|
Spring 2007
|
|
|
Spring 2007
|
|
ur newsletter will promote principles of personal success for women. These ideas will illustrate success in the working world, in interpersonal relationships, and in developing self esteem and confidence. Each member will bring special knowledge about attaining personal goals and adding a sense of discovery and excitement to women's lives.
"Compromise means someone wins and someone loses, and when that happens, the persons who lose, or perceive that they lose, will be finding ways for pay-back or getting even. If you are managing such a situation, it can be disruptive to building a cohesive team or achieving the goals you want."
"...I teach people that, in order to sell most effectively, it's important that you have what I call a Clean Heart Position. A Clean Heart Position is what you hold in your HEART when you go out to sell: a sincere desire to see your prospect get what he or she wants - whether or not he gets it from YOU."
"The team attempts to immediately identify the needs of the family and seeks the assistance that is required. The couple has a greater sense of involvement in the decision-making. The non-adversarial nature of the process keeps decision-making in the hands of the couple where it belongs, rather than in the hands of a judge who is forced to make decisions with very little knowledge of the individuals or the family."
"I believe that these episodes ... could have had different endings had I not "walked in their shoes," listened carefully to their concerns, gathered relevant facts, and given them objective information they could use (and advice they could follow) to make decisions they could feel good about."
"It's black-and-white thinking that causes the win-lose problem. We tend to have a narrow view of how things could be accomplished, without looking at the subtext of what our true goals are. Once we do that, it becomes easier to think through ways to see that each person gets more of what they want without compromising the needs/wants of the other person."
Lenann McGookey Gardner's new book, Got Sales? The Complete Guide to Today's Proven Methods for Selling Services, has just been published, and she's accepting orders at www.YouCanSell.com. She's given interviews to many major magazines, including Selling Power, Sales and Marketing Management, and even Next Truck. Articles Lenann has authored have appeared in Official Board Markets and online at My Article Archive. She is also pleased that her new publicity photographs seem to have come out well!
Guest columnist Maria Montoya Chavez writes, "I recently had my second daughter and continue to be blessed with happy, healthy children. Returning to work for the second time seemed to be even more difficult as I re-entered my law practice hitting the ground running. I immediate felt torn between needing to work late and getting home early to nurse my daughter. It took sitting down with my husband and focusing together on what our goals were and what is most important to us for me to successfully reduce my stress. Although it's not perfect by any means, I've learned how to become a master juggler - or at least look like one."
Jane Blume has just won the Small Business Administration's 2007 New Mexico Home-Based Business Champion of the Year award. Also, New Mexico Business Weekly ranked Jane's firm, Desert Sky Communications, the Number Three PR firm in New Mexico for the second year in a row. In January, she co-presented a three-part teleseminar, "Get a Distinctive Marketing Edge, Be Extraordinarily Visible and Get Known as an Expert," for the Institute of Management Consultants USA's Academy for Professional Development and Education. She spoke to the New Mexico Internet Professionals Association this month about "Off-line Guerrilla Marketing for Internet-based Businesses," and is scheduled to talk about publicity and visibility at the annual meeting of the New Mexico Spa Association in April.
Carol Akright begins her fifth year of lecturing aboard Princess Cruises; this summer, her voyage takes her to the North Cape and the Norwegian Fjords and next year to Asia and the Middle East. In New Mexico, this is Carol's second year of hosting a lecture series called, FUNDING YOUR DREAMS: FROM DREAM TO DESTINY, in which participants learn to move from dreaming about what they want to implementing their financial strategies to manifest their dreams immediately. Carol is also a participant in the MILLIONAIRE MENTORSHIP PROGRAM and in 2007 will bring these enhanced wealth-building strategies to her programs in Albuquerque and worldwide. Based in Corrales, NM, she continues her private practice of financial investment advisory consulting and money management through Associated Securities Corp.
n my former career as a biologist, I remember that one of the basic principles we learned in ecology was that various species managed to not only survive, but also thrive when they found a niche that optimized the requirements necessary for life and reproduction. Later, when I was involved in environmental and recreation facilities design planning, I again found that the word "optimization" was an organizing principle of the field. Optimization, unlike maximization, means that solutions are achieved that provide the best results for the overall situation, not just for one side-a balance that allows for continued well being of all concerned-in other words, a Win-Win.
