| | ... continued from page
11
After all, you can’t
expect to have the
satisfaction of
believing your client is
an idiot for choosing
the wrong solution, and
then suddenly decide
they are the
personification of
wisdom because they have
changed their mind to
what you wanted. Your
approach should be that
their original position
was wise, given the
limited information
available to them.
Remember, always take
the blame for not making
the strengths of your
option clear, even if
you are already blue in
the face from trying to
get the client to see
them.
Cognition: For
the purpose of this
exercise, regard
cognition as a
combination of thinking
and seeing. If I was to
sum up how you see the
situation now, it is as
if you have a piece of
paper in front of you,
divided into two
columns. Down one column
you have listed the
strengths of the
client’s solution, and
the other column lists
the strengths of yours.
The way you see it,
yours is clearly better.
The way you are
operating is as if you
are trying to get the
client to look at your | |
|
| | sheet of paper in the
hope that they will see
what you see. But that
is not going to happen.
The client has their own
sheet of paper and, just
like yours, it’s frozen
in. As they stand, these
lists are not going to
be compatible; they are
always going to be in
competition.
Here is another way
of looking at it. Think
of these lists as
finished images produced
on a computer. Most
programs for image
creation use layers. For
example, one layer, or
combination of layers,
would be used to create
the background. Another
would be used to create
the figure in the
foreground.
Making a change when
the image is still held
in the kind of file
which supports layers is
relatively easy. One
element can be changed
without affecting the
others. But once that
image has been converted
into a file which can be
sent to a desktop
printer, all of those
layers are locked into
instructions to make a
two-dimensional image.
They cannot be separated
out.
When you are talking
with your client now, it
is as if you are dealing
with a finished picture
that has been sent to
the printer. If you
attack one part of it,
you are attacking the | |
|
| | whole thing. To make a
change, you have to make
them feel it is safe to
go back to the original
file, separate out the
layers, and work on each
of them.
That’s why I suggest
you tease out their
interests in a
sympathetic way. If your
judgment about the most
appropriate solution is
sound, you have little
to fear from doing this.
Once you start working
together to list their
interests, you can add
to them and refine them,
just like working on the
layers of an image. So
long as the client is
continually reassured
that you are focusing on
their concerns, they are
more likely to be
flexible in how those
concerns are realised.
In effect, you are
allowing them to retain
their desire to be
consistent, but inviting
them to express it
through the pursuit of
their interests instead
of holding on to the
‘one right solution’.
But one word of
warning: in the light of
the client needs that
emerge from the
conversation you might
find that you want to
modify your own
solution. But that is
what makes the
difference between a
well-intentioned geek
and a professional. | |
| |
Previous Page 
