KNOW YOUR PROSPECT, KNOW YOURSELF - THINKING LONGER AND HARDER

(- Copyright 2016 by Mike Stewart -)

In the last few years, I have gained a new respect for what I used to call the soft sciences, which I also described as psychological mumbo-jumbo. As I have gained experience in life, I have found the number of Eureka moments, the times when there is a paradigm shift in how I view the World, have occurred less and less often.

This is also known as "old fogy" thinking.

Long before there was an Internet, there was behavioral science. Sigmund Freud was big in this area, but he died before there was anything close to a modern computer. We all know there are extroverts and introverts. A lot of us have heard "there are no free lunches", yet we are usually glad to get one.

When I was thinking long and hard about OVERCOMING OBJECTIONS, I wasn't thinking about soft science. I knew enthusiasm sells, but I didn't ask why. Then someone suggested I read a book called "Predictably Irrational". It discussed not only that people sometime act irrationally and apparently contrary to their own best interests, but also described experiments which showed under what circumstances most people would act this way.

When I thought about this in relation to handling objections both before and after the internet, my worldview changed. And it changed in two ways.

I suddenly had an understanding of why Free is so powerful. Why we wanted Free Lunches. Why we would spend hours clipping coupons to save a few cents and pay much, much more to give a good tip at a fancy restaurant. And I understood how this could be applied to internet marketing.

It also made me take a different view of other soft science based marketing presentations - basically expansions of the introvert, extrovert view of people.

I have stressed that sales professionals should think about their unique combination of qualities to show how they can uniquely serve their prospects.

My unique combination of qualities makes me believe that we all have unique combinations of qualities. We all have our own worldview and all worldviews are valid. This is not a particularly radical theory in the world of physics, but I want to apply it to the world of Internet Marketing.

Most of us have taken personality tests. They are designed to categorize us, showing how we appear to others, how we like to work, how we relate to others, and so on. One that I was impressed with was the Extended DISC Personality Analysis. D.I.S.C. stands for and centers on four personality traits: dominance, influence, steadiness, and compliance.

When I took this test, I thought it nailed some of my personality traits: Exact, calm, logical. But it wasn't perfect - I think I can prove it messed up on a couple of these. Nevertheless, it was very useful. And I am also grateful that the tester helped me rewrite some of my marketing material so it is much more effective.

I have been preaching that it is important to relate the areas you are expert in or very, very good to areas in which you have much more knowledge than the average person, but you are not at the expert level. You can then see things the expert misses.

With my new respect for soft science, I looked at D.I.S.C. in a slightly different way. For one thing, I didn't like its purpose. In simple terms, it wanted to help business by categorizing employees or prospective employees so that the business could build teams that would work well together. This sounds good, in fact, I would seriously consider D.I.S.C. if I had to put together a team for a large company. But I also saw it as very much against the individual, helping companies weed out anyone who might think a little differently. Rebels need not apply. This was my worldview and I was sticking to it - until I thought a little bit more.

My expertise is computers which morphed into the Internet as time passed. But my secondary almost expert fields are based on a long time love of science. I began college majoring in biology, changed to chemistry, before finishing up majoring in physics and mathematics.

If the world was just made up of introverts and extroverts, there might just be two worldviews, both equally valid. They would rarely change.

But D.I.S.C. indicated there are multiple types: in my case, people who are exact, people who are calm, people who are logical. And there could be degrees of each of these. Maybe there could be an infinite number of personality traits What would be the underlying cause? Each could have its own valid worldview.

If you want to sell something to one particular person, you can never know with absolute certainty that you will succeed - personalities are too complex. But you might know that you will succeed a certain percent of the time. This seems very analogous to some laws in quantum physics where you don't know which atom will decay, just that a certain percent will.

I find this interesting because I wonder if a group of people with similar worldviews, who can be found by Search Engines, might be more often persuaded by arguments tailored to their worldview.

Since my last worldview change, I attended a presentation by the owner of a small company specializing in what might be called "people skill training" - you can get a more exact idea by visiting his website http://h2hdynamics.com.

One idea the owner was stressing is that it is important to invest in your employees' people skills, not just their technical skills. Part of the presentation that was very impressive was he asked the audience a few questions and everyone was able to self-categorize themselves. I was confident I was "a Thinker". Someone else was "a Good Time Joe".

We then moved to different areas of the room for a brief exercise. I was near "Good Time Joe" and was asked what I should say to him to began a successful relationship. I was completely stumped, but true to my Thinker category, I believe that I could think deeply about Joe and what is important to him - then I could design a website he would find very appealing.

The owner of H2H Dynamics made some very compelling arguments for his company's services. His website also contains a video that presents his case, also in a very effective manner.

The video, in fact, goes much further. It is not only potentially seen by many more people, it is also full of visually appealing graphs, sounds for emphasis, and cute background icons. Most of us, no matter our category or worldview, respond better to interesting visuals.

I remember one more thing from this meeting - a person's worldview can, on rare occasions, change. It will then be replaced by a secondary worldview. As a Thinker, I've thought long and hard about this. What is the physical basis, on a cellular level of lower, of our worldview? When and how would it change? I think I have a reasonable theory.

