On Thursday 14 June 2007, mick wenlock wrote:
> Oops sorry everyone, pushed the wrong button...
>
> Helen,
>
> Great post - it reminded me of soe of the twisted logic that
> scientologists go through as well.
>
> Amazing!
Some of it is also "standard" sales rhetoric: answer a question with a
question. I was shopping for a sectional sofa recently and one
salesman started doing that. I kind of expected it. I had been in a
lot of furniture stores and this was the only place someone had a tie
on and was dressed spiffy. I asked, "Do any of these sectionals have a
sleeper section?" He said, "Do you need them to have a sleeper
section?" I came close to snapping, "I need someone who doesn't answer
my questions with other questions or try any other sales tactics on
me."
It's redirection. Remember the past few weeks where I was going on and
on until my fingers were sore and I was blue in the face from beating
my head against a brick wall? This is why. A major tactic in sales
and in many areas is for a person to change the topic when they get a
question they don't want to answer. That's exactly what's going on
here and whenever it happens, keep track of your original question
because it will never get answered unless you keep pushing. If the
other person keeps dodging it, then you know the answer is whatever you
don't want to hear.
> Mick
>
> helen bang <helen_d_bang@
> In the UK the online business has been called Amivo, not
> Quixtar.
>
> Responses to the 'Is it Amway?' question were taught as follows:
>
> 1. Oh, that's interesting. What do you know about Amway?
> 2. Oh, that's interesting. I know some very successful people in
> Amway - what do you know about Amway?
>
> Alternatively avoiding/ignoring the question:
>
> 3. It's network marketing (until this got a bad name)
> 4. We help people set up their own businesses.
> 5. We help people develop an additional income stream.
>
> if you're feeling really confident.
>
> 6. You mean something like pyramid selling? - Oh no, that's illegal.
> This is a multi billion dollar business.
>
> Bear in mind the initial invite was always supposed to be on the
> telephone, with the 'I've only got a minute, are you free this
> Thursday?' intro and as little as possible divulged up front. If they
> asked too many questions we were taught to 'take it away' - 'I'm
> sorry, I thought you were an open-minded business person. I thought
> there was a degree of trust between us. Let's just forget it.'
My answer, in a case like this, would be, "Yes, there is trust and even
respect, but in this case, you aren't showing enough respect for me to
answer my questions directly, which makes me wonder if you trust me
enough to make a sound choice based on your answers. Do you want to
trust me with what you know or not?"
A simpler version would be, "If there is trust, why aren't you
comfortable answering my question? Don't *you* trust me?"
Of course, by then, the clues have been dropped and your internal Red
Alert should be blaring like a trumpet.
Hal
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___
No comments:
Post a Comment