Then, to my surprise a decade later, a similar concept was presented in my management development training. It was called the "zero-sum game" or the "win-win" vs. "win-lose" models of management. Both to my own surprise and to that of the trainers, I blurted out that I didn't believe in compromise. They smiled gleefully as they expected me to be one of those "either-my-way-or-the-highway" managers whom they could use as a bad example. Instead, I went on to say, "Compromise means someone wins and someone loses, and when that happens, the persons who lose, or perceive that they lose, will be finding ways for pay-back or getting even. If you are managing such a situation, it can be disruptive to building a cohesive team or achieving the goals you want."
At that time I was very optimistic that the "both/and" approach could be achieved easily once people understood that all parties involved had a legitimate stake in the process or decision, and that they would be willing to seek the alternatives that would achieve that goal. Imagine my bewilderment when that didn't happen, and I was faced with fiercely competing adversarial positions - both among my then-team and later on, when working with local groups in the planning process for their communities.
Over time I've come to realize that the "winner-take-all" mindset is not only alive and well, but is still the predominant model for many countries, companies, communities, and relationships. And despite my own best intentions, I sometimes find myself in the compromise or winner-take-all position, which means that my conditioning hasn't been completely erased by my idealized beliefs. Yes, I still believe that the collaborative or win-win approach is the worthy goal to strive for, and is perhaps the only one that will ultimately achieve a more peaceful, productive, and satisfying conclusion. When we consider that the survival of our species may require this positive approach, it seems like a worthy pursuit, doesn't it?
Becoming more pragmatic about the whole thing, let's look at relationships as an example. While it may be very satisfying to "win" an argument, is it worth it if the relationship crumbles? And, could we find an alternative if we were willing to look beyond Plan A and Plan B for another mutually satisfying option? A good friend of mine who is an outstanding manager says, "If Plan A, B ...F, G ... all the way to X can't do it, then there is still another alternative. We just have to be willing to creatively seek it rather than reverting to the troublesome and ultimately defeating win-lose approach."
Nevertheless, at times it is next to impossible to stop people long enough from defending their positions to even hear the other sides of the situation. Their determination to achieve a "win" keeps them from engaging in any creative thinking that could achieve a mutually satisfying solution.
At times like this, I remember the premise set forth by Ernest Holmes, the founder of the international Religious Science movement. He said that each of us is a "creative center," capable of co-creating our own life experiences through the thoughts we think. And Albert Einstein said, "Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world." We have the power to change negative thoughts to ones of expansiveness, and that same force that seemingly holds us in lack and limitation can propel us to a sense of abundance and fulfillment. It is that power within each of us that generates the ideas, so we can consciously direct our energies toward productive endeavors.
That concept rings so very true for me, and I am thoroughly delighted when I have clients who come to me with this approach themselves. I know that in our work together they will achieve great things.
The win-win approach seems like a no-brainer, so then what seems to hold most of us back from not only seeking - but striving to maintain the win-win attitude in life? Through our upbringing, training, and life experiences we have come to believe that we lack something, or are limited in some way from achieving what we want. We have come to distrust our inner creativity and imagination and look to outside judgments about ourselves and about what we can achieve. The beliefs that "we're not enough" or that there "isn't enough to go around" can lock us into striving, conniving, fighting, and manipulating situations to our advantage. Moreover, in our culture, if we win and someone loses [the win-lose model], the winner is highly regarded and rewarded and the defeated one is determined not to be in the loser position next time, further keeping the cycle alive and active. The same accolades are not accorded to those who achieve mutually satisfying results-except as team players on the "winning" team-still a win-lose approach.
This time, I'm not able to set down a series of suggested steps to achieving a win-win approach to life's challenges. This is very situational, and it depends a lot on whether one is approaching a one-on-one situation, a team, or a larger confederacy of participants. In my ideal world, the Platinum Standard for thought and behavior would be each person believing that he or she can make a difference, that each is "enough," that there is enough to go around, and that with the combined creativity and imagination of all involved, solutions can be fashioned that will meet the needs of all -not by maximizing one side, but by collaborating to achieve the optimum for all.