Return to INTRODUCTION TO THINKING LONGER AND HARDER. Or, if you liked this, send an email to Mike Stewart. - mike@esearchfor.com

KNOW YOUR PROSPECT, KNOW YOURSELF - THINKING LONGER AND HARDER

 

 
 

(- Copyright 2016 by Mike Stewart -)

In the last few years, I have gained a new respect for what I used to call the soft sciences, which I also described as psychological mumbo-jumbo. As I have gained experience in life, I have found the number of Eureka moments, the times when there is a paradigm shift in how I view the World, have occurred less and less often.

This is also known as "old fogy" thinking.

Long before there was an Internet, there was behavioral science. Sigmund Freud was big in this area, but he died before there was anything close to a modern computer. We all know there are extroverts and introverts. A lot of us have heard "there are no free lunches", yet we are usually glad to get one.

When I was thinking long and hard about OVERCOMING OBJECTIONS, I wasn't thinking about soft science. I knew enthusiasm sells, but I didn't ask why. Then someone suggested I read a book called "Predictably Irrational". It discussed not only that people sometime act irrationally and apparently contrary to their own best interests, but also described experiments which showed under what circumstances most people would act this way.

When I thought about this in relation to handling objections both before and after the internet, my worldview changed. And it changed in two ways.

I suddenly had an understanding of why Free is so powerful. Why we wanted Free Lunches. Why we would spend hours clipping coupons to save a few cents and pay much, much more to give a good tip at a fancy restaurant. And I understood how this could be applied to internet marketing.

It also made me take a different view of other soft science based marketing presentations - basically expansions of the introvert, extrovert view of people.

I have stressed that sales professionals should think about their unique combination of qualities to show how they can uniquely serve their prospects.

My unique combination of qualities makes me believe that we all have unique combinations of qualities. We all have our own worldview and all worldviews are valid. This is not a particularly radical theory in the world of physics, but I want to apply it to the world of Internet Marketing.

Most of us have taken personality tests. They are designed to categorize us, showing how we appear to others, how we like to work, how we relate to others, and so on. One that I was impressed with was the Extended DISC Personality Analysis. D.I.S.C. stands for and centers on four personality traits: dominance, influence, steadiness, and compliance.

When I took this test, I thought it nailed some of my personality traits: Exact, calm, logical. But it wasn't perfect - I think I can prove it messed up on a couple of these. Nevertheless, it was very useful. And I am also grateful that the tester helped me rewrite some of my marketing material so it is much more effective.

I have been preaching that it is important to relate the areas you are expert in or very, very good to areas in which you have much more knowledge than the average person, but you are not at the expert level. You can then see things the expert misses.

With my new respect for soft science, I looked at D.I.S.C. in a slightly different way. For one thing, I didn't like its purpose. In simple terms, it wanted to help business by categorizing employees or prospective employees so that the business could build teams that would work well together. This sounds good, in fact, I would seriously consider D.I.S.C. if I had to put together a team for a large company. But I also saw it as very much against the individual, helping companies weed out anyone who might think a little differently. Rebels need not apply. This was my worldview and I was sticking to it - until I thought a little bit more.

My expertise is computers which morphed into the Internet as time passed. But my secondary almost expert fields are based on a long time love of science. I began college majoring in biology, changed to chemistry, before finishing up majoring in physics and mathematics.

If the world was just made up of introverts and extroverts, there might just be two worldviews, both equally valid. They would rarely change.

But D.I.S.C. indicated there are multiple types: in my case, people who are exact, people who are calm, people who are logical. And there could be degrees of each of these. Maybe there could be an infinite number of personality traits What would be the underlying cause? Each could have its own valid worldview.

If you want to sell something to one particular person, you can never know with absolute certainty that you will succeed - personalities are too complex. But you might know that you will succeed a certain percent of the time. This seems very analogous to some laws in quantum physics where you don't know which atom will decay, just that a certain percent will.

I find this interesting because I wonder if a group of people with similar worldviews, who can be found by Search Engines, might be more often persuaded by arguments tailored to their worldview.

Since my last worldview change, I attended a presentation by the owner of a small company specializing in what might be called "people skill training" - you can get a more exact idea by visiting his website http://h2hdynamics.com.

One idea the owner was stressing is that it is important to invest in your employees' people skills, not just their technical skills. Part of the presentation that was very impressive was he asked the audience a few questions and everyone was able to self-categorize themselves. I was confident I was "a Thinker". Someone else was "a Good Time Joe".

We then moved to different areas of the room for a brief exercise. I was near "Good Time Joe" and was asked what I should say to him to began a successful relationship. I was completely stumped, but true to my Thinker category, I believe that I could think deeply about Joe and what is important to him - then I could design a website he would find very appealing.

The owner of H2H Dynamics made some very compelling arguments for his company's services. His website also contains a video that presents his case, also in a very effective manner.

The video, in fact, goes much further. It is not only potentially seen by many more people, it is also full of visually appealing graphs, sounds for emphasis, and cute background icons. Most of us, no matter our category or worldview, respond better to interesting visuals.

I remember one more thing from this meeting - a person's worldview can, on rare occasions, change. It will then be replaced by a secondary worldview. As a Thinker, I've thought long and hard about this. What is the physical basis, on a cellular level of lower, of our worldview? When and how would it change? I think I have a reasonable theory.

Return to INTRODUCTION TO THINKING LONGER AND HARDER. Or, if you liked this, send an email to Mike Stewart. - mike@esearchfor.com