Connect with us

Opinion Editorials

4 ways to earn more respect in any group (personal OR professional)

(EDITORIAL) In this world of high velocity and high volume, finding ways to get people to see things your way and rally with you is difficult, but not impossible.

Published

on

respect

We’re all being smothered by false standards. Hoards of voices tell men to be “more assertive” and “take control,” while letting women know that their ticket to getting things done is to “smile more” and “be approachable.”

As entrepreneurs, we are really looking for the answer to one simple question: How can I make it happen?

We want to know how to make the dream work, and how to get people to rally behind us to lead our projects to success.

We are looking for actionable, specific advice that we can take NOW – not lofty, vague ideas that hide under the guise of “psychology hacks” (what does “be more alpha” really mean anyway!?).

The thing is, topics like charisma and influence are often made much more challenging than necessary. At the end of the day, social interactions are governed by one simple rule:

A group, is a group, is a group.

People like Tony Robbins and Tim Ferriss are able to teach the concepts of influence and leadership to a mass audience because all groups are controlled by a few key fundamental principles. Gaining an understanding of these principles allows you to gain respect and influence in any group you would like, and use that respect and influence to organize and guide people toward your goals.

Whether you are looking to inspire more prospects to convert to customers, want to create more cohesion amongst your team in the pursuit of your vision, or simply want to network more effectively, there are overarching themes that are sure to add a strong boost in the effectiveness of your actions as an entrepreneur.

And beyond all else, this is the most important one of all:

Look for what people want, and give it to them.

People join groups because it provides them the ability to have experiences they may not otherwise get to have. That said, everyone in the group is looking to the group to provide them with something. People may join a friend group in order to have fun and talk to people about the things they want to talk about, while people may join a specific career path for financial gain.

Now this all seems rather obvious, but where people tend to make mistakes is that they forget that everyone in the group has a specific motivation for being there. If you do not appeal to someone’s reason for being in the group, they will not see you as a valuable contributor to the group, and may treat you poorly as consequence.

If someone in a your friend group wants to have fun, and they do not see you as someone who can provide them with fun experiences, they will be neutral towards you at best. If they find it fun to see your reaction to their disrespect, but don’t see any other way to have fun with you, they might even be openly hostile toward you.

Likewise, if a coworker sees you as someone who is going to make their job more difficult, and you are not in a position of power over them, they are going to see you an unnecessary source of pain, and may mistreat you as a result.

As an example, let’s say that in a project you are running, there is a web designer in your group, Anna, who takes every opportunity she can to undercut your authority and make you appear incompetent in front of the others. There isn’t any outside tension (such as a conflicting friendship or sexual desire), and seeing as this is your project and she doesn’t have any stake, there is no angle for her to practically assume control of the project, so you just can’t understand why she has decided to make you the target of her tirades. You just chalk it up to being a big ego.

“Are you sure THAT’s the message you want to go to market with? I mean, I’ll put whatever you want on the webpage, I guess.”

“Why do you think it’s so important that we have the supply chain ironed out when we haven’t done any market testing yet? Are you trying to make this fail?”

Of course, every time she openly questions your decisions, the others on the team start to buy into her campaign against you. Lately, others on your team even follow suit, and question your decisions even when she isn’t in the meeting. While leading this project has now become an incredible pain, as everyday you face a volley of questions and dubious team members, this is your BABY, and you know it has serious potential to be something big once you get it to market, so what are you to do?

At this point, I’m sure any reader with an “alpha” mentality is thinking to themselves: “Well, why would you even put up that? Just drop her and hire someone else.”

While I can see that logic, it’s a short-sighted response, and it doesn’t cover all the bases.

What about a situation where you don’t have any other options, because her skillset is in the exact niche you need and it would be hard to find an adequate replacement? What about the blowback from the rest of your team if they see that you fired someone for speaking out? If they have truly vital insights that may save you from going the wrong direction, they may feel that they now need to keep their mouth shut while you plow your way to failure. How do you know that the others would stop questioning you after you fired her? If they are already questioning you on their own now, they already have strong enough doubts in you that her presence is no longer necessary to stoke the fire.

If this designer and her need to question you at every turn is the thing that is holding you back from getting taken more seriously by the group, then there is a much easier way to go about it.

Don’t ask: Why does Anna think she knows everything better than I do?

You need to remove the focus from yourself.

Ask this instead: What does Anna have to gain by attacking me?

When you look at it this way, you can see that Anna’s motivation to question you does not stem from the actual doubt of your decision making ability, but rather from the attention she gets from the others in the group when she does. In fact, when you look a little closer, you may realize that if Anna isn’t questioning your actions, the others on your team don’t give her opinions on anything much consideration.

As a web designer, Anna is often at the bottom of the food chain when it comes to business ventures. But she is an entrepreneur too. She wants to do big things. She wants her voice to heard, and her thoughts to have weight. Questioning you is just the easiest way to be heard.