In the end, I know that I can only be responsible for an unwavering commitment to the win-win premise for myself, and that requires considering the optimum outcome for everyone in the challenge at hand.
As we begin a new year, I hope that if you haven't adopted this method for yourself, you will at least begin experimenting with the win-win approach in your connections with others. And despite the pebbles and roadblocks you undoubtedly will encounter along the way, I also hope your imagination and creativity will find the collaborative solutions that bring satisfaction and lasting solutions to the challenges Life presents.
|
|
 |
Lenann McGookey Gardner is a Harvard M.B.A. and independent management consultant specializing in improving companies' sales and marketing results. She works with smaller businesses, as well as large companies, worldwide, and she also coaches individuals to higher levels of professional accomplishment and satisfaction. Call Lenann at 505.828.1788 when you want to grow your sales by closing the most desirable, highest profit business. Lenann is a winner of the American Marketing Association/New Mexico's Professional Services "Marketer of the Year" award, and is profiled in Who's Who in America. Visit her on the Web at www.YouCanSell.com. |
How to Play the Win-Win Game in Life
ell, what the heck other game are you GOING to play?
Gee, talking about win-win seems so twentieth century!
Haven't we got the idea?
Don't we realize that, unless a situation is a win for both (or all) parties involved, it's not a win at all - because the loser will figure out that he/she is the loser, and probably do something to mess things up?
Nah, we don't realize that. I know this for a fact because I coach people to help them sell. And I can tell you that win-lose is alive and well!
In my work I've learned that really nice people - really smart people - normally really caring people - when they go out to sell may become self-serving barracudas! By that I mean that they're all ME-ME-ME, and "How can I manipulate this person into buying what I have in mind?"
That's such a shame. Plus ... it doesn't work!
Well, maybe it'll work one time. But those of us who are selling our services typically want to develop clients who will buy from us, and buy from us, and buy from us. And if they get a whiff that they're a LOSER in any transaction they do with us, guess how much future buying they'll be doing?
The answer would be NONE.
So in practical terms, what does win-win mean when you're selling something: your services, a product, your ideas, even yourself to a prospective employer, or to someone who is considering, say, raising your pay?
It means you have to be equally concerned about your partner in the transaction getting what he or she wants. Yes, that's right, you have to be just as concerned about THEM as you are about YOU. In my new book Got Sales? The Complete Guide to Today's Proven Methods for Selling Services I teach people that, in order to sell most effectively, it's important that you have what I call a Clean Heart Position. A Clean Heart Position is what you hold in your HEART when you go out to sell: a sincere desire to see your prospect get what he or she wants - whether or not he gets it from YOU.
Think about that for a minute. I am a professional speaker who helps people improve their sales results and make more money. What do my clients want? They want SALES! They want MORE MONEY. They do not particularly want a speech, or even a laugh; they want SALES RESULTS. And they expect that I will provide those results - not just talk about how to sell, but SHOW PEOPLE how to sell, and, often, SUPPORT PEOPLE while they use those new approaches to be sure they sell successfully.
So I find myself doing follow-up programs, coaching and hand-holding until much-improved sales results show up, and continue to show up, so we're reasonably sure that we've accomplished a really difficult thing: behavior change.
Now, what do I like to do? Why, I like to give talks! The follow-up is a pain in the neck! It's descriptions of selling challenges arriving in droves in my e-mail queue; it's working at 2 a.m. because I didn't have time to get back to somebody who's meeting with their prospect tomorrow; it's agonizing as a not-very-skilled client blows a presentation for a $40 million consulting project, because he just wouldn't take my advice!
I don't like that stuff! I told them what to do - why do I have to be involved as they do it, or as they don't? I HAVE to do the follow-up, because I have never seen any speech completely change behavior and transform people into talented salespeople. Not my speeches, not anybody's speeches. People may learn something intellectually, but not emotionally - that is, they may understand what I'm teaching, but not find that what they say when they're selling matches the principles that were right there on the handouts I gave them! So I have to stay with them, reinforcing the learning, and helping them succeed ... that is, to win.
