What is silent technical task?
It will be about very strange requirements that the customer aggressively insists on. I know that this is an endless topic and a lot has been said about it. But haven't you ever been asked to “add more air right into the pink kittens, and also make it rain under the cursor”? Such a person is not ready to listen to arguments. You have not had time to finish the phrase, but he has already concentrated on the search for counter arguments. In addition, a person is often afraid to seem stupid, therefore, continues to argue for the sake of image and self-esteem, even realizing that he was wrong. Agree that it is very difficult to say really new words in this topic? But I will try to summarize the very essence of effective behavior strategies in this situation.
As a result of reading this note, some newcomers will be able to avoid common mistakes that more experienced colleagues have gone through. If you look at the reports on the sites (for example, from a couple of large studios), then be surprised at the typicalness of all situations. The situation is similar with human communication: someone has already aggressively insisted on stupidities, and someone has been forced to really increase the conversion. For the owner of the site, his project is the center of the world, and for us this project is just one of the lines of the summary table with some indicators (for example: conversion, refusals, average time on the site, repeat visits, goals). Let's look at the problem of complex communication, as a summary table of human experience.
We will avoid evaluative judgments of a subjective image of a person, as this will prevent us from understanding which particular beliefs help us to cooperate, and which ones hinder. The site owner wants to invest minimal money in the tools. By the way, programmers and designers are often also considered tools. The site is created not for the sake of the fact of the ideal implementation, but for the sake of profit. But not all site owners understand what specific methods can increase conversion.
This problem occurs when a person is confident in his opinion, because he has too little knowledge in the relevant field to critically evaluate everything and see the fallacy of his beliefs. He is confident that anyone can increase conversion, i.e. it does not need education, experience and mountains of read books. He looks at the site like a child on a spaceship, thinking that it is very easy to control.
')
If this is not the site owner, then he may not be interested in conversion, but in the opportunity to tell his boss: “This cool site was done thanks to me, I did everything for them myself.” Maybe he pulls time, because there is no money for contractors. Or maybe he is pathologically comfortable with his complexes. Or he has the influence of social instincts (“I am dominant, I am a boss, I am a master, you need to teach serfs, they themselves do not think”) overshadows reason. Alternatively, he is too infantile and can not remove the "rose-colored glasses of the owner of the greatest site in the world."
The people mentioned earlier did not appear from the vacuum of space, but are a reflection of the problems of our society. It is possible to search for a long time for reasons in the imperfect education system, in typical mistakes of education, in human nature, but it is better to talk about how to communicate with such people.
Listen carefully, occasionally ask clarifying questions. Tell me now check what options you can try. During this time, you need to make a comparative table. In this comparative table, the stupid option should also be present, but in a disadvantageous light. Do not convince, but create conditions (tables, graphs, reports of statistical systems, examples on competitors' websites) so that the person himself sees the “right and profitable” solution. You present this not as your expert opinion, but as an objectively more profitable way to solve the problem.
Firstly, the fact of choice from the options offered creates feelings of one’s own choice, to which a person is less critical. Secondly, the simplest review (comparative table) looks more convincing than oral phrases. The main thing is not to argue and not take the place of the leader in communication. Speak those arguments that are beneficial to decision makers.
Not. Little. In my experience (I’m 30 years old, I’ve been spinning up different projects all the time and modifying ready-made solutions for business needs) I had the conviction that there really aren’t enough problem people. Of course, in life there were people with convictions that were not the most effective for cooperation, however, the methods described in this note were quite enough for me. However, the most problematic is when a person says: “Surprise me, create the best site! I do not know what I want! I don’t know how to understand that you have created the best site, but I just want the best site! ” It is better not to start cooperation with such genre hunters unless absolutely necessary.
What result will we get?
As a result of reading this note, some newcomers will be able to avoid common mistakes that more experienced colleagues have gone through. If you look at the reports on the sites (for example, from a couple of large studios), then be surprised at the typicalness of all situations. The situation is similar with human communication: someone has already aggressively insisted on stupidities, and someone has been forced to really increase the conversion. For the owner of the site, his project is the center of the world, and for us this project is just one of the lines of the summary table with some indicators (for example: conversion, refusals, average time on the site, repeat visits, goals). Let's look at the problem of complex communication, as a summary table of human experience.
Why do people behave this way?
We will avoid evaluative judgments of a subjective image of a person, as this will prevent us from understanding which particular beliefs help us to cooperate, and which ones hinder. The site owner wants to invest minimal money in the tools. By the way, programmers and designers are often also considered tools. The site is created not for the sake of the fact of the ideal implementation, but for the sake of profit. But not all site owners understand what specific methods can increase conversion.
This problem occurs when a person is confident in his opinion, because he has too little knowledge in the relevant field to critically evaluate everything and see the fallacy of his beliefs. He is confident that anyone can increase conversion, i.e. it does not need education, experience and mountains of read books. He looks at the site like a child on a spaceship, thinking that it is very easy to control.
')
If this is not the site owner, then he may not be interested in conversion, but in the opportunity to tell his boss: “This cool site was done thanks to me, I did everything for them myself.” Maybe he pulls time, because there is no money for contractors. Or maybe he is pathologically comfortable with his complexes. Or he has the influence of social instincts (“I am dominant, I am a boss, I am a master, you need to teach serfs, they themselves do not think”) overshadows reason. Alternatively, he is too infantile and can not remove the "rose-colored glasses of the owner of the greatest site in the world."
The people mentioned earlier did not appear from the vacuum of space, but are a reflection of the problems of our society. It is possible to search for a long time for reasons in the imperfect education system, in typical mistakes of education, in human nature, but it is better to talk about how to communicate with such people.
What communication strategy to use?
Listen carefully, occasionally ask clarifying questions. Tell me now check what options you can try. During this time, you need to make a comparative table. In this comparative table, the stupid option should also be present, but in a disadvantageous light. Do not convince, but create conditions (tables, graphs, reports of statistical systems, examples on competitors' websites) so that the person himself sees the “right and profitable” solution. You present this not as your expert opinion, but as an objectively more profitable way to solve the problem.
Firstly, the fact of choice from the options offered creates feelings of one’s own choice, to which a person is less critical. Secondly, the simplest review (comparative table) looks more convincing than oral phrases. The main thing is not to argue and not take the place of the leader in communication. Speak those arguments that are beneficial to decision makers.
Are there many aggressive ignoramuses?
Not. Little. In my experience (I’m 30 years old, I’ve been spinning up different projects all the time and modifying ready-made solutions for business needs) I had the conviction that there really aren’t enough problem people. Of course, in life there were people with convictions that were not the most effective for cooperation, however, the methods described in this note were quite enough for me. However, the most problematic is when a person says: “Surprise me, create the best site! I do not know what I want! I don’t know how to understand that you have created the best site, but I just want the best site! ” It is better not to start cooperation with such genre hunters unless absolutely necessary.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/243225/
All Articles