So how do you make her stop? You give her the voice and consideration that she wants. When there is a meeting about the status of the project, and the team is deciding on next steps and priorities, ask her for her opinion and make sure people listen to it. Ask her to share her thoughts on the different parts of the business in a 1-on-1 setting, and give her thoughts ample consideration before deciding whether they hold merit. Comment on her good work in front of the group and make sure she knows how much you value her input to team, and how vital she is to the project’s success.

Show her that you hear her.

Yes, if you believe that web designers DO belong at the bottom of the food chain, this is going to be hard to do. It’s going to be especially hard when she has directly attacked your authority (and ego) in front of the team time and time again. And yes, when you first start to do it, Anna will likely think you are being condescending and simply try to attack your ideas and authority even harder.

However, once she sees that you are able to give her what she wants, she won’t feel the need to question you anymore. In fact, since you are one of the only people in the group who are giving her the attention and respect she wants, she may even start to DEFEND you when other people try to jump on your case.

If you aren’t getting the respect you feel you deserve in a group, figure out what people want, and find a way to give it to them. When you do, they will see that you make a much better ally than you do an adversary, and will look to you to help them achieve their group goals, elevating you to a level of more respect and leadership in the process.

When it comes down to it, it’s street-level knowledge: you have to help others to help yourself.

—-

Hey, ambitious reader! Quick thought… You’re competing with 160 million of the American workforce this year for jobs, promotions, and business! Have no fear, we partnered with The American Genius to share special content, an extended series on professional and human strategy – covering subjects that remain unknown to many people. If you’re career climbing, check out our free guides on SocioEd for advice on topics (like how to get promoted quickly) that you can take action on immediately.

Issac Hicks is one of the main voices behind Socio Education. As co-founder and CEO, he works to provide his readers with practical, real, and immediately applicable tactics for their professional and social life.

Opinion Editorials

DNA ancestry tests are cool, but are they worth giving up your rights?

(EDITORIAL) DNA tests are all the rage currently but are they worth potentially having your genetic makeup sold and distributed?

Published

on

dna ancestry tests

By now you’ve heard – the Golden State Killer’s 40+ year reign of terror is potentially over as the FBI agents used an ancestry website DNA sample to arrest their suspect, James DeAngelo, Jr.

Over the last few years, DNA testing has gone mainstream for novelty reasons. Companies like Ancestry.com and 23andMe have offered easy access to the insights of your genetics, including potential health risks and family heritage, and even reconnect family members, through simple genetic tests.

However, as a famously ageless actor once suggested in a dinosaur movie, don’t focus too much on if you can do this, without asking if you should do this.

When you look closely, you can find several reasons to wonder if sending your DNA to these companies is a wise choice.

These reasons mostly come down to privacy protection, and while most companies do have privacy policies in place, you will find some surprising loopholes in the fine print. For one, most of the big players don’t give you the option to not have your data sold.

These companies, like 23andMe and Ancestry.com, can always sell your data so long as your data is “anonymized,” thanks to the HIPAA Act of 1996. Anonymization involves separating key identifying features about a person from their medical or biological data.

These companies know that loophole well; Ancestry.com, for example, won’t even give customers an opt-out of having their DNA data sold.

Aside from how disconcerting it is that these companies will exploit this loophole for their gain at your expense, it’s also worth noting that standards for anonymizing data don’t work all that well.

In one incident, reportedly, “one MIT scientists was able to ID the people behind five supposedly anonymous genetic samples randomly selected from a public research database. It took him less than a day.”

There’s also the issue of the places where that data goes when it goes out. That report the MIT story comes from noted that 23andMe has sold data to at least 14 outside pharmaceutical firms.

Additionally, Ancestry.com has a formal data-sharing agreement with a biotech firm. That’s not good for you as the consumer, because you may not know how that firm will handle the data.

Some companies give data away to the public databases for free, but as we saw from the earlier example, those can be easy targets if you wanted to reverse engineer the data back to the person.

It would appear the only safe course of action is to have this data destroyed once your results are in. However, according to US federal regulation for laboratory compliance stipulates that US labs hold raw information for a minimum of 10 years before destruction.

Now, consider all that privacy concern in the context of what happens when your DNA data is compromised. For one, this kind of privacy breach is irreversible.

It’s not as simple as resetting all your passwords or freezing your credit.

If hackers don’t get it, the government certainly can; there’s even an instance of authorities successfully obtaining a warrant for DNA evidence from Ancestry.com in a murder trial.

Even if you’re not the criminal type who would worry about such a thing, the precedent is concerning.

Finally, if these companies are already selling data to entities in the biomedical field, how long until medical and life insurance providers get their hands on it?

