Originally Posted by GordonJ
As I was doing this, I was talking to him about golf, because I knew he was an avid golfer and he knew I was a golf teaching professional.
We discussed the four shots of golf, the tee shot, approach shot, recovery shot, and putting.
I was able to weave the words of golf, the lingo, into the discussion of psychotropic drugs, and the care of our residents.
It was then that I realized the synergy that was taking place.
Oh the drug was reduced and in 30 days later our resident was taken totally off of Haldol.
Turned out the poor guy who couldn't speak, would get migraine headaches, which in turn caused him to" act out"...a couple of aspirin and he was a new guy. Anyhow,
This synergy, was a combination of the vocabulary, of the lingo,the jargon people in different fields used to communicate.
Jargon is the shortcut.
Jargon and the lingo of one discipline, could be applied to another area totally different, totally opposite and allow you to get RESULTS.
The lingo of a salesman, could be;
the sale begins when the customer says no. Salesmanship is about gaining attention, getting interest, arousing desire and all things that lead to a sale.
The lingo of a psychiatrist, could be about side effects, counter indications,
liability, psychotropic medication etc.
The lingo of a golfer, could be big dog ( is used in the movie Tin Cup), par, birdie, eagle, double bogey.
So in talking to the psychiatrist, I would say things like I know Doc you don't want have a double bogey on this one, so let me be the caddie and make sure you have the right club in your hand when we make a shot.
Now it sounds totally unrelated, but see I was able to enter into his golf world, and related to his real Dr. world. It was through the jargon and the lingo and of course, my assured body language, and my confidence that this was the right thing to do.
Of course, that was because I clearly understood what was at stake, and the real motivations and the obstacles as a salesperson I had to overcome.
That day, was when I realized the power of jargon, lingo and the language we spoke doing our jobs.
It was then that I drew the circle and put the target inside the circle and understood if I my goal was to get that person to take the action I wanted them to take, I FIRST had to step inside their world and use the language they were used to hearing because it was a shortcut into their brain.
Synergy is the combining of two or more "things" to get a new and different thing...
I combined the best of what Social Work offered, the business world and sports and recreation to create, the forerunner to my Square One Workshops.
Thanks Gordon for another FANTASTIC post, full of amazing insight...
I have learned so much over the years from your posts (and also from your books and reports, and luckily for me, from you personally)...
I really think what you said about "synergy" is extremely valuable stuff! I agree with you, that's probably how you delve into someone's "subconscious"...
It reminds me a little of Dale Carnegie's "How to win friends and influence people" - though what you're talking about is at a "deeper" level...
I was lucky to have read "How to win friends and influence people" as a teenager. (My parents had an old dog-eared copy on the bookshelf.) In a nutshell, he recommends you find out what the other person's interests are - then ask about those interests.
For example, if you want to befriend "Adam" for example, and you know that Adam is crazy about horse-riding - you could ask Adam about his most favorite horse-riding experience. Adam's eyes will probably suddenly light up, and he'll spend a while telling you all about it.
If you happen to also know something about the topic, and you can also speak all the "horse-riding" jargon - so much the better!
I like the "synergy" idea - because it helps to enable you to "guide" someone to the destination you want them to go to, using the power of their own interests and passions...
Anyway, thanks, Gordon - I'm going to re-read your post a few times, and of course save it on my computer, too!
P.S. I would say it sounds to me that Peter was using an "authority"-type of approach (in the bunch of approaches that Robert Cialdini writes about). He is the "authority," he has the experience, and he makes sure the customer knows it. As Cialdini showed, people will tend to obey an "authority" figure. Would you say that's accurate? He also "assumes the sale" too, as you pointed out...