What do your prospects (or what does your management) want? Are you giving it to them? Or are you giving what you want to give - what's comfortable for you? If so you may have a WIN in the short run - you're doing what you want to do - but in the long run your dissatisfied prospect, client or boss will figure out that he or she is the LOSER, and will probably run kicking and screaming away from you.
Win-win? Sure. Has to be. Is it your approach to work - and to life - now? If it isn't, why not change your game plan immediately?
Collaborative Divorce: Nope, It's Not an Oxymoron.
s you can imagine, going through a divorce is one of the most difficult times of someone's life. So many emotions... so many unwanted issues to deal with... and so much healing needing to take place. I'm excited to present to you a new way to think about and approach divorce. It's called Collaborative Divorce.
I've discovered I learn better visually therefore, I've come up with a visualization that I hope will assist in explaining the differences between a traditional litigated divorce and a collaborative divorce.
Imagine a tornado: a huge Texas tornado, the kind that rips through a community destroying anything and everything in its path. It spins out of control and we have no ability to direct it. After this tornado departs, people are left devastated. They have no homes, their belongings are scattered everywhere and the only choice they have is to start from ground zero. They are so stunned at what has occurred that they are left with little emotion. The Texas tornado is my visual image of a traditional litigated divorce.
Now, imagine if you could take that tornado and somehow control it. You have been warned that it's coming and so you begin to prepare and work together towards re-directing the tornado away from your little community. If you're successful, your immediate surroundings are kept intact, you have a sense of accomplishment and most importantly, your family is not injured. That's what collaborative divorce is all about.
How does such an approach work? At the onset of the process, the couple and their collaboratively trained attorneys sign a contract agreeing not to go to court or to use the threat of litigation as a bargaining tool to get what they want. If the collaboration fails and the divorce heads to court, each spouse must find a new attorney and the process starts from scratch. This first step commits everyone to cooperate and is the making of a team. The highest priorities of both spouses and their children are taken into account.
The next step is to actually begin to collaborate. The parties identify the immediate needs of the family, which may lead to the recruitment of other team members. The potential team members could be divorce coaches, child specialists, financial advisors or life coaches, all of whom are also collaboratively trained. In Albuquerque, for example, a multidisciplinary organization called the Albuquerque Collaborative Practice Group, which is made up of the professionals I mentioned above, meets once a month to share ideas about improving the collaborative process and educating people about it.
For example, the parties may determine that they need a divorce coach/communication coach who is also a licensed therapist. The coach will meet with the couple to evaluate their communication styles, and help them learn effective ways to communicate without escalating the disagreement into an unnecessary argument. The coach may assist only one party to deal with the divorce, or may decide that a joint session would be successful.
If there are children to consider, a child specialist can interview the children and offer professional advice (based on the children's development) for a custody arrangement that will be in the youngsters' best interests. Additionally, a neutral financial advisor can review all of the couple's finances, gather documents, and help them maximize their assets. Financial planning helps preserve both parties' standards of living. Some divorces may not need all the team members listed above; however, such valuable assistance is available.
You may be thinking, "Gosh, this process looks awfully expensive!" Actually, it is generally less costly and time-consuming than litigation. The team attempts to immediately identify the needs of the family and seeks the assistance that is required. The couple has a greater sense of involvement in the decision-making. The non-adversarial nature of the process keeps decision-making in the hands of the couple where it belongs, rather than in the hands of a judge who is forced to make decisions with very little knowledge of the individuals or the family.
Still not sold on the process yet? I have more for you: the collaborative divorce process produces much less fear and anxiety than a court proceeding does. Everyone involved can focus on reaching a settlement without the imminent threat of "going to court." It encourages finding creative solutions to resolve issues and is much less time-consuming than waiting to get in to see the judge. With committed parties, the process creates a positive climate that produces a more than satisfactory outcome.
Divorce is destructive. It's so much better if a couple can say, "We've been married for 15 years and share children. So instead of fighting for the next two years, spending money we don't have (or spending money that could be set aside for our children's educations or our retirement) and going from best friends to bitter enemies, we're going to sit down at the table and decide to better ourselves, better our situation and better the outcome."
