Bel's thoughts

Quote from Bel on October 30, 2022, 6:42 pm

Bad former client comes forward again, and a thought that crossed my mind

New developments in connection with this earlier post of mine, where I was writing about a very manipulative person (the "triangular guilt tripper") who kept pushing manipulatively for me to help:

Quote from Bel on October 23, 2022, 1:58 pm

Handling a former bad client

...

Him: Goodday Bel,

I haven't yet received any payment, I called to no avail ...

Can you send them a reminder also to know when they will pay.

[triangular guilt tripping here] ...

I think I would have helped him in being paid, notwithstanding his past behavior, if he had asked kindly and thus shown being at least a bit sorry about how he treated me in the past.

But his present tone (where he basically throws his anger at me, something he used to do even more when I was unaware) is pushing me more and more to the side where I don't want to help him.

So I thought about it; I waited ten days, and answered:

Me: Hi X,

you can send yourself the order to the customer service, including by email, specifying your bank coordinates and pushing for payment within 15 days.

Bye

The new development is that I now received this email from the above person:

Him: Good day Bel,

I sent an email to the customer service of ..., as you indicated, I put you in cc, but since I don't have certified mail they didn't receive it as per the attached photo. Can you send yourself the mail to push for payment??

Let me know thank you.

Good day

I put the email away and told myself I would deal with this later, but I couldn't stop thinking about it.

I then had a thought: what if I started purposefully asking this person to send me documents, details, direct him to do something, ask for something else, while deliberately responding every 10 days and then at the end, finding an excuse to close everything with nothing accomplished and telling him "Nope, sorry, document x forbids me from going forward. Good luck!".

I immediately thought this would be: i) unethical; ii) very risky; iii) not myself at all. So I decided I will either tell him I can't help (unlikely) or just finally help him get paid to get rid of him (and I think I will do exactly this).

But, after thinking all this, I strangely experienced a sudden worsening of my mood, a phase of intense anger, and a subsequent phase of intense sadness.

So much that, again, I had to pause everything for some hours and just let these emotions pass.

After the whole emotional gamut, I now understand why my thought triggered all these emotions.

And here it is:

"Wild goose chase" manipulation: making someone lose time and expend useless (work) effort

How a colleague of mine once incurred a debt he didn't want to repay

Somewhat early-on in my career, many many years ago, I met a fellow lawyer specializing in a particular area of the law, and he asked if I could give him English language lessons.

I agreed, and proceeded to have about ten English conversations in videoconference with him over several weeks.

He offered to pay at the start, and I told him I would think about it and come up with an amount later, as I had never done this kind of thing and didn't know how much effort I had to expend.

After the lessons where over, strangely he was always unavailable to talk whenever I tried to call him to quote the price for the lessons (and, just to laugh, I am only now realizing why he was unavailable, exactly as I am typing this!).

I had an idea: why not ask him for help instead of "payment"

Then a client came to me to ask for help, in a case that was precisely in that area of the law where my colleague specialized.

I had started drafting the pleadings to start a judicial case for my client, but I reached a point where I became stuck and didn't know how to progress.

I then thought I could ask for the help of the above fellow lawyer.

He, after all: i) specialized precisely in that area; and ii) had a "social debt" with me for the lessons I had given him.

How my colleague faked helping me only to make me waste time, effort, and lose a client

Strangely, my colleague accepted to help.

He then proceeded to review my pleadings in such a way that, as time went on, I was more and more confused.

Although he was specialized in that area, the comments and reviews he did to the draft made no sense to me.

He seemed to raise doubts more than find solutions, and would never commit to one solution or another.

If I told him "ok let's go with this", he would suddenly change his mind and suggest the opposite approach.

All in all, months went by and he didn't help me make any progress at all on the lawsuit pleadings.

And, I now understand, he likely knew from the start that the lawsuit couldn't be done from the start for a technical reason.

I didn't realize it at the time, but he had the options of: i) refusing to help; ii) really helping; or iii) faking helping me to sabotage me with the "wild goose chase" manipulation, ie exactly the thought that crossed my mind with reference to my former client.

