July 18, 2008 at 11:34 am
I'm not sure that soft skills necessarily come with time. Yes, to the extent that you can train yourself not to dribble when you drink, or to hit the inside of a toilet bowl 85-90% of the time, you can learn some basic soft skills. Nothing that would be recognizable as a great success by the more conversationally expansive archetypes.
There are different sorts of people. "Soft skills" are a way to fuzz the gap between the various types of people. Unfortunately, those that deemed it necessary to "soften" the gap are the same that naturally exhibit the soft skills in question. Logical thinkers, as I assume that most of you are, find it difficult to reason why their logic and fact are not sufficient to convey their meaning to others. It makes perfect sense to us, right? Fuzzy thinkers on the other hand, want to feel good about what they are saying and hearing. To us it makes no sense because we can usually see right through all of the flufftastic twaddle. Unfortunately, we don't rule the world (yet), and as such must play by the rules of the fuzzy folk.
It can be difficult, especially when you tend to think that most of your target audience are idiots. Why on earth should you have to compromise your integrity to placate morons? While its true that we keep the nuts and bolts together, mechanically sound rides don't bring folks to the carnival. We need the barkers, or none of us would have work.
Make it a game... prove yourself superior on yet another level. Whereas invariably I feel doltish and trite when vague utterances find their way clear of my brain and into the perception of others, others simply perceive them as normal. People like to be smoothed. Say everything with a smile on your face. A spoonful of sugar… sugar attracts more flies… something like that. Be aware of your audience. You can feel them starting to turn on you if you pay attention. Work in some humor and bring it back around.
Look at it this way, most people don't have the sense to not be hyper-sensitive. This natural tendency is exploited by the culture in many a company: keep people on edge, always questioning their value, keep it competitive. Unfortunately, if you manage to trigger someone's defenses a few sentences into a conversation, you've pretty much given away any chance you had of success. They will be far more concerned (albeit sub-consciously) with retaliation that rationality.
BTW - that's why the field of Business Analysis has evolved. BA's and BSA's are the missing link between normal humans and nerds. The translator class, if you will.
We wouldn't be such misanthropes if people weren't such insufferable misologists.
July 18, 2008 at 11:38 am
Carla Wilson (7/18/2008)
Years ago, the department I was in did one of those personality classes, where you fit into a quadrant based on introvert/extrovert, etc. and then learn how each person's strengths contribute to the group. A lot of people hate those exercises, but what I really liked about the course was the recognition of the fact that people ARE different, and to take advantage of the strengths to make the group better.
I believe this is one of the key reasons for communication difficulties: we have different ways of perceiving the world, and an innocuous comment from one perspective looks like an attack from another.
I've read all the books mentioned above and tried to learn a bit from each. Also taken a few classes, most of which were snorers but I tried to extract a few points they were trying to make. The best classes I've taken have been in how to deal with difficult people (sometimes I recognize myself in some of the descriptions).
I learned a really good technique for persistent people who won't take a hint, called "broken record" -- if someone is trying to sell me something I don't want, or don't need, or trying to get me sign a petition for something I don't believe in, I just keep repeating the same answer. In other words, they keep trying to say "but, have you considered ..." something else about the offer, etc., and I reply "I am not interested, thank you." No matter what they say, they keep getting the same six words. They eventually do get the message. Similar for insistent co-workers trying to get me to turn to their opinion -- I just repeat my answer of what will be better (politely).
When co-workers in meetings make passive-aggressive comments or thinly veiled insults, I have found the best technique is to deflect it back at them by asking them to clarify their statements. "Would you please rephrase that?" or "Pardon?" or "Can you explain further?" or "Was there a question in there?" Tone of voice is important - the best is to keep your own temper in control - you can blow up about the brat when you get home.
July 18, 2008 at 11:41 am
I did two different personality tests for two different companies. Then each time someone came in explaining the result to us and explained how different personality could work together eg introvert vs extrovert. What I found out it was not the personality, it was the dynamic of the team that made the team. In one company that I did the test, I really enjoyed working with my team. Everyone respected each other and helped each other out. The other company that I did the test, I did not enjoy working with my team. I felt people compete with each other.
