Well it's not some kind of self-interested thing! We do it for the company!
In many cases, HR foresees certain processes that are going to happen.
But what about the fact that everyone (first and foremost leaders) MUST assert interest within an organization?
It is not easy! The most typical reason is that people (leaders) do not see things from the same perspective!
For example, you can increase profits:
- by increasing sales (as revenue increases)
- by improving the negotiating skills of salespeople (because the margin will be better)
- by increasing promotional spending on sales (which helps sales)
- by reducing promotional costs for sales (as costs are reduced)
- hiring more salespeople (because they can sell more)
- by firing sales staff (saving on labour costs)
- etc.
We could list many more ideas, all representing different perspectives. Maybe there were points that you yourself agreed with and there were points where you shook your head and said, "who has heard such nonsense???".
What happens then in a company? What happens in a group in which (in theory) everyone has the same goal but a different strategy is thought to be the right one?
Assertion of interst! BUT HOW?
Unfortunately, in a very high percentage of cases, we see that inappropriately...
Unfortunately, very often we find that there is no real assertion of interests (or conciliation)...
Unfortunately, sometimes it seems as if the participants are individually, separately, "grinding in different mills"... :)
So, what do we most often do instead of assertion of interest or reconciliation?
I've put together 3 of the most common things we do wrong in the absence of concrete interest assertion knowledge.
1. We argue
Arguments are the most common form of attempts to assert interests within a company. Definitions of an argument:
a. A battle of arguments; an intellectual struggle between two or more persons, orally or in writing, to decide a question, to form a position, to establish a record.
b.A loud quarrel; a loud argument, verbal fight, mutual abuse by two or more persons.
c. Old-fashioned, obsolete: A clash, fight; a struggle by physical force.
An argument is not necessarily a fight or a quarrel or anything like that. Nor should it be thought of as a negative concept. You can argue and in some ways it is worth arguing. We call it constructive debate. What is it?
- exchange of information
- mutual verification of assumptions
- mutual identification of interests
- etc.
I could go on for a long time about the otherwise extremely important elements that make the debate constructive.
Basic truth:
"In the argument that we win we will probably lose. And in the argument where we lose, we usually lose." :)
So how can an argument be truly constructive? You have to learn! And indeed, over centuries and millennia, this kind of argument is not "encoded in our genes"!
2. We persuade
Of all the activities that someone does instead of assertion of interest, this is my favourite! :)
Let's look at the definition:
a. Persuasion by argument; persuading a person to accept a statement as true, a position as correct. To persuade by argument or emotional appeal to a different action, behaviour or decision.
b. The effect of a fact; a decision based on experience that persuades a person to accept the reality of a phenomenon or circumstance, to accept the correctness of a thing, or to remove a doubt.
This is my favourite because it's very similar to the argument but because it has the word "reasoning" and the word "fact" in it it seems much more reasonable! :) But it's not. Just because we say "but these are indisputable facts..." or "I tried to reason with him..." there's no question that we're right, but the other person doesn't get it. You know that joke where the guy is driving on the highway against traffic... "an idiot? Well, they're all coming at you!"
So, all joking aside, persuasion is nothing more than a cheap tool to get the other side to give up their previous opinion and replace it with ours. That's why we sometimes call it an "exchange of views". :) (e.g. "I went to my boss with my opinion and came out with his!")
How can someone be really persuasive in an assertion of interest situation within a company? You can learn!
3. We're procastinating
I once had a colleague who had this motto: "a problem that doesn't solve itself, i.e. by procrastination, is not a real problem!" :)
What is procrastination?
a. Procrastinating; trying to avoid doing things for so long that you never get them done, and then doing more and more things that do more and more damage, even ruining your whole life.
b. Leaving it until later and later; in order to wait for the right time, he repeatedly avoids, much later, a decision, a choice, a long-term action, a challenge.
Of course, there are situations where we need more information and therefore delay assertion of interest. We postpone the meeting, come back to it later, etc. It is often said that "he who buys time buys life...". But there are times when procrastination becomes so rampant within a company, within an organization, that no one really takes on the responsibility of asserting interest and the consequences of the resulting DECISION. And I'm not going to come up with anything surprising here. You can defer, but you have to know exactly what the strategy is. And yes you can learn to do that.
I have collected the 3 most common advocacy supplements, which show that they can be used in some form, but only if the whole company, the whole organisation, the whole group "speaks the same language". It is therefore worth introducing a common denominator in every company, in every organisation: ASSERTION OF INTERST TECHNIQUES WITHIN THE COMPANY!
Incredible amounts of time and money can be saved by replacing the previously endless meetings and lobbying with concrete, open assertion of interes. When the people, the staff, the LEADERS in a company speak the same language and ALL "pull in the same direction", the efficiency of the company or group increases several times over!
Comments