And no. iii) is precisely what he did: he made me waste months with fake useless "help", to sabotage my work.

All the while even "socially scalping" me by faking he was "repaying" his earlier debt to me for the English lessons!

It's one thing to do something "bad" to retaliate, but another one entirely to be sadistically manipulative with a naive person just for fun

And the worst thing is that I had only been giving to him.

In the case of my former client above, I had this fleeting thought as he had been very manipulative toward me.

But, my colleague had only been helped by me.

Surely he had seen I was naive and power-unaware, though: starting from the fact that I accepted to postpone my payment until after I gave all the lessons [big facepalm]!

And that was sufficient for him to activate the sadistic-"wild goose chase"-manipulation-fake-social-scalp mode.

How that particular case ended, and another tangential realization I now have on some clients who look for "young lawyers"

In the end, I somehow realized I would get no help from him, and told my client the truth: ie that I had not found a way to help him, and that nothing was due. My client of course got really angry at me. Significantly enough, though, he later came back to ask for my help on another case. Which I refused to do.

Side-realization: some clients purposefully seek to engage young naive lawyers as they know their case is non-meritorious; they may even have gone to a more experienced lawyer before who told them so. They are only looking to find an idiot who thinks they can be helped, to then - at best - have a shot at justice, and - at worst - blame the young lawyer for making them lose the case.

This side-realization explains my big anger now, when I encounter a "client" who I feel is not representing to me the whole truth or that thinks I can be "led on" or "set up". I am reliving the anger from those younger days. 

Back to the story: it was then really strange to me that this colleague of mine, who I still then tried to contact more than once, would never answer my calls and only superficially answer my messages (and here again, I only now am able to fully see why he behaved like this, while I am typing this: second facepalm!).

So this is the story of how I came to really understand why this colleague of mine did what he did to me only because I, much later, had the fleeting idea of doing a similar thing to another person.

Not all that's bad ends badly

Much later, when other colleagues started going toward the same route with me, I now understand, I was able to realize their sadistic "sabotage" intentions much more early-on, and disengage.

One example is my former "friend" who I often spoke here of one-upping me in front of a client of mine. I had already involved him in a joint lawsuit for one of my clients, and he was already starting to sabotage me early on. So I simply dropped him and went on with the lawsuit by myself. I thought "F*** this person. Even if I have to work thrice the time, I prefer going on my own rather than asking for the help of an as**** like this!"

Many other cases come to mind where I picked up something was very "off" and disengaged rather early on.

And this was before I got on TPM. So I guess my gut started to really protect me, from a certain point onwards.

I wasn't able to fight, or even to subcommunicate I understood what they were doing, but at least I was able to disengage.

Bad former client comes forward again, and a thought that crossed my mind

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on October 31, 2022, 3:04 am

Great stuff Bel, thank you for sharing!

I'll be adding the "wild good chase" to the dictionary as well now.

A few notes:

• Ask for help instead of payment: yes, that would have been probably a better way to go about it
• Pre-price your effort and time (fair value marketing): before even starting with the lessons, it's good to say "I'm busy of course, but I'll try to make up for you". Then, you can even ask him to join you for lunch or dinner and talk in English. That way, he picks up the tab, you get closer, he respects you more, and you make an ally. Without that, the takers of this world will price your time and effort at the price they prefer: zero

Possible solution for your manipulative "friend"

What I'm not sure here if it's your legal (or moral) duty to chase the payment as part of the initial work, or not.

Whether it is or it's not, things are different.

In any case, since he's annoying asshole, have you thought about this:

Dear,

(My involvement ended with the case resolution)

Technically, it's not my task to chase the payment, which can be a tedious and long process (add what it may require from a legal perspective).

It's a separate task and usually comes with a separate billing agreement.

But because of our ties, I decided to land you a hand and see what I can do in my spare time.

Dinner on you :).

Then, of course, never go for that dinner if you don't like him.

But the point is that now the expectations and who's giving/taking are clear.

When he pings you, it's clear to both that he's taking once again: it's not your duty, you're doing a favor, and in your spare time.

