Quote from John Freeman on December 27, 2021, 8:54 pm

Quote from Ali Scarlett on December 27, 2021, 7:34 pm

Thanks for starting this thread, John, I had a situation that felt very similar recently.

Thank you Ali for contributing to this thread! I think you analysed the situation quite well.

To answer Kavalier, I agree with Lucio. I would add:

1. Mindset: if you internalize that they have power over you and not the opposite, it might help you to feel when you are out-of-sync (AKA inverting the dynamics).
2. Body language: you can show your deference/submission with body language, or even just admiration and respect. Also with tone of voice.

They are tasking us, we are not tasking them. We are asking them to help us accomplish the tasks we've been given by them. It's quite different. If they do something to help in this case we should be twice as grateful to them instead of congratulating them on their performance, which we are not entitled to (by virtue of our station in the hierarchy in relation to them).

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on December 28, 2021, 6:24 am

Quote from Ali Scarlett on December 27, 2021, 7:34 pm

Thanks for starting this thread, John, I had a situation that felt very similar recently.

I recently accepted a position helping my father as the managing director of his professional cleaning company. And, not too long ago, we closed on a partnership deal with a real estate company.

The owner of the real estate company is also the owner of the property that we have under our care. And, a few days ago, she hired a handyman to install a new door lock for her.

Unfortunately, she wasn't fully sure of how to use it.

So, since I was heading over there with my cleaning team to get a feel for the property anyway, I offered to record a video for her showing her how it's done.

My thoughts on the situation were that:

• I'd be giving her value: more than a simple explanation (or directing her to Google), she'd be getting a brief video look at how it's done.
• She'd value the cleaning company more: for going beyond the scope of our work by sharing value that her handyman is supposed to give.

It also felt like tasking, but in this case, I was tasking myself with giving her this value. So, it felt OK.

This is how it went:

The "that would be great" was a small, acceptable judge role, in my opinion. And, following up with the "thank you" made the judge role here even more acceptable because she's acknowledging the value that I'm offering her.

After I gave that value though, this was her response:

The notes on the side of the screenshot are my opinion and open to feedback, as well as my thoughts below.

When she gave a "like" in response to my text, it felt like she was giving positive judgment. And, when she said "that's great" instead of "thank you," it only made it feel even more like judge credit awarding.

After she tried to change the subject, it also felt as if she was ending the acknowledgment there — giving her positive judgment and then moving on.

Where I think I could improve:

• Seeking credit acknowledgment twice: could come across as social credit scalping (see "dealing with people who force you to say 'thank you' — aka: 'service-oriented' folks"). But, it's only social credit scalping if it's overdone. And, in this case, I think it was fair to do it once in the beginning to be sure that I wasn't wasting my time recording the video and then again to make sure that I increased the company's social capital with the client.

Here's how I responded:

In this case, the way I see the situation is:

• The client is on the same level as me, so she doesn't have the power to take a judge role over me: she can provide me with feedback on my work to make our working relationship more of a win-win. And, similarly, I can provide her with feedback to make sure that we get along. But, it feels unfair for her to judge and assess my work as if she's my boss. And, once again, it would also be unfair for me to judge and assess her work as if to tell her how to do her job.

So, I frame ignored her judge credit awarding and moved on.

It was a group chat, so when she tried to change the topic, I let another member of my team continue the conversation so my frame ignoring came across more smoothly (as opposed to hitting her with dead silence and then moving on myself).

Whether the "that's great" was her way of saying "that was a great video" or her way of saying "I understand now" is still a bit unclear to me. But, regardless of what she meant, it still felt like a covert power move and, therefore, I handled it like one.

What do you think of this exchange?

Is there anything you would have done differently? Do you think that I misread the situation?

Would be curious to read your thoughts.

Quickly:

• "That would be great" is not the smoothest from her but fine IF she later gives proper credit

it's also a missed opportunity for her for more win-win, but not everyone is so savvy, so no biggie

• I'd personally have avoided asking "was it helpful", as it can feel like reward-seeking plus tasking them

To the receiver, ti can feel like the favor had strings attached -emotional ones, but still strings attached-.

Next time you make a favor, they might think "damn, now I'm forced again to be all effusive in my thanks or he'll ask me again".

In my opinion, it's better to do the favor and then simply assess their response and/or later openly explain the issue (ie.: "when we go beyond the scope of our work and we don't get credit for it, we feel we're not being rewarded for the extra mile" -something like that-).

Or, alternatively, you can turn it into a statement:

I hope it was helpful

Or a "fair value exchange" statement:

Theoretically, it should have been the handyman's job to explain, but we know they're not the most tech-savvy :) (/but we're happy to take up the slack)

Or a more direct request:

Does that clear it up?

Albeit this question is still in the "we're doing this extra service until you get it", it also invites her to say "yes, thank you" if she got it.

• "That's great" + "like" was out of place

Yes, that was an undue judge role, credit withholding, and not enough gratefulness.

• Good call on ignoring

Answering her question after those dynamics would have further disempowered you and framed your extra mile as "part of what you do".

