Former Community – We Moved

🆕 Coached community here, for posts & feedback public community here.

ForumPublic Forum: Self-DevelopmentJournalsBel's thoughts

Please or Register to create posts and topics.

Bel's thoughts

#541 · April 7, 2023, 5:24 pm

Straight honest talk is almost always better - the "people are not stupid" principle

The case

I was reflecting on this past interaction of mine with a relative-client of mine.

I did some work for her for free, and used what Lucio had suggested - "Hey, it would take us more to prepare the invoice than the amount is worth" - to not fall for the insistence to pay.

I then suggested a dinner on her.

While on the dinner, she told she wanted to refer me to three other people she knew who were in her same situation.

But, she told me, she would only do so if "I made them pay".

I said "Ok don't worry, in their case I'll quote my fees and go on from there".

And then no contact came to me from these supposed three people.

The issue

The issue I see now - but didn't see then - is that her telling me "I'll only refer them to you if you make them pay" was more of a test of congruency for me than a real point.

She was not invested into me getting paid by these three friends of hers - she was invested (unconsciously) in seeing if I was congruent that the work I did was "not so difficult" that I had to make her pay.

She was checking to see if I had put her into debts, so to say.

And when I elaborated on the fact that - in the case of her friends - I would "give them a fee quote and ask to be paid", she probably lost respect for me and did not refer me to her friends.

The solution

What I should have done was maintain congruency and explain to her that the work was not complex, and that I wouldn't ask anybody for a payment for this.

But that, at the same time, I was glad to be of help to her friends and get to know them, and in my experience more complex stuff that requires complex work always comes up at some point.

In this way, I would have maintained congruency and "passed the test".

John Freeman has reacted to this post.

#542 · April 7, 2023, 5:25 pm

How to answer "let's hope I don't need a lawyer"

This comes up frequently for me when I suggest people to call me if they need a lawyer.

I'm thinking a good answer might be something like

Me: You never know when a good lawyer may be of help in turning around a matter for the positive.

Basically aimed at projecting the correct perspective (lawyer = help, solution, advice, counsel, ally, fighter for your cause) , to reverse the common thought that lawyers = problems.

John Freeman has reacted to this post.

#543 · April 7, 2023, 6:24 pm

For the first case, I think she's being very weird: she's referring you her friends only if you make them pay and you did a work for free to her?

Come on...

I think I would have answer with a good old "It depends": "It depends what kind of work is required from me" and would have told her: "but you don't have to refer them to me if you don't want to" to remove the me needing something from her. She's actually getting something here: by introducing you to her friend she's gaining power as an intermediate so that's her win. Not to make her friends pay (?!). And what kind of friend does want her friend to pay?!

How to answer "let's hope I don't need a lawyer"

On this one I have a different take. When they leave the consult, sometimes parents will say: "Let's hope we don't see each other soon" with a smile. They mean that if they come it's that the child is sick so they hope their child is not sick. In the past I was taking it personally as it also meant they were not looking forward to see me again. Now when they say that I say something like:

Yeah, I hope so. I wish good health to the whole family (with a warm smile)

And they smile back. That's the way I deal with the: "If I need you it means I have a problem" which is the correct situation.

Lucio Buffalmano and B have reacted to this post.

