Corporate trolling. Part two
Today we will examine the types of opposition that occur during face-to-face events - in presentations and negotiations. Of course, it is difficult to grasp in one fell swoop the vast sphere of black rhetoric, black PR and other black abominations that accompanies any of our even the most good undertaking. But habralyudi people experienced, information to look trained. As they say, a good engineer does not have to know everything, but he must be able to quickly obtain the necessary knowledge. I myself am not a guru either in negotiations or in rhetoric, but I have had experience in communicating with real masters of my craft who will never write in Habr, even if they know about the existence of this resource. It seems to me that this experience, generalized and purified from emotions, will be interesting to many.
Let's imagine that you have been instructed to present a certain system that is planned for implementation in some organization. Future users are sitting in front of you, the leaders of these users, and maybe, the Light itself (Who Gives the Money) will wander around. Most sellers are usually sellers, but they can lead him to show the goods face. That is, an authoritative person in a tie in front of the screen with funny pictures.
Suppose you managed to excite an audience with the inevitability of future changes. This is usually achieved by illustrative examples close to the life of theComanche users. When people start to try on the future personally for themselves, they start thinking. They have an unpleasant feeling. And some may wish that you and your company would disappear from the horizon and never appear at all. And then the opposition begins.
The most common phrase. Variations: “30 years have worked without your system and nothing,” “We have unique methods (perching pears)”. There is no 100% recipe, and there can be no, because the very wording is absurd. In essence, this is a reception of sophistry. Similarly, we can say that "I have lived for 30 years, and I will live another 300". From the first does not follow the second. The main thing is not to flinch when you say that. And remember the one who said it first. Before you is a Troll victim (see previous post ). Most likely, this is a middle manager who sits tightly on the accompaniment of the replaced system. Or the one whose frames will be pulled out to accompany your system. Or simply a respected employee who decided to once again raise his authority.
')
Get to know someone who claims this. You are the very friendliness and sincerely want to know the reasons for such a categorical statement. As soon as they give you the reasons, you will immediately apologize, pick up the laptop under your armpit and leave the most respectable assembly. As a rule, the client starts wagging and you smoothly proceed to the next agenda items. But sometimes the “historical excursion” begins. Fear him like fire! Because he hypnotizes other "old-timers" and as soon as you pull them out of sweet dreams, they will hate you. And your products at the same time.
Very dangerous artifact. It begins as a harmless life story. "30 years ago we started to introduce a similar system ...". And then follows the sad story of implementation. Which by an easy stroke puts an end to all your arguments in favor of the system being introduced. Who are you and who is this respected by all? The problem is that you cannot tell the customer’s representative that it’s not a “bad” system, but his crooked hands (or 30 years is an eternity in IT). Anyway, the historical parallels in the presentation are very dangerous. Especially if you are young and you can’t tell you how in 1986 you wrote control algorithms for any rover. At the same time, during interviews, similar stories, on the contrary, are of great value. But this is a completely different conversation.
You will save the rules. Ask to postpone the story to after the presentation, say that you still have 180 extremely interesting slides and a prototype demonstration for dessert.
Questions without questions are also aimed at switching the attention of the audience from the theme of your presentation to anything else (usually the personality of the “questioner”). The man raises his hand: "Can I ask you a question?" After your permission, a speech in the style of "historical excursion" begins.
The best thing is if you immediately say that the question and answer session will be at the end of the presentation. But sometimes (and most often) you should welcome questions from the audience during the presentation. If a “speech” begins under the guise of a question, do not hesitate to ask as soon as possible what the question is. You can even interrupt the performance in a minute. Bring the context back. You are asked a question, you are ready to answer and are waiting for a question.
Million receptions of varying degrees of cruelty. If you are unlucky and you have an opponent tempted in black rhetoric, immediately call for reinforcements! If there is a senior comrade - sales, project manager, etc., address the questions to him. If you are alone before the troll, God help you. Or download the appropriate skill. Googling literature and start to train. As a rule, the basic methods of counteraction is enough for 99% of self-taught trolls. And if you suddenly got the same 1%, then this is most likely an order. That is, they have released a killer troll, and the solution to the problem lies in the political field.
For an example, here are tricks from personal practice:
“Your data is incorrect, X’s research confirms this” (about graphs or numbers). While you are making excuses, proving that your sources are reliable, everyone will remember only what you are driving.
- “Did you personally participate in projects to introduce your system in such (unique) enterprises as ours?” How, without knowing our (unique) specifics, can you tell us how to do our work? ”The same joke as in the previous paragraph.
- “And you know that ...” Then follow some internal agreements, which you most likely never heard of. This is an example of the use of referential, or referential influence. Favorite trick of all bosses. “But you don’t know what's going on up there!” “You don’t have all the information to say that!”, Etc.