It may feel unnatural, at first, to try to work together as a team with the person you are about to divorce. However, even if the team may be dysfunctional at the outset, they're still a team learning to work together.
Through the collaborative process, the possibility actually exists for participants to create a climate that facilitates the best possible "win-win" settlement.
|
|
|
Jane Blume, editor/publisher of our Defining Women newsletter, celebrates 41 years of professional work in communications this year. Jane founded Desert Sky Communications in 1989 to help businesses, non-profit organizations and individual entrepreneurs "get the right messages to the right audiences." Desert Sky's services include public relations, marketing and advertising strategies and execution; writing and editing; corporate identity; photography; facilitation; and innovative radio programs. For more information, call Jane at (505) 294-1976, email to or visit www.desertskycommunications.com. |
HOW TO PLAY THE WIN-WIN GAME OF LIFE
ecently, I successfully re-negotiated a contract with a client that called for more specific activities each month than the original agreement had - at half the original retainer fee.
I also recommended to a prospective client, the owner of a for-profit business, that we should begin our professional relationship working on a project - instead of on the monthly retainer he originally suggested.
I am fully aware that I acted contrary to all the marketing tips and techniques from national experts, who advise consultants to do everything they can to maximize revenue.
However, I acted this way for some very important reasons:
In the case of the non-profit client: while it was true that we had started to gain some traction for the PR activities we were performing, the truth was that the organization was not getting enough "bang" for their retainer bucks during the first year that they had worked with Desert Sky. They were actually thinking of going on hiatus for a while to re-think their PR strategy.
The decisions to reduce the fee and build in more defined activities are proving their worth: now that both of our firms are in closer alignment, an increasing number of positive public relations opportunities are presenting themselves to us.
In the second case: the prospective client told me in our first meeting that he had signed contracts with PR firms in the past, but that the relationships seemed to go nowhere after the first 60-90 days. It was not clear to me why this negative pattern had occurred, and it was also not clear what activities Desert Sky Communications would pursue on the company's behalf on a regular basis if we did have a retainer agreement. When I rejected the idea of a retainer in favor of doing an initial project to see if our firms might be a good fit, the prospect was visibly relieved.
In a third episode: a client agreed, after reviewing information I sent her, that she should switch vendors for optimizing and updating her firm's website to Desert Sky's web master. We also negotiated a new retainer that would include my web master's services. This came about because the client had assigned one of her staff to ask me if Search Engine Optimization (SEO) for the company's website could be performed in-house - by any of the employees in her firm's IT Department.
There were several issues I had to consider:
- I did not want my client to think that I was trying to disrupt - openly or subtly - the relationship she already had with the firm that originally designed and programmed the website, and thereby gain additional business for Desert Sky Communications.
- However, I realized that it was not likely that the original vendor knew about SEO - otherwise the staff would have done what was necessary when they designed and programmed the website in the first place.
- But I couldn't be absolutely certain that the original vendor was not knowledgeable about SEO: it was possible that she and her employees could have upgraded their skills since the time that my client's website went "live."
- I also suspected that my client's IT staff were not capable of updating the website: they are electricians, and their jobs involve installing computer systems, not programming them. But I couldn't be absolutely certain of that fact, either.
- The client and I were on the verge of discussing renewal of our contract, and I was aware that she wasn't certain if the arrangements should be the same as they were in the previous year.
I handled this potentially sensitive situation by asking my web master what SEO for the client's website would really require; explaining to the client in a detailed memo what would have to be done; suggesting that the client ask the original vendor about their knowledge of SEO; asking the client to find out if her IT staff know how to program websites in HTML (Hypertext Markup Language), and offering my web master as the solution if the first two options proved not to be workable.
I also came into the contract renewal negotiations prepared to offer an arrangement that I believed the client would find attractive.
I believe that these episodes with the two clients and one prospect could have had different endings had I not "walked in their shoes," listened carefully to their concerns, gathered relevant facts, and given them objective information they could use (and advice they could follow) to make decisions they could feel good about.