Whatever comes out of it for him is gold and extra.

You make it clear you're doing him a favor, and make him end the engagement with you on a clear and explicitly stated debt -instead of only a debt in your mind, which is likely part of what's bothering you now-.

That's also good for the future: it makes it harder for him to annoy you again in the future, and makes it easier (and fairer and more expected) for you to say "no" to any future request.

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on October 31, 2022, 3:15 am

On a separate note:

Quote from Bel on October 30, 2022, 6:42 pm

Many other cases come to mind where I picked up something was very "off" and disengaged rather early on.

And this was before I got on TPM. So I guess my gut started to really protect me, from a certain point onwards.

I wasn't able to fight, or even to subcommunicate I understood what they were doing, but at least I was able to disengage.

That makes sense.

Many people who end up here "not ready", either because too naive or too angry, will not realize the learning potential

The too-naive will think "nah, this is over-thinking it, that person just happened to be late at the appointment".
And the too angry are too enraged (and fearful) and to think of cooperation and win-wins in a complex world, despite the risks.

Quote from Bel on October 31, 2022, 11:16 am

Thank you so much Lucio.

Before going in detail on your post, I’m just going to say:

BOOM!

If I had known then what I am learning here now, I would have had superpowers, and the outcome of all this would have been very different.

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on October 31, 2022, 3:04 am

• Ask for help instead of payment: yes, that would have been probably a better way to go about it

From your comment here, I understand that my responding to his offer to pay with a statement that I would quote an amount later was a mistake.

My colleague thought that I was social scalping him, and that’s what triggered the whole manipulative behavior on his part.

Am I reading it correctly?

If that’s the case, this is the most precious learning for me here, as I could have avoided the whole thing just by behaving in a “socially fair” way.

So it seems I was doing things that were triggering manipulation and frenemy behaviors.

• Pre-price your effort and time (fair value marketing): before even starting with the lessons, it's good to say "I'm busy of course, but I'll try to make up for you". Then, you can even ask him to join you for lunch or dinner and talk in English. That way, he picks up the tab, you get closer, he respects you more, and you make an ally. Without that, the takers of this world will price your time and effort at the price they prefer: zero

This is just invaluable. I had no idea to today that I could have “solved” it like this.

This would have avoided “scalping” him by asking for money, and would have subcommunicated:

- I was making an effort

- I was doing him a favor

- and I valued him as a friend

- while at the same time not “selling myself short”.

Possible solution for your manipulative "friend"

What I'm not sure here if it's your legal (or moral) duty to chase the payment as part of the initial work, or not.

Whether it is or it's not, things are different.

In any case, since he's annoying asshole, have you thought about this:

Dear,

(My involvement ended with the case resolution)

Technically, it's not my task to chase the payment, which can be a tedious and long process (add what it may require from a legal perspective).

It's a separate task and usually comes with a separate billing agreement.

But because of our ties, I decided to land you a hand and see what I can do in my spare time.

Dinner on you :).

Then, of course, never go for that dinner if you don't like him.

But the point is that now the expectations and who's giving/taking are clear.

When he pings you, it's clear to both that he's taking once again: it's not your duty, you're doing a favor, and in your spare time.

Whatever comes out of it for him is gold and extra.

You make it clear you're doing him a favor, and make him end the engagement with you on a clear and explicitly stated debt -instead of only a debt in your mind, which is likely part of what's bothering you now-.

That's also good for the future: it makes it harder for him to annoy you again in the future, and makes it easier (and fairer and more expected) for you to say "no" to any future request.

This is just astronomically BOOM. Like a supernova exploding!

Technically, it is exactly as you say. Making him get paid is not (formally) part of my obligations.

So I’ll write this to him immediately.

In my mind, I had no idea that “honest exchange talk” could be used here, and I didn’t know it could be used even if one has no intention to get anything back from the other person.

Now I see why it’s invaluable, even from a pure process perspective!

In other words: at a general level, I was concentrating on the content (of what one could ask by using the honest exchange talk) rather than on the process (of what using the talk entails and causes in the behavior of the parties).