So it was a good call to let someone else take it forward.

The Greater Gameplan

Finally, keep in mind that even without credit and/or with poor behavior on her end, you are still potentially gaining here.

You're giving more value, and if the customer is not a total ahole, that makes the customer happier, far more likely to stay with you, recommend you, or grow their business with you.

Some exceptions apply here, since some takers may only grow more entitled with your giving.
And Machiavellian customers might not recommend you to avoid competition and price increases.

BUT, you are still potentially empowering yourself if the customer grows more dependent on you.

And, ultimately, the more value you give, the more power to ask for increased fees later on.
If you're dealing with a taker and they're not willing to grant it, you might have to strong-harm it, but you're in a far better position to do that.

Different Modes For Different People: From "Friends" to "Business"

You can do a lot to nudge and frame people into becoming more givers and more win-win people -that's part of what PU's designed to do-.

But you can't always 100% change and control people.

And neither should you.

You can still come out of it very well if you adapt.

So if people don't give you any credit, you can then switch your mindset and operation to a more calculative, Machiavellian one yourself.

It becomes a sort "OK, not friendship and love? Fine, then we'll do business only with you, and I'm gonna do business fairly and well, but to maximize my profit".

You can still give them a chance though.
Many people don't want to be takers and prefer win-win, but they don't realize they're turning people off from wanting to give with their behavior (see a recent example of covert question in the forum, something I also used to fall for all the times).

Makes sense?

Quote from Matthew Whitewood on December 28, 2021, 11:25 am

Thanks to John for starting this thread and to Lucio for all the detailed analysis. And Ali for the case study.

Adding some cherries on the cake, I think there are some fascinating stuff here.

Or a more direct request:

Does that clear it up?

Albeit this question is still in the "we're doing this extra service until you get it", it also invites her to say "yes, thank you" if she got it.

Let me know if this was helpful = Did I deliver value to you so I can get credit? "Help" also has a minor "value-dominance" power dynamics albeit appropriate here because you delivered here. As Lucio advised, "let me help" also can feel like tasking. So the phrase may subconsciously feel disempowering whether fair or unfair.

Does that clear it up? (Or did that solve the issue?) = I am interested in solving the issue. I proposed a solution. Did that solve the issue? More collaborative frame towards the task at hand.

The Greater Gameplan

Finally, keep in mind that even without credit and/or with poor behavior on her end, you are still potentially gaining here.

You're giving more value, and if the customer is not a total ahole, that makes the customer happier, far more likely to stay with you, recommend you, or grow their business with you.

Some exceptions apply here, since some takers may only grow more entitled with your giving.
And Machiavellian customers might not recommend you to avoid competition and price increases.

BUT, you are still potentially empowering yourself if the customer grows more dependent on you.

And, ultimately, the more value you give, the more power to ask for increased fees later on.
If you're dealing with a taker and they're not willing to grant it, you might have to strong-harm it, but you're in a far better position to do that.

Thanks for this strategy Lucio. In my opinion, this is worth putting into Power University.

One needs to worry less about one-off transactions if

• You are a recurring source of value. You have future leverage. The leverage may be far more significant compared to the credit. Depending on the actions of the person you are dealing with, you can go calculative or giving, as Lucio advised, precisely due to this leverage.
• You get a lot of returns from the whole scenario as compared to the one-off transaction. The one-off value becomes a lubricant towards getting the huge payoff. Include the lubricant in the package (the cost of the service).

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on December 28, 2021, 1:51 pm

Thank you Matthew, it's very helfupl when someone flags something as "PU-worthy" as that's not always clear to me (and if someone agrees/disagrees feel free to share. Maybe a thread for "PU-worthy insights/strategies?).

One thing I'd also like to add is:

How Business (& Money) Impact Credit & Social Exchanges

Social exchanges are as valid in business as they are outside of it.

But in business, there are some added and different dynamics as well.

For one, people are warier of providing credit because credit in business overlaps with money-flows.

So the considerations also are:

• Maintain negotiation power: the more credit you give, the more negotiation power you lose because a (future) negotiation will be pre-framed as you owing them more
• Cover Your Ass against future demands: not giving credit in fear that the seller might only do more in preparation of a bigger ask down the road
  (a win-win approach if the value is "real", but semi-manipulative or manipulative if one seeks to social-scalp the credit. This is one of the reasons why I'd also avoid asking "was it helpful", since you give them more reasons to think you're force-stacking credits with ancillary and comparatively less value-adding favors preparing for a future demand. So you make them more defensive for nothing)

And there is also:

• Emotional self-defense: people might feel bad to give a lot of credit for extra work because that indirectly says that they're also under-paying them (I sometimes feel "bad" when a seller goes above and beyond on a fixed-price gig)

• Manipulation defense: Not give credit because they'd fear it's a manipulative attempt to get a bigger tip at the end of the contract (example: I actively avoid the common trap of "always saying it was good" when a waiter asks "how was it" because it's often a stock, semi-guilt-tripping technique to get a higher tip)

Something to keep in mind: credits in business can be part of the negotiation -and manipulation-.