#544 · April 9, 2023, 11:41 am

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on April 9, 2023, 11:41 am
Quote from Bel on April 7, 2023, 5:24 pm
Straight honest talk is almost always better - the "people are not stupid" principle
The case
I was reflecting on this past interaction of mine with a relative-client of mine.
I did some work for her for free, and used what Lucio had suggested - "Hey, it would take us more to prepare the invoice than the amount is worth" - to not fall for the insistence to pay.
I then suggested a dinner on her.
While on the dinner, she told she wanted to refer me to three other people she knew who were in her same situation.
But, she told me, she would only do so if "I made them pay".
I said "Ok don't worry, in their case I'll quote my fees and go on from there".
And then no contact came to me from these supposed three people.
The issue
The issue I see now - but didn't see then - is that her telling me "I'll only refer them to you if you make them pay" was more of a test of congruency for me than a real point.
She was not invested into me getting paid by these three friends of hers - she was invested (unconsciously) in seeing if I was congruent that the work I did was "not so difficult" that I had to make her pay.
She was checking to see if I had put her into debts, so to say.
And when I elaborated on the fact that - in the case of her friends - I would "give them a fee quote and ask to be paid", she probably lost respect for me and did not refer me to her friends.
The solution
What I should have done was maintain congruency and explain to her that the work was not complex, and that I wouldn't ask anybody for a payment for this.
But that, at the same time, I was glad to be of help to her friends and get to know them, and in my experience more complex stuff that requires complex work always comes up at some point.
In this way, I would have maintained congruency and "passed the test".
I don't think that's necessarily a test, Bel.
I know that you know this, but I like to repeat it anyway: we can't safely make the jump from one case -or even a few cases- to a general rule.
Though it's certainly possible she didn't like the answer.
Your answer would have been much better indeed.
Or even something like this:
Yeah, if it's a bigger work, then a invoice is in order.
But worst-case scenario that it's a bigger work I'll still make them a special offer because they come from you and also mention that to them
Notice the power move:
You don't even mention FREE.
You don't want to be associated with the word FREE -top fliers don't do stuff for free, they do favors, a much different frame-.
You SUB-communicate that if it's small it'll be free.
And also reassure her that even if it's big, she's still gets her WIIFM.
So you reassure her that she will get her credit and that her friends get special treatment.
Win-win.
(Free work wouldn't have been win-win at all)

Quote from Bel on April 7, 2023, 5:24 pm
Straight honest talk is almost always better - the "people are not stupid" principle
The case
I was reflecting on this past interaction of mine with a relative-client of mine.
I did some work for her for free, and used what Lucio had suggested - "Hey, it would take us more to prepare the invoice than the amount is worth" - to not fall for the insistence to pay.
I then suggested a dinner on her.
While on the dinner, she told she wanted to refer me to three other people she knew who were in her same situation.
But, she told me, she would only do so if "I made them pay".
I said "Ok don't worry, in their case I'll quote my fees and go on from there".
And then no contact came to me from these supposed three people.
The issue
The issue I see now - but didn't see then - is that her telling me "I'll only refer them to you if you make them pay" was more of a test of congruency for me than a real point.
She was not invested into me getting paid by these three friends of hers - she was invested (unconsciously) in seeing if I was congruent that the work I did was "not so difficult" that I had to make her pay.
She was checking to see if I had put her into debts, so to say.
And when I elaborated on the fact that - in the case of her friends - I would "give them a fee quote and ask to be paid", she probably lost respect for me and did not refer me to her friends.
The solution
What I should have done was maintain congruency and explain to her that the work was not complex, and that I wouldn't ask anybody for a payment for this.
But that, at the same time, I was glad to be of help to her friends and get to know them, and in my experience more complex stuff that requires complex work always comes up at some point.
In this way, I would have maintained congruency and "passed the test".

I don't think that's necessarily a test, Bel.

I know that you know this, but I like to repeat it anyway: we can't safely make the jump from one case -or even a few cases- to a general rule.

Though it's certainly possible she didn't like the answer.

Your answer would have been much better indeed.

Or even something like this:

Yeah, if it's a bigger work, then a invoice is in order.
But worst-case scenario that it's a bigger work I'll still make them a special offer because they come from you and also mention that to them

Notice the power move:

You don't even mention FREE.

You don't want to be associated with the word FREE -top fliers don't do stuff for free, they do favors, a much different frame-.

You SUB-communicate that if it's small it'll be free.
And also reassure her that even if it's big, she's still gets her WIIFM.

So you reassure her that she will get her credit and that her friends get special treatment.

Win-win.

(Free work wouldn't have been win-win at all)

John Freeman, Transitioned and B have reacted to this post.

Community, new content and Confidence University now available here.

