Former Community – We Moved
🆕 Coached community here, for posts & feedback public community here.
New customer seems to be tasking me (and maybe even disrespecting me) explicitly
Hi Guys!
One of my contacts got a new job, and sent me an e-mail that goes as follows:
Him: Hi Bel.
All good?
As you know, I don't work for [...] anymore and now I manage [...].
- I would need you to review this document ...
- Can we establish a rate of ... as we already have with other lawyers...?
At the end of the job, after we have spoken, you can invoice [...].
Thank you and good day.
I answered as follows:
Me: Hi ...,
congratulations for your new role. Thank you for your mail, I will send you the draft as soon as ready and we will talk soon.
I did the work, which took me one and a half weeks, and sent him the revised draft. He answered like this:
Him: Bel
Thank you for your mail. I send you my comments.
Clean it and then send me the clean final file.
After that we will talk.
Have a good day :)
It is evident to me that he is trying to explicitly and disrespectfully task me (with the sentence in bold) to establish a superior role.
The emoticon with the smile at the end, to camouflage disrespect in the message, is also a sign I am starting to recognize: my other female colleague used to do the same.
I reviewed PU on tasking and I am thinking of doing what he asks of me ("cleaning" the file, which is what I would need to do anyway) and then send him the file back with an email like this:
Me: Hi ...
I have reviewed your comments and made additional modifications, the most significant of which is the removal of the section on [...]. Optional: As to your comments on [...], I suggest we wait for the [other document] to be ready before implementing a specific clause here, which in any case would need to be specific and tailored to the applicable [other document].
I enclose here a clean file reflecting the above, and also a mark-up file showing the additional modifications made.
Kind regards.
So my idea is to use the "do it somewhat different" technique, which is made easy by the fact that what I would write is true. And to not mention "talking soon", so that he may understand I don't appreciate disrespect.
But I feel I am still letting him disrespect me this way: how can I better address the "clean the file and send it to me" phrase?
I could task him back:
Me: Optional: As to your comments on [...], I suggest we wait for the [other document] to be ready before implementing a specific clause here, which in any case would need to be specific and tailored to the applicable [other document]. Send it to me when it is ready and I'll have the clause drafted.
But I feel this would risk me losing this potential new client.
I thought about it more, and this is the solution I came up with (to be sent in two-three days together with the final work).
First his e-mail:
Him: Bel
Thank you for your mail. I send you my comments.
Clean it and then send me the clean final file.
After that we will talk.
Have a good day 🙂
Of note is that I already sent him a "clean" file in my first e-mail. So he in essence is tasking me with something I already did.
However, I find thread-expanding on this is a mistake, because if I push back on his "I'm the boss" stance, I will lose.
So here the e-mail I plan to send, together with both the mark-up file (with some additional modifications I need to make) and the "clean" file:
Me: ...,
we cannot insert the [X] clause until the corresponding model has been approved, as it has to reflect its specific content.
We can therefore consider for now applicable the text here attached.
Have a good day
Bel
The idea is: you disrespect me to show you are the boss? I will then show you I am the one who knows about the law.
Another idea, which I am borrowing from another lawyer who wrote something similar years ago when I was in biglaw:
My e-mail: Thank you ... for the comments on the text. (opening is much less polite than I usually write; also frames him as helping me, just like he did to me)
You'll find attached the version with the last amendments (clarifies I am not just "cleaning" the file but also working more). We cannot insert the [X] clause until the [X] model has been approved; at that time we will make another amendment (goes directly counter to one of the comments he made in text, and communicates I am the one who knows the law, and not merely an executor; also subtly re-tasks him back with informing me in the future of when the [X] model will be approved; finally, shows my work is not "final" yet, and he will need me again).
For the rest let's talk (clarifies he's not dictating what happens, and although both can call, I now expect him to call me). Talk soon,
Bel
What does everyone think - is any of the above a good way to rebalance the disrespect without destroying the relationship with this potential new customer? Is there anything I am misapplying or missing?
Yeah, it is tasking, and I wouldn't have liked the tone either.
I think the power moves might have started earlier:
- Can we establish a rate of ... as we already have with other lawyers...?
At the end of the job, after we have spoken, you can invoice [...].
He's jumping to the conclusion that you will say "yes", and that removes your agency.
I would have addressed that first.
Quote from Bel on March 2, 2022, 2:15 pmBut I feel this would risk me losing this potential new client.
That might be a risk.
But it's not as bad as you think, because successful folks aren't looking for lawyers they can boss around to handle their most important -and lucrative- cases.
As a matter of fact, you might even see that as a test.
Roll over, and you're easy to task, boss around, and good for smaller cases and grunt work.
As for your answers, the first one seems more like following and obeying without regaining power.
The next two are better.
And yes, I'd add "let's talk for the rest" in the end.
Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on March 2, 2022, 11:17 pmI think the power moves might have started earlier:
- Can we establish a rate of ... as we already have with other lawyers...?
At the end of the job, after we have spoken, you can invoice [...].
He's jumping to the conclusion that you will say "yes", and that removes your agency.
I would have addressed that first.
