November 14, 2014 at 13:04What is the technical task silent about?
It will be about very strange requirements that the customer aggressively insists on. I know that this is an endless topic and much has been said about it. But haven’t you ever been asked to “add more air directly to the pink kittens, and also make rain under the cursor”? Such a person is not ready to listen to arguments. You have not had time to finish the phrase, but he has already concentrated on the search for counterarguments. In addition, a person is often afraid to seem stupid, therefore, continues to argue for the sake of image and self-esteem, even realizing that he is wrong. Agree that it is very difficult to say really new words in this thread? But I will try to summarize the very essence of effective strategies for behavior in this situation.
As a result of reading this note, some beginners will be able to avoid the typical mistakes that more experienced colleagues went through. If you look at reports on sites (for example, from a couple of large studios), then you will be surprised at the typicality of all situations. The situation with human communication is similar: someone already aggressively insisted on stupid things, and someone was forced to really increase the conversion. For the site owner, his project is the center of the world, and for you and me this project is just one of the lines of the pivot table with some indicators (for example: conversion, refusals, average time on the site, return visits, goals). Let's look at the problem of complex communication as a summary table of human experience.
We will avoid value judgments of the subjective image of a person, as this will prevent us from understanding which specific beliefs help us to cooperate and which ones interfere. The site owner wants to invest minimal money in tools. By the way, often programmers and designers are also considered tools. The site is created not for the very fact of perfect implementation, but for profit. But not all site owners understand what specific methods can increase conversion.
This problem arises when a person is confident in his opinion, since he has too little knowledge in the relevant field to critically evaluate everything and see the fallacy of his beliefs. He is sure that any person can increase conversion, i.e. this does not require education, work experience and mountains of books read. He looks at the site like a child on a spaceship, thinking that it is very simple to control.
If this is not the owner of the site, then he may be interested not in conversion, but in the opportunity to tell his boss: "This cool site was made thanks to me, I did everything for them myself." Maybe he is pulling time, because there is no money for contractors. And maybe pathologically amuses their complexes. Or he has the influence of social instincts ("I am the dominant, I am the boss, I am the master, the lackeys need to be taught, they themselves do not think") overshadows the mind. As an option, he is too infantile and cannot take off the "pink glasses of the owner of the greatest site in the world."
The previously mentioned people did not appear from a cosmic vacuum, but are a reflection of the problems of our society. You can look for reasons for a long time in an imperfect education system, in typical upbringing errors, in human nature, but it’s better to talk about ways to communicate with such people.
Listen carefully, occasionally ask clarifying questions. Say that now check what options you can try. During this time, you need to make a comparative table. In this comparison table, a stupid option should also be present, but in an unfavorable light. Do not convince, but create conditions (tables, graphs, reports of statistical systems, examples on competitors' websites) so that a person sees the “right and profitable” solution. Present this not as your expert opinion, but as an objectively more favorable way to solve the problem.
Firstly, the very fact of choosing from the proposed options creates the feeling of one’s own choice, to which a person is less critical. Secondly, the simplest review (comparative table) looks more convincing than oral phrases. The main thing is not to argue and not take a leader's place in communication. Speak arguments that are beneficial to decision makers.
Not. Little. In my experience (I’m 30 years old, I’ve been “spinning up” various projects all the time and finalizing ready-made solutions to meet the needs of the business) there is a belief that there are really few problem people. Of course, in my life I came across people with beliefs that were not the most effective for cooperation, however, the methods described in this article were enough for me. However, the most problematic thing is when a person says: “Surprise me, create the best site! I do not know what I want! I don’t know how I understand that you created the best site, but I just want the best site! ” With such genie catchers it is better not to start a collaboration unless absolutely necessary.
What result do we get?
As a result of reading this note, some beginners will be able to avoid the typical mistakes that more experienced colleagues went through. If you look at reports on sites (for example, from a couple of large studios), then you will be surprised at the typicality of all situations. The situation with human communication is similar: someone already aggressively insisted on stupid things, and someone was forced to really increase the conversion. For the site owner, his project is the center of the world, and for you and me this project is just one of the lines of the pivot table with some indicators (for example: conversion, refusals, average time on the site, return visits, goals). Let's look at the problem of complex communication as a summary table of human experience.
Why do people behave this way?
We will avoid value judgments of the subjective image of a person, as this will prevent us from understanding which specific beliefs help us to cooperate and which ones interfere. The site owner wants to invest minimal money in tools. By the way, often programmers and designers are also considered tools. The site is created not for the very fact of perfect implementation, but for profit. But not all site owners understand what specific methods can increase conversion.
This problem arises when a person is confident in his opinion, since he has too little knowledge in the relevant field to critically evaluate everything and see the fallacy of his beliefs. He is sure that any person can increase conversion, i.e. this does not require education, work experience and mountains of books read. He looks at the site like a child on a spaceship, thinking that it is very simple to control.
If this is not the owner of the site, then he may be interested not in conversion, but in the opportunity to tell his boss: "This cool site was made thanks to me, I did everything for them myself." Maybe he is pulling time, because there is no money for contractors. And maybe pathologically amuses their complexes. Or he has the influence of social instincts ("I am the dominant, I am the boss, I am the master, the lackeys need to be taught, they themselves do not think") overshadows the mind. As an option, he is too infantile and cannot take off the "pink glasses of the owner of the greatest site in the world."
The previously mentioned people did not appear from a cosmic vacuum, but are a reflection of the problems of our society. You can look for reasons for a long time in an imperfect education system, in typical upbringing errors, in human nature, but it’s better to talk about ways to communicate with such people.
What communication strategy to use?
Listen carefully, occasionally ask clarifying questions. Say that now check what options you can try. During this time, you need to make a comparative table. In this comparison table, a stupid option should also be present, but in an unfavorable light. Do not convince, but create conditions (tables, graphs, reports of statistical systems, examples on competitors' websites) so that a person sees the “right and profitable” solution. Present this not as your expert opinion, but as an objectively more favorable way to solve the problem.
Firstly, the very fact of choosing from the proposed options creates the feeling of one’s own choice, to which a person is less critical. Secondly, the simplest review (comparative table) looks more convincing than oral phrases. The main thing is not to argue and not take a leader's place in communication. Speak arguments that are beneficial to decision makers.
Are there many aggressive ignoramuses?
Not. Little. In my experience (I’m 30 years old, I’ve been “spinning up” various projects all the time and finalizing ready-made solutions to meet the needs of the business) there is a belief that there are really few problem people. Of course, in my life I came across people with beliefs that were not the most effective for cooperation, however, the methods described in this article were enough for me. However, the most problematic thing is when a person says: “Surprise me, create the best site! I do not know what I want! I don’t know how I understand that you created the best site, but I just want the best site! ” With such genie catchers it is better not to start a collaboration unless absolutely necessary.