3 ms·

> That's all very well, but often people haven't thought of whatever you might tell them. I don't think the point was, "Don't tell them about things that might

> That's all very well, but often people haven't thought of whatever you might tell them. I don't think the point was, "Don't tell them about things that might help them." I understood it more as, "Tell them things, but do it in reference of what worked in your experience. Then let them decide whether that might work in their experience." Before: "You should try (this thing). It's awesome for (whatever it does) because (x, y, z)." After: "At (my place), we use (this thing). It's been great for us at (whatever it does) because (x, y, z)." Basically, you're removing the implicit assumption that you know better than the person you're speaking with about what would work for their business.

indlebe 13y ago
>Basically, you're removing the implicit assumption that you know better than the person you're speaking with about what would work for their business. Bingo. I feel that that from a psychological perspective the way you word advice can dictate how well it's received. "I think you should do X", or even worse "You're doing that wrong, you should be doing X" isn't generally something that people digest hearing that well. "I've done X in that exact situation and it worked really well for me" can be much more palatable.
notahacker 13y ago
Sure, a person who can discuss how, in his experience, it's been possible to get clients to pay for X by doing Y, which to some extent overlaps with your domain Z is potentially offering you much more valuable insight than someone who simply asks "have you considered doing Y?" But the usefulness of the insight you're able to provide is an essentially separate issue from coming across as a jerk who blithely insists they can fix others' business. It's possible to discuss your experiences with Y in great detail and still be that jerk (because you come across as assuming that experience must be relevant and your way of doing it was right), and conversely possible to have no experience of Y whatsoever other than reading an article on it and still be asking a very reasonable question If someone thinks you're an asshole for simply for asking whether they'd considered a Salesforce integration, they're almost certainly the asshole.

indlebe 13y ago

>Basically, you're removing the implicit assumption that you know better than the person you're speaking with about what would work for their business. Bingo. I feel that that from a psychological perspective the way you word advice can dictate how well it's received. "I think you should do X", or even worse "You're doing that wrong, you should be doing X" isn't generally something that people digest hearing that well. "I've done X in that exact situation and it worked really well for me" can be much more palatable.

notahacker 13y ago

Sure, a person who can discuss how, in his experience, it's been possible to get clients to pay for X by doing Y, which to some extent overlaps with your domain Z is potentially offering you much more valuable insight than someone who simply asks "have you considered doing Y?" But the usefulness of the insight you're able to provide is an essentially separate issue from coming across as a jerk who blithely insists they can fix others' business. It's possible to discuss your experiences with Y in great detail and still be that jerk (because you come across as assuming that experience must be relevant and your way of doing it was right), and conversely possible to have no experience of Y whatsoever other than reading an article on it and still be asking a very reasonable question If someone thinks you're an asshole for simply for asking whether they'd considered a Salesforce integration, they're almost certainly the asshole.