’re ready to listen.

3. Get more Info – by asking open-ended Questions.

4. Assert your own interests and needs. Note: this is step 4 after you have calmed down and listened to the other guy’s point of view. Now he is likely to listen to you.

5. Find common ground – for a solution with a problem-solving approach.

There are several tippers from this book that I practice to avoid conflicts:

1. People’s beliefs are not always what you assume they are. When people make wrong assumptions, it can push hot buttons.

2. Empathy is a great hot button diffuser since it acknowledges the other person’s feelings, and takes your mind off your own feelings and allows you to creep into someone else’s. This is calming during a conflict.

3. Ask questions – Questions help you learn more information about the other guy’s feelings, and give you time to cool down, if you’re angry

4. Paraphrase – By restating I can make sure I heard exactly what my partner meant me to hear. Paraphrasing also lets the other guy know I am listening, a key ingredient to conflict resolution.

Here are two books I recommend which are in a similar vein:

Crucial Conversations by Kerry Patterson, Joseph Grenny, Ron McMillan, Al Switzler and Stephen R. Covey (my comments)

The Power of a Positive No: How to Say No and Still Get to Yes by Bill Ury

Filed under: communication, connection, cooperative, Cooperative Intelligence, emotional intelligence, leadership | 1 Comment »

« Previous Page — Next Page »