I’ll be the first to admit that the slippery slope fallacy is strong here, but there are a few troubling patterns of behavior and incorrect assumptions already in play regarding the handling of your DNA evidence.

The best course of action is to take extra precaution.

Read the fine print carefully, especially what’s in between the lines. As less scrupulous companies look to cash in on the trend, be aware of entities who skimp on privacy details; DNA Explained chronicles a lot of questionable experiences with other testing companies.

Above all, really think about what you’re comfortable with before you send in those cheek swabs or tubes of spit. While the commercials make this look fun, it is a serious choice and should be treated like one.

This story was first published, October 2017.

Continue Reading

Opinion Editorials

Do women that downplay their gender get ahead faster?

(OPINION) A new study about gender in the workplace is being perceived differently than we are viewing it – let’s discuss.

Published

on

flexible workforce

The Harvard Business Review reports that women benefit professionally when they downplay their gender, as opposed to trying to focus on their “differences” as professional strength.

The article includes a lot of interesting concepts underneath its click-bait-y title. According to the study by Professors Ashley Martin and Katherine Phillips, women felt increasingly confident when they pivoted from focusing on highlighting potential differences in their perceived abilities based on their gender and instead gave their attention to cultivating qualities that are traditionally coded as male*.

Does this really mean that women need to “downplay” their gender? Does it really mean women who attempt this get ahead in this world faster?

I don’t think so.

The article seems to imply that “celebrating diversity” in workers is akin to giving femme-identified employees a hot pink briefcase – it actually calls attention to stereotyped behaviors. I would argue that this is not the case (and, for the record, rock a hot pink briefcase if you want to, that sounds pretty badass).

I believe that we should instead highlight the fact that this study shows the benefits that come when everyone expands preconceived notions of gender.

Dr. Martin and her interviewer touch on this when they discuss the difference between gender “awareness” and “blindness.” As Dr. Martin explains, “Gender blindness doesn’t mean that women should act more like men; it diminishes the idea that certain qualities are associated with men and women.”

It is the paradox of studies like this one that, in order to interrogate how noxious gendered beliefs are, researchers must create categories to place otherwise gender-neutral qualities and actions in, thus emphasizing the sort of stereotypes being investigated. Regardless, there is a silver lining here as said by Dr. Martin herself:

“[People] are not naturally better suited to different roles, and [people] aren’t better or worse at certain things.”

Regardless of a worker’s gender identity, they are capable of excelling at whatever their skills and talent help them to.

*Though the HBR article and study perpetuate a binary gender structure, for the purposes of our discussion in this article, I expand its “diversity” to include femme-identified individuals, nonbinary and trans workers, and anybody else that does not benefit from traditional notions of power that place cisgendered men at the top of the social totem pole.

Continue Reading

Opinion Editorials

Dispelling the myth that women don’t get raises because they don’t ask

(EDITORIAL) It has been accepted as fact that women don’t get raises because they don’t ask as often as men, but new studies indicate that’s not true at all.

Published

on

women female negotiations

Many of the seemingly universal “truths” of business often come down to assumptions made about workers based on their gender.

Among the most oft-repeated of these “truths” is that women and other femme-identifying people are bad at self-advocating, particularly in matters involving compensation.

These include: Women don’t negotiate their salaries. Women don’t get promotions or leadership positions because they don’t “lean in.” Women don’t ask for raises.

This last truth is finally being discussed as the myth it is.

Over at The Cut, Otegha Uwagba discusses her own experience successfully and not-so-successfully negotiating a raise, but more interestingly how increasingly research has shown that there is no “gap” in between the genders when it comes to asking. Rather, the disparity really arises when it comes to which ask is heard.

As Uwagba explains, “While men and women ask for pay raises at broadly similar rates, women are more likely to be refused or suffer blowback for daring to broach the topic.”

This blowback comes from the inability of some people in leadership positions to think critically about the ways in which business still actively dismisses women’s leadership qualities while simultaneously praising less-competent men who demonstrate these very characteristics.

The HBR article acts as good reminder that the cumulative effect of all of these misguided “facts” about women and business often perpetuate the toxic culture that creates and circulates them.

The implication of all of these myths creates a sense that women are the ones responsible for the unequal treatment they often receive. When the message that women receive is that the reason they don’t get a raise is that they didn’t ask—even when they DO—that tells them that their lived experience isn’t as valid as the pervasive “truth.”

This is, simply put, gaslighting.

Even more, telling women that women face challenges because they didn’t do something or know something, rather than the addressing the very real fact that professional women face sexism at almost every step of their career does not help them.

It only helps those already in positions of power blame women for their own archaic beliefs and actions.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Our Great Partners

The
American Genius
news neatly in your inbox

Subscribe to our mailing list for news sent straight to your email inbox.

Emerging Stories

Get The American Genius
neatly in your inbox

Subscribe to get business and tech updates, breaking stories, and more!