I understand letting it slide was a mistake. Is it correct to say that in seeing his first email, the only correct move would have been to automatically push back on the rate, even at the risk of losing the opportunity? Or would explicitly accepting the request in writing also be a good move (e.g. "I can accept the rate you propose").
I think now the best thing I can do is leverage my letting it slide as a concession, to ask for something back or to refuse if he asks additional concessions.
Quote from Bel on March 2, 2022, 2:15 pmBut I feel this would risk me losing this potential new client.
That might be a risk.
But it's not as bad as you think, because successful folks aren't looking for lawyers they can boss around to handle their most important -and lucrative- cases.
As a matter of fact, you might even see that as a test.
Roll over, and you're easy to task, boss around, and good for smaller cases and grunt work.
Thank you, this is invaluable. It explains many many things in my past and present professional life, that I can start addressing from now on.
OT: Years ago I assisted a big tech company in a public tender, and the company wanted to reserve property on a software that was part of the tender. I explained that this was counter to the tender law, which required property to pass to the contracting authority. The client aggressed me on the phone by raising his voice and saying that this was non-negotiable, and we would go ahead with the property reserve. I backed down, and ultimately the bid was declared inadmissible precisely for this reason. Of course the client never returned. Had I responded more forcefully ("You can shout all you want, but this point is very clear. No way we can proceed this way. Better to give up now then."), who knows if the client would still be around.
Also thank you for the go ahead on the last email, which is what I will send; I will also tone down politeness even more, because I am very tired of being manipulated.
What I got from this exchange is that your principle of toning down warmth with power-hungry people also works in writing.
In fact, until now I could not understand why some big lawyers would write emails to clients with a detached/almost nasty tone.
Now I get that it is a way of saying “Hey client, be careful because I don’t like your tone and can be equally nasty. In fact I may even lose you deliberately here if you go on”.
Balancing these things is very difficult. I have also had the opposite experience of clarifying expectations with clients too explicitly and losing the client.
I think a very important step, based on your other posts, is adressing the underlying cause. I would say that the root cause is to improve your self-esteem (equivalent to self-love).
Then your communication will naturally reflect this improved self-esteem.
You will think that you deserve better and therefore you will sub-communicate it in your words and body language. Also in writing.
It's not about "showing who's boss". It's about becoming your own boss (AKA becoming your own judge). And knowing that you can get good and better opportunities. Then you will become more powerful as you won't need others as much as you used to.
People can feel how much you need them. If they feel you need them so much than they can talk to you however they want, then it's already a losing battle.
It's all about your demeanor, just like bullying. If you look like someone who can't be and won't be bullied, people won't bully you. You won't have to say a word as everything you say and do will project that you're a strong individual.
And just like you and me, other people don't mess with strong individuals.
It's about a deep inner transformation. Let me know if it's clear or if you want more info.
Cheers!
Thank you John, I fully understand. My main sticking point was recognizing covert aggression, because it always comes with the other person trying to pin the blame on you for it. I only had my realization that people were deliberately manipulating me about a year ago. Until then, I thought I was doing something wrong.
You are right that inner game is a must; at the same time, I am also a big believer that learning the outer game is also a must, at least while you are starting. Without knowing how to recognize and respond to covert aggression, you are toast even if you have the highest self-esteem.
Quote from Bel on March 3, 2022, 10:38 amI understand letting it slide was a mistake. Is it correct to say that in seeing his first email, the only correct move would have been to automatically push back on the rate, even at the risk of losing the opportunity? Or would explicitly accepting the request in writing also be a good move (e.g. "I can accept the rate you propose").
I think now the best thing I can do is leverage my letting it slide as a concession, to ask for something back or to refuse if he asks additional concessions.
Both are good.
Depending on how you negotiate rates, could have said "let's talk for the rates" or "my rate is... ".
But that might be more in the future for you.
If you're more starting out and need customers, then it's also a great move to say "I can accept your current rate". It re-empowers you just enough, it gives you respect back, with close to zero risk of losing the client.
Or, a bit move or a power remove "since we know each other for a while and I appreciate you coming to me, I can accept a rate of X".
Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on March 3, 2022, 1:54 pmDepending on how you negotiate rates, could have said "let's talk for the rates" or "my rate is... ".But that might be more in the future for you.
If you're more starting out and need customers, then it's also a great move to say "I can accept your current rate". It re-empowers you just enough, it gives you respect back, with close to zero risk of losing the client.Or, a bit move or a power remove "since we know each other for a while and I appreciate you coming to me, I can accept a rate of X".
Thank you, this is genius.
As to negotiating, the best part of what you suggest is in not referring to his "proposal" when you say "Let's talk about rates: my rate is ...". Like he hadn't said anything. It rightly subcommunicates that it wasn't polite for him to start with asking lowering my rate, and avoids the anchoring effect of his proposal.
As to accepting his proposal, thread-expanding on "knowing each other and him choosing me" is the best. It subcommunicates I am doing him a favor without saying it explicitly.
Both platinum-level solutions.
In fact, I think I will mention the rate he proposed and use the thread-expanding move on the phone when he calls me, as I feel this is something I can still use now to re-empower my position. I could even nibble a bit (e.g. "I also want to confirm that I accept the rate you proposed for the first year, as we have known each other for a long time and I appreciate you coming to me").