Anyway communication is important but I just feel liked a politican these days, talk very carefully, otherwise someone will find something wrong with what I say and then I will be in trouble.
July 18, 2008 at 11:50 am
jpowers (7/18/2008)
Carla Wilson (7/18/2008)
I learned a really good technique for persistent people who won't take a hint, called "broken record"the best is to keep your own temper in control - you can blow up about the brat when you get home.
First, I've found that approach has gotten me in hot water before. Quite often in these situations people tend to interupt one another. When that happens I stop speaking, let them finish. Then after a diliberate pause, I begin speaking again, making it a point to say the exact same words that I was saying when I was interupted. I also speak slightly slower, softer, and with a deeper voice. It worked VERY well when I worked the door at coke-fac.:cool:. Dance Club. Repeating this process until I get my turn. This process has also been successful in several meetings I've had with coworkers that don't seem to get it.
Lastly, I recall a quote...
Four things come not back: the spoken word, the sped arrow, time past, the neglected opportunity. - Omar Ibnal-Halif
Honor Super Omnia-
Jason Miller
July 18, 2008 at 12:12 pm
As with any technique for dealing with opponents (whether in communication or karate), one needs to use good judgment. No technique is good for all situations, and may need modification, as with changing the tone of voice and speaking more slowly.
Practice and experience and patience are key, grasshopper.
:rolleyes:
jpowers (aka NotquiteXena)
July 18, 2008 at 12:40 pm
Carla Wilson (7/18/2008)
But all this said, I think it's time for me to brush up on my communication skills. In the past week, I've almost exploded twice. Thanks for lighting a candle!
Wow, only twice? I am fortunate that right now I am the new guy and have not worked on many released projects, so I don't have many dealings with non-technical folks. Back when I did, there were at least a couple of "blow-ups" a week. Fortunately they were usually AFTER I hung up the phone. In my early thirties I learned to hang-up and then vent, and many times vent at home by explaining the situation quite animatedly to my wife. Once that started she never complained about my not talking about work anymore.:D
I also learned to use email or another form of written communication when frustrated. I did this for 2 reasons:
1. I could vent and then edit out the nasty stuff.
2. I had proof of what I said.
cyndi.horn (7/18/2008)
There are different sorts of people. "Soft skills" are a way to fuzz the gap between the various types of people. Unfortunately, those that deemed it necessary to "soften" the gap are the same that naturally exhibit the soft skills in question. Logical thinkers, as I assume that most of you are, find it difficult to reason why their logic and fact are not sufficient to convey their meaning to others. It makes perfect sense to us, right? Fuzzy thinkers on the other hand, want to feel good about what they are saying and hearing. To us it makes no sense because we can usually see right through all of the flufftastic twaddle. Unfortunately, we don't rule the world (yet), and as such must play by the rules of the fuzzy folk.
I also would have to agree with the premise behind this quote. Folks in IT tend to be logical folks who see a right way and wrong way and that colors our communication. We need to acknowledge other ideas and views as valid and then move on. When something is explained in a logical manner we can accept it (which is why most of us get along in the forums), if not then we like to "prove" our side (when this happens it can a wee bit nasty in the forums).
Jack Corbett
Consultant - Straight Path Solutions
Check out these links on how to get faster and more accurate answers:
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Need an Answer? Actually, No ... You Need a Question
July 18, 2008 at 1:55 pm
I also would have to agree with the premise behind this quote. Folks in IT tend to be logical folks who see a right way and wrong way and that colors our communication. We need to acknowledge other ideas and views as valid and then move on. When something is explained in a logical manner we can accept it (which is why most of us get along in the forums), if not then we like to "prove" our side (when this happens it can a wee bit nasty in the forums).
Sorry I kind of disagree. Sometimes I see folks in IT also compete with each other and let their ego close their mind. Some developers always do things one way and never listen to other people that there may be a better way to do things.