#545 · April 9, 2023, 11:48 am

Quote from Bel on April 7, 2023, 5:25 pm
How to answer "let's hope I don't need a lawyer"
This comes up frequently for me when I suggest people to call me if they need a lawyer.
I'm thinking a good answer might be something like
Me: You never know when a good lawyer may be of help in turning around a matter for the positive.
Basically aimed at projecting the correct perspective (lawyer = help, solution, advice, counsel, ally, fighter for your cause) , to reverse the common thought that lawyers = problems.

Even possible:

SAY IT FIRST.

Hopefully you'll never need it, but...

And when they say that, you say:

It depends. Lawyers don't always mean trouble, they're often there as opportunities to make money

Ie.:

Change the frame from "fight / trouble" to "win / opportunity".

B has reacted to this post.

Community, new content and Confidence University now available here.

#546 · April 12, 2023, 2:34 pm

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on April 9, 2023, 11:48 am
Quote from Bel on April 7, 2023, 5:25 pm
How to answer "let's hope I don't need a lawyer"
This comes up frequently for me when I suggest people to call me if they need a lawyer.
I'm thinking a good answer might be something like
Me: You never know when a good lawyer may be of help in turning around a matter for the positive.
Basically aimed at projecting the correct perspective (lawyer = help, solution, advice, counsel, ally, fighter for your cause) , to reverse the common thought that lawyers = problems.
Even possible:
SAY IT FIRST.
Hopefully you'll never need it, but...
And when they say that, you say:
It depends. Lawyers don't always mean trouble, they're often there as opportunities to make money
Ie.:
Change the frame from "fight / trouble" to "win / opportunity".

Thank you, Lucio.

This is a total powerhouse.

Lucio Buffalmano has reacted to this post.

#547 · April 12, 2023, 2:46 pm

Quote from B on April 12, 2023, 2:46 pm
Manipulative job interview move: informing workplace members beforehand of the "interview" and setting up a "cult-like" group welcome
My experience: being invited by a friend to a cult-like first meeting in a religious organization
I was once, many many years ago, invited by a friend to a meeting of people in a religious organization.
When I got there, everybody was very welcoming and apparently already knew me beforehand. They talked with me, made me feel appreciated with compliments and seemingly unconditional acceptance, and offered me dinner. The atmosphere was as if I already was a part of the group.
Later, they invited me two or three times to a "bible meditation session". I didn't accept, but expressed the willingness to go there again to meet informally as had happened the first time.
I remember they totally switched behavior and basically everybody in the organization cut me off abruptly. They stopped responding to me and were very dismissive.
Manipulative cult-like "job interview"
Fast forward to today. One person I know had two job interviews in a company.
In the second interview, she went there and found herself meeting all the workplace people, who already knew her name and were totally welcoming.
They spoke to her as if she were already a member of the company. They encouraged her, complimented her, and seemed very happy she would join.
Thing is: this was a second job interview, and this person had not been offered a position nor told the conditions of employment.
During the meeting, the hiring manager in fact seemed to somewhat counter the behavior of the workplace people by saying out loud "go easy, we've not chosen her already".
At the end of the meeting, the hiring manager told this person to "come tomorrow" to "start getting a feel for the workplace", and that the "details would be sorted out later".
This person got off the meeting and had an emotional break-down panic attack.
Analysis
I then had an epiphany: the cult-like welcome in the second job interview was arranged beforehand by the hiring manager.
He likely told everyone to welcome this person warmly, to make her feel part of the company already.
It was a "love-bombing" episode, and proof that the workplace was likely very manipulative and possibly managed by a psychopath.
The reason why the interviewee broke down emotionally after the second interview was because of the cognitive dissonance between her subconscious (which recognized the danger) and her conscious mind (which didn't understand what was going on).
The push-pull by the manager added to the manipulation and to the dissonance.
And of course the final "start already" move, which Lucio already explained in one of TPM's articles and which is highly manipulative per se.

Manipulative job interview move: informing workplace members beforehand of the "interview" and setting up a "cult-like" group welcome

My experience: being invited by a friend to a cult-like first meeting in a religious organization

I was once, many many years ago, invited by a friend to a meeting of people in a religious organization.