Of course, I did not ignore the interests of my company: after all, if Desert Sky Communications doesn't have clients and assignments, we might as well close our doors. However, it is clear that all three people I dealt with came away from our interactions feeling very positive about what transpired.
And we all came away from the transactions believing that we had all been "winners."
any people will say that LIFE is a zero-sum game - meaning that there are only so many good things that happen in life in total, and if you get some of them, then someone else is denied their ration - the goodies in your life bank account are subtracted from theirs.
So this sets up a win-lose scenario and might explain the level of aggression that some people exhibit when they’re going after what they want. There is some thought that those who finish first get the portion of good results emanating from that situation. This concept pits people against one another, since no one wants to be the loser, who misses out on what he or she is after, because someone else got there ahead of them.
What this philosophy presumes, however, is that you cannot create new good things for yourself, your family, or your community out of your own creative efforts. Napoleon Hill, author of THINK AND GROW RICH, quotes another positive thinker, Earl Nightengale, who said, “Thoughts are things,” and, “You become what you think about all day long.” Look around at all the new inventions, conveniences, advances in modern medicine, transportation, electronics, and you can see that someone had the idea (the THOUGHT) for these new THINGS before they actually created them.
So you, too, can create out of your mind the “goodies” in life you want. You don’t have to take something away from the storehouse of others to add to your life what is important to you. By using your creativity, you win. Indeed, your ingenuity may very well contribute positive results for others, so they win, too. Again, win-win.
Now let’s look at a situation where you are in disagreement with someone else. He or she wants to handle a matter one way, and you want to do it another way. You’re both locked into your points of view, and neither one of you wants to “give in.” I think the best way to handle this is to step back and assess what is it that you’re both trying to accomplish. What is the underlying goal behind the situation for each of you?
One example: You’re traveling abroad, and your husband wants to pack a minimal amount of clothing in one small suitcase. You’re someone who likes lots of clothing options, and you want to bring two suitcases. He complains about the excess amount of your clothing and the aggravation of carrying the extra luggage. Underneath, he wants to minimize the stress of traveling with lighter luggage, and you want to have a variety of garments on the trip. So, you offer to carry both your bags, he doesn’t have to manage the extra luggage, and you both get what you want - win-win.
Some issues go much deeper and touch the core of our deepest beliefs. You want to spend more family time with your children and husband, and your spouse is a workaholic-who rarely gets home before 9 pm - and he also works all day Saturday. He says his extra time at work will produce more income for the family, but meanwhile you feel he’s missing out on your children’s growing-up years and you miss having more time for the two of you. How do you turn this into a win-win?
Let’s go back to what you are each after-he wants to provide well for your family’s future, and you want more quality family time now. You could decide that on two Saturdays a month he will not work, and those will be family days. You could decide to get a part-time job yourself, to add to the household income. You could - together with your husband - come up with a way to join a multi-level marketing company and work together as a team to bring in the added income his overtime is now producing.
You could even get your kids involved in the marketing and delivery of the products from this MLM company, making them part of the income-producing team - an example of how you can get creative to generate more income without sacrificing the important time together as a family. This is a win-win for everyone.
It’s black-and-white thinking that causes the win-lose problem. We tend to have a narrow view of how things could be accomplished, without looking at the subtext of what our true goals are. Once we do that, it becomes easier to think through ways to see that each person gets more of what they want without compromising the needs/wants of the other person.
What is important to see, too, is that if you’re part of a team, whether it’s a family, a negotiation, or a work group, setting up a win-lose scenario means that everyone really loses. You lose the good will, the trust, the team spirit, and the incredible boost in joy and pride when a team really works hand-in- hand to create win-win situations. When you can set up the win-win methods, you realize that your goals are as important to the other person, or team members, as theirs are to you. You want them to succeed also. And the creativity that flows from a positive win-win positioning by all, is truly amazing.
So, look beneath for the ultimate goals behind each situation, get creative with your solutions to meet everyone’s needs, and enjoy the blessing of experiencing win-win in the many areas of your life that are important to you.
Home Page | Who We Are | Newsletters | Join Our Mailing List