So these techniques work (and are useful) first at a process level, rather than at a content level. Even when they formally consist precisely of a request for (future) content.

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on October 31, 2022, 5:34 pm

Thank you so much for the credit, Bel, and thank you so much for highlighting what was helpful.

Truly, that's really invaluable to make PU even better ("fair value marketing" was theoretically there, but obviously not highlighted enough, so now I know I need to expand it and may be add some examples -my bad, too, it's a foundational approach to effective socialization, and should have known better 🙂 ).

Let us know how it goes with that ahole for the credit recovery.

To answer your question:

Quote from Bel on October 31, 2022, 11:16 am

From your comment here, I understand that my responding to his offer to pay with a statement that I would quote an amount later was a mistake.

My colleague thought that I was social scalping him, and that’s what triggered the whole manipulative behavior on his part.

Am I reading it correctly?

If that’s the case, this is the most precious learning for me here, as I could have avoided the whole thing just by behaving in a “socially fair” way.

So it seems I was doing things that were triggering manipulation and frenemy behaviors.

Yeah, it's possible.

We can't necessarily justify this person, and it's entirely possible he's an ashole and he'd have been an asshole anyway.

But still, yes, a more strategic and contextually-suited approach may have avoided the manipulation and, even if he turned out to be an asshole, still produced at least better outcomes (for sure for you, and maybe even for him).

Also consider: in Mediterranean cultures, the general expectation among colleagues, friends, and semi-friends is that you do the favor and get repaid with social credit and/or another favor, rather than straight to money (of course, exceptions always apply, but consider that in this case English lessons isn't your work, so billing for a conversation may feel off).
So, sometimes, it does feel jarring when someone you know mentions "quote" for non-work related favors (I think there's an example in PU too where a girl I was dating talked about a "quote" for a favor I asked and it almost ended the relationship until she U-turned, apologized, and then the "quote" became a running joke).

Still, since those conversations take time and effort, it's best -and fair- to price them appropriately and have him adapt to your schedule.
The script above was a good option because it turned a cost, into a potential win-win -you turn the "chore" into a socialization opportunity with a valuable contact and make a friend/ally-.

Even if he couldn't make it to those lunches, the exchange would still end with you willing to help and find a way.

And if he did make it, chances are that after a while the meetings would have fallen through even before the 10th-meeting mark as life gets in the way -and you may have just said "whenever you need something with English language, let me know"-. But what remained was "a friend and cool guy who was willing to help".
And that stays.

Quote from Bel on October 31, 2022, 7:27 pm

Thank you Lucio, I understand.

My mistake was: asking for payment in a non-work matter

Doesn't matter that he was the one who suggested paying me, I should still have refused.

Instead I tried to "take time", as I was unsure what to do. And the fact that I mentioned the possibility of being paid destroyed the potential relationship.

And my "late refusal" and "turning it into a favor" at that point aggravated the situation.

I think concentrating on my side of the deal holds better learning value for me for sure.

Another mistake I used to make: asking a big client to pay for "small personal stuff"

I find this has a parallel to when a key person (or key person's relative) in a "company client" asks the company lawyer for help in a personal matter.

Or, similarly, when a person who brings in many clients asks for some work on a personal matter.

Unless the matter is really "big", I think there is a "social rule" to not make the key person pay.

And this was the mistake that probably recently destroyed the relationship with that one of my clients I wrote about elsewhere (the one where I ultimately waived my fees).

In that case as well, all I did was, significantly, mentioning the possibility/expectation of being paid.

Thank you, this is invaluable learning for me. Finding out what was causing me to lose clients (and that it wasn't a technical thing, but a social thing I can now address) is invaluable.

What my former boss used to do

My former boss would systematically refuse all work from people who were not significantly rich, or not related to big companies.

When he was involved by a company with some initial little work, he would do it for a fee. Then, it often happened that a key company person came to him for some personal issue. My boss would do this personal work totally for free, even if big.

Then, after the work had ended, he would approach them and propose that they involved him in all the company legal issues with a monthly guaranteed fee.