When I got there, everybody was very welcoming and apparently already knew me beforehand. They talked with me, made me feel appreciated with compliments and seemingly unconditional acceptance, and offered me dinner. The atmosphere was as if I already was a part of the group.

Later, they invited me two or three times to a "bible meditation session". I didn't accept, but expressed the willingness to go there again to meet informally as had happened the first time.

I remember they totally switched behavior and basically everybody in the organization cut me off abruptly. They stopped responding to me and were very dismissive.

Manipulative cult-like "job interview"

Fast forward to today. One person I know had two job interviews in a company.

In the second interview, she went there and found herself meeting all the workplace people, who already knew her name and were totally welcoming.

They spoke to her as if she were already a member of the company. They encouraged her, complimented her, and seemed very happy she would join.

Thing is: this was a second job interview, and this person had not been offered a position nor told the conditions of employment.

During the meeting, the hiring manager in fact seemed to somewhat counter the behavior of the workplace people by saying out loud "go easy, we've not chosen her already".

At the end of the meeting, the hiring manager told this person to "come tomorrow" to "start getting a feel for the workplace", and that the "details would be sorted out later".

This person got off the meeting and had an emotional break-down panic attack.

Analysis

I then had an epiphany: the cult-like welcome in the second job interview was arranged beforehand by the hiring manager.

He likely told everyone to welcome this person warmly, to make her feel part of the company already.

It was a "love-bombing" episode, and proof that the workplace was likely very manipulative and possibly managed by a psychopath.

The reason why the interviewee broke down emotionally after the second interview was because of the cognitive dissonance between her subconscious (which recognized the danger) and her conscious mind (which didn't understand what was going on).

The push-pull by the manager added to the manipulation and to the dissonance.

And of course the final "start already" move, which Lucio already explained in one of TPM's articles and which is highly manipulative per se.

Lucio Buffalmano, John Freeman and Kavalier have reacted to this post.

#548 · April 12, 2023, 3:12 pm

I am having numerous realizations about past experiences that I was not able to correctly interpret at the time.

I remember in particular one first date I had with a woman who, at the end, suggested we "go to dinner" the "next time".

If this were to happen today, I would drop her immediately: I now realize no woman who is really interested in a man would make such a suggestion.

I remember another woman who, during a second date, abruptly told me she had to go back home - alone.

If this were to happen today, I would just say

Me: Of course - do you want me to accompany you?
Her: No, thank you.
Me: Okay - have a great night.

And leave it at that.

I now realize, if I had behaved this way, there would have been a possibility she likely would have called me back some days later, and apologized.

John Freeman and Kavalier have reacted to this post.

#549 · April 13, 2023, 11:07 am

Quote from Bel on April 12, 2023, 2:46 pm
Manipulative job interview move: informing workplace members beforehand of the "interview" and setting up a "cult-like" group welcome

Interesting situation, Bel.

As usual, I'm the annoying person who reminds to be careful in going from analysis to final conclusions -and I may have to cut that off sometimes, it's not exactly adding value to some of my relationships :D-.

Such as, in this case: it may have all been organized, but we cannot know for sure.

For example, one element that stops me from jumping to that conclusion is to put myself in the manipulator's shoes:

Smart manipulators don't want everyone to know they're manipulators, so they may have been careful to tell everyone to "be very warm" and then tell them "to not be too warm cause she wasn't hired yet".

Rather, he may have orchestrated it all, but without being explicit (ie.: he may have gotten a cake and told everyone "she seems great, let's meet her", thus nudging for a very warm welcome, but without ever being explicit about it).

What smelled super fishy was that they told her to come again the day after with little details.

Needless to say, I'd love if your friend went for the learning opportunity and then let us know more.
But if time is more important than learning, then it may be a smarter approach to cut contact.

John Freeman, Kavalier and B have reacted to this post.

Community, new content and Confidence University now available here.

