SPEAKING THEIR LANGUAGE - seahorses-consulting.comseahorses-consulting.com/.../SpeakingTheirLanguage_V3-Handout.pdf · Shapes Individual Comfort Zones ... Roach (1986); Natter (1981);

SPEAKING THEIR LANGUAGESales Impact Summit 2013

Seahorses© 2013 1


Seahorses© 2013 2

Sources for this model: Sangeetha (2012); Mishra & Gahlot (2012); Bhasker (2013); Thomas & McDonagh (2013); McNally (2011); McKenna (2007); Olson (2007); Fielding (2006); Adair (2009)

SENDER RECEIVER

CODING DE‐CODING

Sources for this model: Sangeetha (2012); Mishra & Gahlot (2012); Bhasker (2013); Thomas & McDonagh (2013); McNally (2011); McKenna (2007); Olson (2007); Fielding (2006); Adair (2009)

SENDER RECEIVER

SHAPE YOURMESSAGE


Seahorses© 2013 3

Allocating Time

Overlaying Styles

Setting theStructure

Selecting theTemplates

Focussing Laying Out Work out TimingsWriting/

ScriptingBounding

Theme Title Points

ConciseContent

Pulling the Content Together


Seahorses© 2013 4

EnhanceSales/Marketing

Outcomes

Improve all formsof communication

Cut Development

Time


Seahorses© 2013 5

This is our problemThis is what we needThis is achievable(With the Profiling Pyramid)

Inherited/Natural Behaviours Affected by Gender, Age, Health, etc.

Specific to Group Driven by Race, Religion, Creed, etc. Sets Organisational Style (eg. Aggressive)

Knowledge of the Subject Knowledge of the Situation

Defines Expectations Drives Fears and Aspirations Links Allies or Creates Opponents

Inherited and Learned Shapes Individual Comfort Zones

PersonalityType

Agendas(Internal/External)

Knowledge(Subject/Situation)

Culture(Societal/Organisational)

Human Nature(Universal)

Source: Developed from information provided in: McShane & Von Glinow (2000); Briggs Myers, McCaulley, Quenk, & Hammer (1998); Keirsey & Bates (1984); Linows (1997); Burns (2000); Sartain, North, Strange & Chapman (1973); Morris & Sternberg (1988); Bernstein & Audley (1988); Hofestede (1991); Tyler & Peck (2001); Newell (2012); Sung Eun Chung & Meneely (2012); Hou & Elliott (2010); Barson (2011); King (2012); Saat & Singh (2011)


Seahorses© 2013 6

PersonalityType

Specific to Group Driven by Race, Religion, Creed, etc. Sets Organisational Style (eg. Aggressive)

Knowledge of the Subject Knowledge of the Situation

Defines Expectations Drives Fears and Aspirations Links Allies or Creates Opponents

Inherited and Learned Shapes Individual Comfort Zones





PersonalityType

Extraversion Introversion

1

Thinking Feeling

3

• Directs energy outward• Gains energy from

interaction

• Directs energy inward• Loses energy from

interaction

Decisions based on:• Logic & Analysis• Objectivity &

Detachment

Decisions based on:• Personal & Social values• Understanding & Harmony

Judging Perceiving

4

Deals with:• Decisiveness• Seeks Closure• Rational Focus

Deals with:• Flexibility• Open Options• Irrational Focus

Source: Briggs Myers, McCaulley, Quenk, & Hammer (1998); Keirsey & Bates (1984)

Sensing Intuition

2

• Focussed on information from 5 senses

• Focussed on patterns and relationships.

Personal Energy Perceiving

Judging Decision Style

Extraversion Introversion

1

• Directs energy outward• Gains energy from

interaction

• Directs energy inward• Loses energy from

interaction

Thinking Feeling

3Decisions based on:• Logic & Analysis• Objectivity &

Detachment

Decisions based on:• Personal & Social values• Understanding & Harmony

Judging Perceiving

4

Deals with:• Decisiveness• Seeks Closure• Rational Focus

Deals with:• Flexibility• Open Options• Irrational Focus


Sensing Intuition

2

• Focussed on information from 5 senses

• Focussed on patterns and relationships.