Still a mistake to withhold credit in my opinion because it's a defensive mindset, because it negatively impacts relationships, and because it keeps the pie smaller.

Quote from Matthew Whitewood on December 28, 2021, 2:53 pm

Thanks a lot for the added point!

I just experienced this man. Like 1 hour ago. Not "business" per se.

In my culture, guests are expected to contribute to the wedding expenses.

I wished him well on social media

Me: Congrats bro!! Very happy for you

Him: Thanks bro! Better give a big packet

I wanted to say "big but light". Basically, a large packet but with little money inside.

He basically wanted to play on our friendship and capitalise on my well wish to make me feel like contributing more financially.

I will pretend nothing happened and give the standard amount. Or maybe less. Or maybe I will be overseas.

Does anyone have better ideas? No pressure and feel free to skip if not much.

• Emotional self-defense: people might feel bad to give a lot of credit for extra work because that indirectly says that they're also under-paying them (I sometimes feel "bad" when a seller goes above and beyond on a fixed-price gig)

I face this issue too. Sometimes I give a tip. Sometimes I tell myself that they went above and beyond of their own accord but that doesn't mean I "agreed" to an exchange. Although I will be appreciative and thankful.

For great freelancers, I use Calendly to move them out of the platform. Then, I pay them the same rate but they don't incur the platform fee.

Still a mistake to withhold credit in my opinion because it's a defensive mindset, because it negatively impacts relationships, and because it keeps the pie smaller.

The opposite mindset would be giving credit fully and freely. Then seeing those who return the favour and have a similar win-win approach.

I think giving credit is an act of vulnerability. Like you mentioned about emotional self-defense.

• Manipulation defense: Not give credit because they'd fear it's a manipulative attempt to get a bigger tip at the end of the contract (example: I actively avoid the common trap of "always saying it was good" when a waiter asks "how was it" because it's often a stock, semi-guilt-tripping technique to get a higher tip)

Also important when dealing with landlords in my opinion. I have dealt with countless nasty landlords.

If they repair the light bulb, they may deduct my rental deposit for example. So I give less credit and frame it as part of the contract.

Some others will increase the rent after I thank them a few times.

Thanks a lot to everyone for this thread! It's really interesting how small covert power moves like "perfect" can actually result in tangible losses over time.

Quote from Kavalier on December 28, 2021, 3:53 pm

Thank you very much everyone! The whole discussion was eye-opening for me!

Quote from John Freeman on December 29, 2021, 11:20 am

Actually, Ali after giving some thoughts:

I would say that it could feel from the other person that you could be looking to confirm value given. And this could make the other person think you might be trying to inflate the credit. It could make them cautious into acknowledging the value received for fear of owing more.

Kavalier, more thoughts:

The general idea is to acknowledge that we are aware of the power dynamics with your superior. We could also communicate it while expressing gratefulness:

• Thank you for the supervision (only superior supervises)
• Thank you for the teaching (only supervisor supervises)
• Thank you for the explanation
• Thank you for helping me (with this task)/ for the help (to move an obstacle out of my way to accomplish the task)
• Thank you very much (emphasized)

Basically anything that emphasize that whatever they did was not for you as an individual/peer/task-giver but as a superior to a subordinate to accomplish a given task. It might imply that the value they have given to you is very valuable (which it is).

Quote from John Freeman on December 30, 2021, 8:52 pm

Here is a framework depending from where the "Perfect!" power move comes from (semi-equivalent to "Good job!"):

From a superior

We want to acknowledge the power dynamics while not being too subservient.

Possible answers:

• I'm on it
• I'm taking care of it
• I'm getting to it now
• I'll get to work

From an equal

We want to rebalance the power dynamics and make it equal again. So it does not have to be as hard rebalance (as Lucio noticed) as in the "from subordinate" situation.

Example:

A friend organized an event and I'll bring some food, she "Perfect!" me. I acknowledge the power dynamics: she invites me (host position) but I'm not her subordinate. I think that if we let it go unchecked it could be disempowering.

Possible answers:

• Cool!
• Nice!

From a subordinate

We want to re-establish the tasker-taskee dynamics. So we want to go harder while staying warm.

Possible answers:

• Very good.
• Let me know if you have any trouble with anything.
• Let me know if you have any questions.
• Let me know if you need more information.

Generally speaking, I would avoid "Perfect!" back. It might sound insecure or defensive as in "Power for power's sake". That being said, it's always a last resort option. Better an imperfect or clumsy rebalance than no rebalance at all.

Do you guys have any further comments on this framework?

Quote from Transitioned on December 31, 2021, 12:22 am

Thanks John codifying this makes it even better.  Helps me a lot as a PM you re always having to give status updates.

For the subordinate scenario.  Another one I have heard.  'Let us know if you need any support from the team'.  In Australian work culture it probably means you have pissed off the manager as there's a bit of an implication of you need help.