Some details about communication (II)-Initiative

During the Warring States Period, Qi Yan and the two countries have always been dependent on lips and teeth, Qi is strong and Yan is weak, Yan is Qi to resist the barrier of the north, Qi will be Yu xiong from the Warring States Period in the south.

The son of Yan Guoqiang forced the boss to sit down on him, and the son sent a request to the Qi State to establish a covenant with the Qi State. Generally, the two State covenant should be initiated in the name of the king, the son-on-Behalf of Wang FA's appointment is actually a test of Qi's attitude towards him. Qi Wang received a letter and was in a dilemma. If he had contracted with his son, he would first acknowledge the son's Yan in the Warring States period. However, the situation of Yan was not clear at this time. If he had not contracted with him, he is afraid of offending attackers and will be troubled by war in the future.

Qi Wang had no plans. He asked SU Qin and SU Qin, who had been in Qi's Prime Minister after the joint venture failed. He wrote a letter to reply. The general content was that Yan Qi and the two countries were allies and had a covenant, there is no major change to the two sides of the border today, and there is no need to contract again (I don't remember the ancient saying). That is to say, I don't recognize the child, nor do I get angry with the child.

In this case, the child first threw the question to Qi Guo (see the tips for asking questions in "some details about communication"), and Qi Wang fell into the default idea of the other party, the contract with the sub-party is not entangled with the sub-contract, and the initiative to deal with the problem is lost. Su Qin is worthy of being a consultant, jumping out of the assumption of the problem, fundamentally questioning the necessity of the contract, let's take the initiative back to ourselves.

In communication or negotiation, it is necessary to grasp the initiative of the Dialogue and control the development direction of the dialogue to achieve the purpose of self-communication.

I once asked a Vice President to discuss a product design issue. The lead jumped out of the issue and turned the conversation direction into an execution issue, I said "you" and "we" several times during the conversation and scolded us for not sharing each other, instead, we should put the leadership decisions in place as soon as possible (it is not always wrong to say "you" and "we" in the conversation. We do not need to rush to confess that we are not shirking responsibility, but tell you and me, it is precisely because of the division of labor in the team, the division of responsibilities, the division of labor, and the difference that you and I can cooperate ).

As the other side of the conversation, the content of the previously designed conversation was immediately swept away. I was not right at the moment, and due to lack of experience, I was not aware of the need to quickly turn the topic around and regain the initiative, then, we can only identify the issue of execution based on each other's topic and ultimately fail to fulfill the original purpose of the conversation.