PersonalityType

Source: Briggs Myers, McCaulley, Quenk, & Hammer (1998)

SENSING TYPES INTUITION TYPES

INTROVERSIONISTJ ISFJ INFJ INTJ JUDGING

ISTP ISFP INFP INTPPERCEIVING

EXTRAVERSIONESTP ESFP ENFP ENTP

ESTJ ESFJ ENFJ ENTJ JUDGING

THINKING FEELING THINKING

Creating 16 Types


Seahorses© 2013 7

SENSING TYPES INTUITION TYPES

INTROVERSIONISTJ ISFJ INFJ INTJ JUDGING


EXTRAVERSIONESTP ESFP ENFP ENTP

ESTJ ESFJ ENFJ ENTJ JUDGING


PersonalityType

Simplified to 4 Types (keys to communication)

The Four Types ST SF NF NTSENSING TYPES INTUITION TYPES

INTROVERSION

ISTJ ISFJ INFJ INTJJUDGING


EXTRAVERSION

ESTP ESFP ENFP ENTP

ESTJ ESFJ ENFJ ENTJJUDGING



The Four Types ST SF NF NTSENSING TYPES INTUITION TYPES

INTROVERSION

ISTJ ISFJ INFJ INTJJUDGING


EXTRAVERSION

ESTP ESFP ENFP ENTP

ESTJ ESFJ ENFJ ENTJJUDGING


PersonalityType

Source: Briggs Myers, McCaulley, Quenk, & Hammer (1998); Thompson (1997, 2001)

EXTRAVERSION

INTROVERSION

SENSING

INTUITION

THINKING

FEELING

JUDGING

PERCEIVING

Orientation ofPersonal Energy

InformationProcessing

InformationEvaluation

DecisionStyle

Keys to Decision Making Process(And prime Communication Issues)

Attitude & Orientation

or or or or

PERCEIVING JUDGING


Seahorses© 2013 8

PersonalityType

Applying Emblematic Analysis

Let’s demonstrate this

PersonalityType

TABLE 4 TABLE 1 TABLE 2 TABLE 3

Option 1 Option 2 Option 1 Option 2 Option 1 Option 2 Option 1 Option 2

E I S N T F J P

Source: Hilliard (2006)


Seahorses© 2013 9

Extraversion

E

Introversion

I

Sensing

S

Intuition

N

Thinking

T

Feeling

F

Judging

J

Perceiving

PTalkative Quiet Conventional Visionary Analytical Warm

Happy when settled

Happy when Pending

Sociable Territorial Concrete Abstract Objective Subjective Systematic Casual

Outgoing Intimate Realistic Imaginative Policy FocusSocial Values

FocusDeliberate Spontaneous

Many Relationships

Few Relationships

Experiential Theoretical Impersonal Personal Methodical Emergent

Seeks Breadth Seeks Depth Traditional Original Competitive Nurturing Fixed Flexible

Participative Reflective Practical Innovative Questioning Accepting Seeks ClosureSeeks Open

Options

Initiating Receiving Conservative Trendsetting Logical Emphatic Decisive Tentative


STSensing & Thinking

SFSensing & Feeling

NFIntuition and Feeling

NTIntuition and Thinking

PrimaryFocus

Facts Data

Facts Values

Possibilities Values

Possibilities Data

SupportingData

Specific Facts (may ignore patterns)

Opinions of specific people (may ignore hard data)

Symbols, imagery and metaphors (may ignore practical data)

Systematic Patterns (may ignore specifics that differ from their mental model)

DeliveryStyle

Practical andmatter-of-fact

Non-personalanalysis

Sympatheticand friendly

Personalwarmth

Enthusiasticand insightful

PersonalWarmth

Logical andingenious

Non-personalanalysis

Source: Briggs Myers, McCaulley, Quenk, & Hammer (1998); Keirsey & Bates (1984) ; Lawrence (1982)


Seahorses© 2013 10

STSensing & Thinking

(Relate to Objectives)

SFSensing & Feeling

(Relate to People)

NFIntuition and Feeling

(Relate to People)

NTIntuition and Thinking

(Relate to Objectives)

Stability Reality Proven Experienced Practical Logical Objective Structured Trustworthy Duty Security Achievement