July 18, 2008 at 2:45 pm
Loner (7/18/2008)
I also would have to agree with the premise behind this quote. Folks in IT tend to be logical folks who see a right way and wrong way and that colors our communication. We need to acknowledge other ideas and views as valid and then move on. When something is explained in a logical manner we can accept it (which is why most of us get along in the forums), if not then we like to "prove" our side (when this happens it can a wee bit nasty in the forums).
Sorry I kind of disagree. Sometimes I see folks in IT also compete with each other and let their ego close their mind. Some developers always do things one way and never listen to other people that there may be a better way to do things.
Sure there are those who let their ego close their mind, but most good programmers/dba's are willing to learn a new or better way. We all have our "soap box issues", like Celko and identity values, but most of the time we, at least most on this site, are willing to listen to and consider other people's opinions respectfully.
Jack Corbett
Consultant - Straight Path Solutions
Check out these links on how to get faster and more accurate answers:
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Need an Answer? Actually, No ... You Need a Question
July 18, 2008 at 4:45 pm
Steve Jones - Editor (7/18/2008)
I think Grant and Jeff must be related to Dwight Shroot. Sorry you guys lost your privileges to bring nunchakus and stars into the office.
Heh... who says I gave them up? I keep the bat in an easy-rider rifle rack... Everyone thinks the nunchakus are nothing more than a really big nut cracker (how ironic). No one really notices the throwing stars because everyone thinks they're just really big gold stars on my years of service plaque. And, the floor lamp is really a poison dart gun. 😛
Of course, when I click my mouse just right, all the lights go out and the fire alarms sounds. :hehe:
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 18, 2008 at 9:36 pm
Jeff Moden (7/18/2008)
Steve Jones - Editor (7/18/2008)
I think Grant and Jeff must be related to Dwight Shroot. Sorry you guys lost your privileges to bring nunchakus and stars into the office.Heh... who says I gave them up? I keep the bat in an easy-rider rifle rack... Everyone thinks the nunchakus are nothing more than a really big nut cracker (how ironic). No one really notices the throwing stars because everyone thinks they're just really big gold stars on my years of service plaque. And, the floor lamp is really a poison dart gun. 😛
Of course, when I click my mouse just right, all the lights go out and the fire alarms sounds. :hehe:
Who needs nunchaku, bo/jo sticks or stars, when you have Exchange? Public humiliation wor4ks oh so very much better. And - it's backed up, so you can replay it whenever you feel like it....:)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your lack of planning does not constitute an emergency on my part...unless you're my manager...or a director and above...or a really loud-spoken end-user..All right - what was my emergency again?
July 21, 2008 at 1:53 am
...flufftastic twaddle....
gets my vote for best descriptive term! 😀
(sounds like a forum for debate! :D)
--Shaun
Hiding under a desk from SSIS Implemenation Work :crazy:
July 21, 2008 at 7:04 am
jpowers (7/18/2008)
As with any technique for dealing with opponents (whether in communication or karate), one needs to use good judgment. No technique is good for all situations, and may need modification, as with changing the tone of voice and speaking more slowly.Practice and experience and patience are key, grasshopper.
:rolleyes:
jpowers (aka NotquiteXena)
I've been having a lot of fun with the "weapons parody"... might as well continue with that...
I almost never raise my voice to or use sarcasm on users, the developers I work with/mentor, the DBA's, or even my managers. The proverbial "bat" that I keep talking about always works and it's always the right thing to do to help folks... the "bat" is usually in the form of a million row test table and demonstrable code comparisons and performance tests which, of course, include scalability tests. Even disk and memory configurations can be tested in such a manner. One can argue until they're blue in the face but "a person forced against their will, is of the same opinion still". The only way to get someone to change their opinion is with clear and absolute proof... if you can't provide such proof, then there's no sense in arguing. Even ego-maniacs respond correctly to such proof.