The topic is truly inexhaustible, and the experience and skill of countering can be acquired only in battle.
I will cite just two simplest techniques that work and often work during negotiations with specialists . What is happening there between the sale and the customer is a great mystery, and probably this is the subject of another blog.
The goal of the event is to unbalance you by exerting pressure. To do this, a troll-killer is invited, who begins to dig up every word, every document, swear, resent, and often lose all adequacy. Your loss - when, in response to the next attack, you lose calm and begin to react accordingly.
Any educated person is looking for a way out of a conflict situation. And the output will be offered to you in the form of a "good and wise boss." Which will pacify the dispersed employee, will offer you coffee with brandy and some conditions for overcoming the crisis. Which before this seemed unacceptable to you, and now seem almost the only salvation.
What to do? And nothing! Do not lose composure, keep the party line. This is a trade, and you should have some backlash. If you have not been provided with instructions on where to sift, and where it is impossible - your boss is asucker . How many of the similar battles of specialists in the hem brought months of extra free work - do not count. Please get your bosses to give you cards in their hands. This is their job, after all.
There is even a variation of the Stockholm syndrome, when the specialist comes from the negotiations and begins to spread rot to his own people, extolling the personal qualities of the customer, to whom he hasn’t had warm feelings at all. This suggests that the real master is working on that side. These are often found among government officials. They hone their skills for years, doing nothing other than pressing and trolling.
A variant of the reception described above in the absence of an evil specialist. It is practiced by middle functionaries and managers, who by their position are not allowed to have a personal chauffeur and a manual trolley killer.
In the first part of the scheme, the pressure is exerted by the customer’s representative himself. The whole available arsenal is used, including methods of referential or refrain influence. The abundance of references to “higher powers”, “corporate standards”, “CEO” or “Kremlin” speaks of the approach of Phase Two.
When you have fully realized your insignificance and are sitting with a bowed head, the Big Boss Call follows. With a changed face, the customer’s representative runs out of the office, and within a few minutes the enlightened one returns. Say, "I explained to our very deplorable situation, went to work, blocked you as best I could, and decided to bestow mercy on myself, but under the following conditions ...".
In contrast to the first option, you can repent of all sins in Phase One, detach yourself with whips, but without giving any promises. You can also have a pitiful shabby look (see movies with Woody Allen). But Phase Two you must meet cheerfully and independently and not make any concessions other than those planned. Moreover, a successfully broken template will allow you, on the contrary, to overcome some conditions, since a customer representative cannot quit his own game.
In this topic, it remains to disassemble the techniques that were observed during the delivery of work results (system demonstration or documentation delivery). So there is a backlog for the third part.
Presentation
Let's imagine that you have been instructed to present a certain system that is planned for implementation in some organization. Future users are sitting in front of you, the leaders of these users, and maybe, the Light itself (Who Gives the Money) will wander around. Most sellers are usually sellers, but they can lead him to show the goods face. That is, an authoritative person in a tie in front of the screen with funny pictures.
Suppose you managed to excite an audience with the inevitability of future changes. This is usually achieved by illustrative examples close to the life of the
"We will never have this"
The most common phrase. Variations: “30 years have worked without your system and nothing,” “We have unique methods (perching pears)”. There is no 100% recipe, and there can be no, because the very wording is absurd. In essence, this is a reception of sophistry. Similarly, we can say that "I have lived for 30 years, and I will live another 300". From the first does not follow the second. The main thing is not to flinch when you say that. And remember the one who said it first. Before you is a Troll victim (see previous post ). Most likely, this is a middle manager who sits tightly on the accompaniment of the replaced system. Or the one whose frames will be pulled out to accompany your system. Or simply a respected employee who decided to once again raise his authority.
')
Get to know someone who claims this. You are the very friendliness and sincerely want to know the reasons for such a categorical statement. As soon as they give you the reasons, you will immediately apologize, pick up the laptop under your armpit and leave the most respectable assembly. As a rule, the client starts wagging and you smoothly proceed to the next agenda items. But sometimes the “historical excursion” begins. Fear him like fire! Because he hypnotizes other "old-timers" and as soon as you pull them out of sweet dreams, they will hate you. And your products at the same time.
Historical excursion
Very dangerous artifact. It begins as a harmless life story. "30 years ago we started to introduce a similar system ...". And then follows the sad story of implementation. Which by an easy stroke puts an end to all your arguments in favor of the system being introduced. Who are you and who is this respected by all? The problem is that you cannot tell the customer’s representative that it’s not a “bad” system, but his crooked hands (or 30 years is an eternity in IT). Anyway, the historical parallels in the presentation are very dangerous. Especially if you are young and you can’t tell you how in 1986 you wrote control algorithms for any rover. At the same time, during interviews, similar stories, on the contrary, are of great value. But this is a completely different conversation.