Quote from Bel on October 31, 2022, 8:18 pm

Coming back to this:

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on August 23, 2022, 2:44 pm

What to say after you check a power move

I think there's a time and place for that answer, and it can work great in the right situation.

However, the answer I probably use most often after checking a power move is a simple:

It's OK

The reason is that the main message of power/awareness/not being cool with their games is already sent the moment you check it.

It's certainly possible they'll keep playing power moves going forward, but it's also very possible that's the end of it: they got the message you're not the guy to be taken advantage of and/or pushed around, and now you can have an adult-to-adult, open and genuine interaction -or even alliance-.

At that point, you may as well focus on re-building rapport.

In our turkey-eagle allegory, after you enforced boundaries may be the perfect time to soar back up.

"I perfectly understand the situation" instead keeps on playing the "one VS another" game.

There's also an important reason I often like this approach: saying "I perfectly understand the situation" thread-expands on the game playing.
A strong "that's OK" instead sub-communicates that it was a small parenthesis in your life: you're not the type of guy who either appreciates power moves, who engages in power moves, or who's used to power moves -the latter one is important, it sub-communicates high-power, that people don't pull power moves on you very often-.

Essentially we then discussed if, in the case of red-level power moves, this "It's ok" approach was still good, or if one would better close with "I understand the situation full well, thank you".

Well, today I had this realization that "It's ok", as suggested by Lucio, is probably always the best response, i.e. including for red level power moves and for repeated power moves.

This is for several reasons, and especially for those stated by Lucio in the quote above: i.e. "It's ok" subcommunicates "I know what I'm doing in addressing this, in fact it was silly and funny to me". So it's useful especially for bystanders.

Other reasons, I think, that lead in this direction:

• power movers are not accustomed to people checking power moves correctly. They don't expect it, or they wouldn't power move
• this means that when someone correctly checks a power move, they are dumbfounded and presumably will start thinking the person they tried to play cannot be played again
• so when they ask for a life presever, what they are really saying is "Ok, I lost, now let me exit from this social situation with some face saved"
• so when one says "it's ok", it's actually unlikely that they will continue power moving
• also, power movers, I suppose, don't think what they're doing is "bad". They do not see their "red level" move as a "red level" move: it's the social group reaction that will let them know they made a big faux pas
• finally, my former idea (ie "Don't worry, I understand the situation") probably amounts to "social scalping" on their power move, and is instead likely to enrage them and make them continue power moving (which is probably why the guy in my case kept trying to)
• even assuming one recognizes the other party is continuing to power move repeatedly, "It's ok" will strategically make them think one has not recognized it, while my former idea has the big drawback of "officializing the enemy frame".

So, from all points of view,

It's ok

seems to always be the best solution after one checked a power move.

Quote from Bel on November 1, 2022, 12:57 pm

Update on this:

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on October 31, 2022, 3:04 am

Possible solution for your manipulative "friend"

...

Dear,

(My involvement ended with the case resolution)

Technically, it's not my task to chase the payment, which can be a tedious and long process (add what it may require from a legal perspective).

It's a separate task and usually comes with a separate billing agreement.

But because of our ties, I decided to land you a hand and see what I can do in my spare time.

Dinner on you :).

Then, of course, never go for that dinner if you don't like him.

But the point is that now the expectations and who's giving/taking are clear.

...

I sent him an email substantially as Lucio suggested, and this is his (totally unexpected and to me frankly incredible) response:

Him: Hi Bel,

I didn't think that even in front of an order they could do as they like or in any case delay the compensation, darn.

In any case of course for the dinner you are my guest 😉 so it is also an occasion to see each other again.

Thank you so much keep me updated.

Bye,

I am simply speechless, don't know what to say.

Instead of being annoyed, he is now more kind and warm.

Lucio, I owe you a dinner.

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on November 1, 2022, 2:27 pm

Ahaha nice one, Bel!

You know what would be the coolest capstone to this?

You do go for that dinner after, and you two become friends :).

A bit far-fetched, but far from impossible actually.
And I may even go for that dinner. Even if not friends, things may still improve (a lot).