My boss (who is NOT an ego maniac :D) wanted to import 1.2 million rows of data on a daily basis for a project. I told him, as I've suggested to him at least a dozen times, that BULK INSERT with a BCP format file would be the best way to go. He said "Dangit, Jeff... I'm tired of hearing about BCP and BULK INSERT! We're using Java to do the import and that's my final word!" Heh... he was under a bit of pressure. Anyway, I said "ok" and walked away and wrote the BULK INSERT and the format file. I gave the Java developer time to build his code and put it into production. As Java code goes, the developer did a brilliant job (which my boss was quick to rub in my face a bit). I took my code over to the developer, who I knew had a bit of intellectual curiosity, and demo'd it to him... his took 16 minutes and did no verification of content... mine did verify content and it only took 51 seconds. Needless to say, he was amazed and said "I'll be right back." I went out for a smoke break. Just as I was done, my boss (who also smoked) came out and said "Jeff, I'm sorry... showed me what your code did and you were right on with the BULK INSERT. I'll never question you again." "Heh...", I said, "You should always question me... you should always ask me if there's a better way even if it's not about data" and to this day, he does.
Demonstrable code, soft words, and a bit of patience... that's the kind of "bat" I'm talking about. It hasn't failed me yet. It even works on people I don't know so well provided that your not arrogant about it. Arrogance will make the "bat" slip out of your hands because people will go out of their way to NOT use your methods if you are arrogant.
Flipping things around, someone says they want to do something and you know it will harm the data. Now, what do you do? Soft yet firm "No... that will harm the data in the following manner" followed by an explanation. Sure, you'll run into the "I'm your manager and I said do it" in which case you break out the other "bat"... "I can't... it would break the data and you and I would both be fired for it. I know you're in a hurry but let's work on this together so we can both keep our jobs."
Every once in a while, you'll run into some blatherskites like what Loner used to work for that will insist that the change be made or you'll be fired. Michigan is an Oracle and DB2 state with very few decent SQL Server jobs available. I would hate to be fired for such a thing and if running it up the chain of command doesn't work, then I still don't mind getting fired... I have a reputation to protect and will do so even if it means getting fired. Yeah, I know... lot's of folks aren't in a position to dig in that hard, but at least take it to the edge. Here's the 3 rules I operate by...
[font="Arial Black"]Jeff Moden's Three Rules of DBA's.[/font]
1. A DBA may not injure data or performance of the data or, through inaction, allow data or performance of the data to come to harm.
2. A DBA must obey orders given to it by "Users", except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A DBA must protect "Users" existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First Law.
(Defininition of "Users" is anyone including but not limited to Developers, Designers, Data Modelers, Dev Managers, Project Managers, Customers, other DBA's, Ops personnel, one's immediate supervisor, or anyone else who, by command, code, design, setting, or device, may impart changes to the schema, the data, or the server).
Part of protecting the "Users existence" is keeping them from doing something that violates the first law especially where it could cost them their job... 🙂 When they finally realize that you're on their side and that you're not just butting heads, life in the shop becomes almost conflict free.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 21, 2008 at 7:16 am
Nice post. Good set of rules. But now we'll have to refer to you as Jeff Isaac Rbar Moden. You're starting to sound like a Civil War general.
"The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood"
- Theodore Roosevelt
Author of:
SQL Server Execution Plans
SQL Server Query Performance Tuning
July 21, 2008 at 7:54 am
Grant Fritchey (7/21/2008)
.....Civil War general....
too USA centric. 😀
Hiding under a desk from SSIS Implemenation Work :crazy:
July 21, 2008 at 8:53 am
Jeff Moden (7/21/2008)
[font="Arial Black"]Jeff Moden's Three Rules of DBA's.[/font]1. A DBA may not injure data or performance of the data or, through inaction, allow data or performance of the data to come to harm.
2. A DBA must obey orders given to it by "Users", except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A DBA must protect "Users" existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First Law.
Shouldn't the third law be in conflict with the second law rather than the first, especially since the second cannot be in conflict with the first? I know I've had to protect users from themselves. (and you should standardize between rules and laws, looks like you have an integrity violation on your data set there :hehe: )
-----
[font="Arial"]Knowledge is of two kinds. We know a subject ourselves or we know where we can find information upon it. --Samuel Johnson[/font]
Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 84 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply