Social Context, part 3

In the last two posts, I illustrated two extremes of a person's social context within a work situation:

1. Complete dependence, as shown in the twelve disciples of Jesus, who preached in pairs throughout the land of Judea without any money or food, relying entirely on the people they met for survival.


2. Complete independence, as shown in Jesus' cousin John the baptist, who preached alone, in the wilderness, relying on nobody but himself, God, and nature for his survival.

In reality, neither of these parties operated within these extreme social contexts indefinitely. The disciples later regrouped and continued to follow Jesus; later, a few disciples used other employment (fishing, tent-making, sale of property) to provide income while they continued their Christian ministry. John the baptizer attracted disciples who lived and worked and served with him.

And in general, healthy individuals live and work in an equilibrium between these two extremes - in a state of interdependence. One might consider this to be a state of healthy teamwork.

For people to function in a team, two fundamental things must happen.

First, each team member must accept responsibility for his own actions. There are certain tasks which each individual can do better than anyone else on the team. The individual must complete those tasks with all of his heart, applying the full measure of his strength to successfully do his particular job within the team.

Second, each team member must rely on his teammates to complement his weaknesses and to fulfill the tasks that he himself cannot fulfill. He must trust his teammates to do their jobs to the best of their own strengths, just as he trusts his teammates to allow him to do his own job to the best of his own strengths. He must communicate with and collaborate with his teammates, and dedicate his efforts to the success of the team as a whole.

The way in which a healthy team works is the same way in which a healthy organization and a healthy society work - in a state of interdependence. Each of us accepts responsibility to fulfill her own role and vocation according to her own strengths on behalf of those around her. And in return, she trusts and relies on those around her to use their own strengths to fulfill those things which she herself cannot.

Interdependence, like most good things in life, is a balance. Beware of becoming too dependent or too independent. And when you sense yourself sliding toward one extreme or another, you might try a little mental experiment: imagine how you would act if you operated under the extreme opposite social context instead.

Social Context, part 2

Jesus of Nazareth had a cousin - John - whose work slightly preceded Jesus' own. John instructed the people of Israel to change their ways and to prepare for the coming Messiah.

John's modus operandi was quite different from the instructions that Jesus gave to his own disciples. Jesus told his disciples to travel in pairs, going from town to town, preaching and healing and relying on the people they met for their food, water, and shelter.

John went out to the desert, alone, dressed like a wild man, eating off the land, and the people traveled out to the wilderness to hear him speak.

If all of your work is done alone, if you are by yourself, if you are a one-man team, then who makes your decisions? You. Who plans your strategy? You. Who coordinates your communication? You. Who does all the work? You.

If, instead, you work in an office full of coworkers and superiors and subordinates, you can sometimes get caught up in soliciting everyone's opinion, or letting someone else make the decision, or leaving the work for another person to do. Sometimes these things unintentionally get out of hand; sometimes they become our excuse to procrastinate.

If your success and survival depended entirely on you and your decisions and your efforts, how would that change the way you approach your work and your life?

Social Context, part 1

In the first century A.D., a Jewish rabbi from the town of Nazareth in Galilee hand-picked twelve men to be his disciples. After a period of time, he sent these disciples out by twos to proclaim the kingdom of God and to heal the sick and afflicted among the people of Israel. And he gave them some interesting instructions for the task:

"Take nothing for your journey - no staff, no bag, no bread, no money, no extra undergarments. And whenever you enter a house, stay there until you depart from that place." (Luke 9:3-4)

Strange requirements. If you travel extensively as part of your work - as a touring musician, or a motivational speaker, or a political candidate, or a sales representative - don't you usually take a suitcase? and a change of clothes? and, above all, a credit card?

So why would this Jesus of Nazareth instruct his disciples to leave these things behind as they traveled around the countryside to preach?

Likely there were multiple reasons. But consider this one:

If you're traveling from town to town for weeks (months? years?) on end, without having any money to buy food or a hotel room, you are forced to rely on the people you encounter in each town. You are forced to speak with people in each town - to meet them, to engage them in conversation, to tell a compelling story to them, to pique their interest, to build a relationship that benefits both yourself and them.

If, on the other hand, you have the ability within yourself to supply all of your own needs, you may find it easier to become an island. To be totally self-reliant. To avoid community and collaboration. To isolate yourself from others, never to connect with others (i.e. your clients, your potential clients, your coworkers) at all.

If your success and survival depended entirely upon your relationships with other people, how would that change the way you approach your work and your life?

Good Salesman / Bad Salesman

Sorry for the brief hiatus, everyone.

Recently I've been in the market to buy a house, and last week I ramped my search up a notch. This experience of considering a major purchase has given me an interesting look at the sales process. Being a marketer, my work does not often cover the area of "salesmanship," so I find it fascinating when I can make some observations about "sales" from the viewpoint of a consumer.

And so, based on my recent experiences in working with realtors as I shop for a large-value, long-term, high-investment purchase, and based on other shopping experiences in general, here is Haley's Good Salesman/Bad Salesman list (version 1.0):

A Bad Salesman believes that he knows exactly what the customer wants as soon as the customer makes a request.
A Good Salesman asks questions, so that he can learn and clarify the customer's tastes, preferences, needs, and circumstances.

A Bad Salesman believes that he is the expert in the sales relationship.
A Good Salesman knows that the customer is the expert on her own needs and wants, and that his sales expertise about the product is relevant only after the customer teaches him about her situation.

A Bad Salesman is mostly concerned with talking about the product.
A Good Salesman is mostly concerned with listening to the customer.

A Bad Salesman shares his own speculations when he doesn't know the answer to the customer's question.
A Good Salesman admits when he doesn't know the answer to the customer's question, and finds the answer for the customer within 12 hours.

A Bad Salesman badmouths his competitor.
A Good Salesman conducts himself with grace, openly recognizing and respecting the strengths of his competitor, or identifying the differing usage situations for his competitor's product versus his own product, or speaking about "other brands" in general terms, or not mentioning the competitor at all when he talks with the customer.

A Bad Salesman alters the customer's needs to fit his product.
A Good Salesman alters his product to fit the customer's needs.

A Bad Salesman wants the sale to be a good deal for him and his company.
A Good Salesman wants the sale to be a good deal for both his company and his customer.

A Bad Salesman is an advocate for his company.
A Good Salesman is an advocate for his customer.

A Bad Salesman's goal is to make the sale.
A Good Salesman's goal is to make sure his customer gets the best solution.