#550 · April 13, 2023, 8:27 pm

Quote from B on April 13, 2023, 8:27 pm
Thank you, Lucio.
On the covert workplace triangulation
I agree: this guy had triangulated his workplace people into the warm welcome without saying that explicitly.
My point is that the whole workplace smelled of "toxic".
My acquaintance decided not to go there the next day, but there is a follow-up.
My friend calls the hiring manager to say she needs time to evaluate the offer
My friend - the job candidate - called the hiring manager after the "job interview" (more like a toxic worplace cult-welcoming) and basically told him she wouldn't go the next day, as she needed some time - "as is normal" - to evaluate the offer. To this aim, my friend asked him to forward her the employment agreement and the economic conditions for her to evaluate.
He answered "wait, you changed your mind?" and she held the frame that there was no change of mind: as she had already said, she "needed time" to "evaluate the offer" and "decide whether to accept before starting work".
The hiring manager's wife calls my friend - and shares they already knew me
The next day (the one she was supposed to go there and didn't) my friend receives a call from another high-up person in this workplace, who turns out to be the wife of the hiring manager.
I have to add a bit of background at this point: my acquaintance - the job candidate - had occasionally collaborated with my law practice, and had put it on her resume.
So this woman calls my acquaintance, and asks if she knows me well. My acquaintance says yes, of course.
The woman then tells my friend that the hiring manager was a classmate of mine years ago in school.
I had even gone to their marriage, and then lost contact with both of them.
His wife then tells my acquaintance this:
Wife: The world is such a small place! Go figure. I remember that at one of my husband's birthdays, Bel gifted him a pen. Everybody laughed, but Bel instead explained the gift and did not care that they were laughing...
My thoughts
My acquaintance ultimately refused the offer.
But, when she told me what had happened, my immediate thought was:
Why did this woman have to tell my acquaintance, who is one of my work contacts, a totally irrelevant story, where she tried to evidently paint someone as object of ridicule for gifting a pen to her husband.
In my mind, this behavior by this woman confirms she was basically trying to smear me, and possibly convince my acquaintance to not come back to work with me, but instead accept their offer.
So, the "toxic workplace feeling" was totally confirmed on my side.
If you have any comments, very happy to read.

Thank you, Lucio.

On the covert workplace triangulation

I agree: this guy had triangulated his workplace people into the warm welcome without saying that explicitly.

My point is that the whole workplace smelled of "toxic".

My acquaintance decided not to go there the next day, but there is a follow-up.

My friend calls the hiring manager to say she needs time to evaluate the offer

My friend - the job candidate - called the hiring manager after the "job interview" (more like a toxic worplace cult-welcoming) and basically told him she wouldn't go the next day, as she needed some time - "as is normal" - to evaluate the offer. To this aim, my friend asked him to forward her the employment agreement and the economic conditions for her to evaluate.

He answered "wait, you changed your mind?" and she held the frame that there was no change of mind: as she had already said, she "needed time" to "evaluate the offer" and "decide whether to accept before starting work".

The hiring manager's wife calls my friend - and shares they already knew me

The next day (the one she was supposed to go there and didn't) my friend receives a call from another high-up person in this workplace, who turns out to be the wife of the hiring manager.

I have to add a bit of background at this point: my acquaintance - the job candidate - had occasionally collaborated with my law practice, and had put it on her resume.

So this woman calls my acquaintance, and asks if she knows me well. My acquaintance says yes, of course.

The woman then tells my friend that the hiring manager was a classmate of mine years ago in school.

I had even gone to their marriage, and then lost contact with both of them.

His wife then tells my acquaintance this:

Wife: The world is such a small place! Go figure. I remember that at one of my husband's birthdays, Bel gifted him a pen. Everybody laughed, but Bel instead explained the gift and did not care that they were laughing...

My thoughts

My acquaintance ultimately refused the offer.

But, when she told me what had happened, my immediate thought was:

Why did this woman have to tell my acquaintance, who is one of my work contacts, a totally irrelevant story, where she tried to evidently paint someone as object of ridicule for gifting a pen to her husband.

In my mind, this behavior by this woman confirms she was basically trying to smear me, and possibly convince my acquaintance to not come back to work with me, but instead accept their offer.

So, the "toxic workplace feeling" was totally confirmed on my side.

If you have any comments, very happy to read.

Lucio Buffalmano, John Freeman and Kavalier have reacted to this post.