You will save the rules. Ask to postpone the story to after the presentation, say that you still have 180 extremely interesting slides and a prototype demonstration for dessert.
Attention, question!
Questions without questions are also aimed at switching the attention of the audience from the theme of your presentation to anything else (usually the personality of the “questioner”). The man raises his hand: "Can I ask you a question?" After your permission, a speech in the style of "historical excursion" begins.
The best thing is if you immediately say that the question and answer session will be at the end of the presentation. But sometimes (and most often) you should welcome questions from the audience during the presentation. If a “speech” begins under the guise of a question, do not hesitate to ask as soon as possible what the question is. You can even interrupt the performance in a minute. Bring the context back. You are asked a question, you are ready to answer and are waiting for a question.
Black rhetoric
Million receptions of varying degrees of cruelty. If you are unlucky and you have an opponent tempted in black rhetoric, immediately call for reinforcements! If there is a senior comrade - sales, project manager, etc., address the questions to him. If you are alone before the troll, God help you. Or download the appropriate skill. Googling literature and start to train. As a rule, the basic methods of counteraction is enough for 99% of self-taught trolls. And if you suddenly got the same 1%, then this is most likely an order. That is, they have released a killer troll, and the solution to the problem lies in the political field.
For an example, here are tricks from personal practice:
“Your data is incorrect, X’s research confirms this” (about graphs or numbers). While you are making excuses, proving that your sources are reliable, everyone will remember only what you are driving.
- “Did you personally participate in projects to introduce your system in such (unique) enterprises as ours?” How, without knowing our (unique) specifics, can you tell us how to do our work? ”The same joke as in the previous paragraph.
- “And you know that ...” Then follow some internal agreements, which you most likely never heard of. This is an example of the use of referential, or referential influence. Favorite trick of all bosses. “But you don’t know what's going on up there!” “You don’t have all the information to say that!”, Etc.
The topic is truly inexhaustible, and the experience and skill of countering can be acquired only in battle.
Conversation. Art spin
I will cite just two simplest techniques that work and often work during negotiations with specialists . What is happening there between the sale and the customer is a great mystery, and probably this is the subject of another blog.
Evil expert and good boss
The goal of the event is to unbalance you by exerting pressure. To do this, a troll-killer is invited, who begins to dig up every word, every document, swear, resent, and often lose all adequacy. Your loss - when, in response to the next attack, you lose calm and begin to react accordingly.
Any educated person is looking for a way out of a conflict situation. And the output will be offered to you in the form of a "good and wise boss." Which will pacify the dispersed employee, will offer you coffee with brandy and some conditions for overcoming the crisis. Which before this seemed unacceptable to you, and now seem almost the only salvation.
What to do? And nothing! Do not lose composure, keep the party line. This is a trade, and you should have some backlash. If you have not been provided with instructions on where to sift, and where it is impossible - your boss is a
There is even a variation of the Stockholm syndrome, when the specialist comes from the negotiations and begins to spread rot to his own people, extolling the personal qualities of the customer, to whom he hasn’t had warm feelings at all. This suggests that the real master is working on that side. These are often found among government officials. They hone their skills for years, doing nothing other than pressing and trolling.
Telegram from the Center
A variant of the reception described above in the absence of an evil specialist. It is practiced by middle functionaries and managers, who by their position are not allowed to have a personal chauffeur and a manual trolley killer.
In the first part of the scheme, the pressure is exerted by the customer’s representative himself. The whole available arsenal is used, including methods of referential or refrain influence. The abundance of references to “higher powers”, “corporate standards”, “CEO” or “Kremlin” speaks of the approach of Phase Two.
When you have fully realized your insignificance and are sitting with a bowed head, the Big Boss Call follows. With a changed face, the customer’s representative runs out of the office, and within a few minutes the enlightened one returns. Say, "I explained to our very deplorable situation, went to work, blocked you as best I could, and decided to bestow mercy on myself, but under the following conditions ...".
In contrast to the first option, you can repent of all sins in Phase One, detach yourself with whips, but without giving any promises. You can also have a pitiful shabby look (see movies with Woody Allen). But Phase Two you must meet cheerfully and independently and not make any concessions other than those planned. Moreover, a successfully broken template will allow you, on the contrary, to overcome some conditions, since a customer representative cannot quit his own game.
Conclusion
In this topic, it remains to disassemble the techniques that were observed during the delivery of work results (system demonstration or documentation delivery). So there is a backlog for the third part.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/122148/
All Articles