Reality Values Structured Teams Proven Experienced Responsible Subjective Loyal Trustworthy Supportive Personal

outcomes

Accommodating Accomplished Innovative Clever / Intelligent Conscientious Ethical / Responsible Focused on

Possibilities Honorable Principled (Using

Personal Values) Strategic Thinker

Advanced / Modern Coherent / Logical Rational Common sense Consistent Explanatory Imaginative Innovative Resolve Issues Solution Focussed Strategic Solutions

Source: Briggs Myers, McCaulley, Quenk, & Hammer (1998); Keirsey & Bates (1984); Klein (1990)

Works if you know them

What if you don’t know them well ?

Or know very little about them?


Seahorses© 2013 11

Scientific Wild Assed Guess

2 Methods



Seahorses© 2013 12

Source: Briggs Myers, McCaulley, Quenk, & Hammer (1998); Hilliard (2002)

Source: Roach (1986)


Seahorses© 2013 13


Source: Briggs Myers, McCaulley, Quenk, & Hammer (1998); Pollitt (1982); Roach (1986); Natter (1981); Gardner & Martinko (1990) & See Handout

ST SFISTJ

• Management, Administration & Accounting• Law Enforcement• Dentists• Engineering• Careers requiring attention to detail

ISFJ• Education• Health care• Religion• Careers focussed on helping people

ISTP• Skilled Trades• Technical Fields• Agriculture• Law Enforcement & Military• Careers requiring an analytical hands‐on approach

ISFP• Health care• Business• Law Enforcement• Gentle service related careers

ESTP• Business & Marketing• Skilled Trades• Law enforcement• Applied Technology• Action oriented careers

ESFP• Health care• Teaching & Coaching• Childcare workers• Skilled Trades• Careers requiring outgoing enthusiasm

ESTJ• Management & Administration• Sales & Marketing• Law Enforcement & Military• Careers focussed on applying logic and organisation

ESFJ• Education• Health Care• Religion• Careers leveraging personal concern for others


Seahorses© 2013 14

Source: Briggs Myers, McCaulley, Quenk, & Hammer (1998); Pollitt (1982); Roach (1986); Natter (1981); Gardner & Martinko (1990) & See Handout

NF NTINFJ

• Religion & Counselling• Teaching• Arts• Careers focussed on facilitating development

INTJ• Scientific , Engineering, or technical fields• Computers• Law• Accounting & Finance• Careers focussed on applying Intellectual Creativity

INFP• Counselling• Writing• Arts• Psychology• Careers requiring the use of creativity

INTP• Scientific or technical fields• Psychology• Careers that require solitary objective analysis (e.g.

Research)

ENFP• Counselling• Teaching• Religion• Arts• Careers focussed on using creativity &

communication

ENTP• Science• Management• Technology• Arts• Careers focussed on taking on new challenges

ENFJ• Religion• Arts• Teaching• Psychology• Careers that help personal growth

ENTJ• Management• Leadership• Accounting & Finance• Careers requiring tough minded analysis

PersonalityType





These are good

indicators

Only apply what is sensible

Source: Developed from information provided in: McShane & Von Glinow (2000); Briggs Myers, McCaulley, Quenk, & Hammer (1998); Keirsey & Bates (1984); Linows (1997); Burns (2000); Sartain, North, Strange & Chapman (1973); Morris & Sternberg (1988); Bernstein & Audley (1988); Hofestede (1991); Tyler & Peck (2001); Newell (2012); Sung Eun Chung & Meneely (2012); Hou & Elliott (2010); Barson (2011); King (2012); Saat & Singh (2011)

We willshow you this soon


Seahorses© 2013 15

Source: Developed from information in: Baker (1981); Black (1952); Cederblom (1991); Dauben (1995); Dauer (1989); Flesch (1951); Fraenkel (1961); George (1977); Giannini, Rackwitz & Pinto (1991); Lanham & Harris (1987); Josephson & Josephson (1994); Mander (1936); Martin (2006); Missimer (1990); Piatelli‐Palmarini (1994); Porn, Holstrom & Jones (1985); Rock (1983); Salmon (1984); Smith & McIntyre (1982); Thoules (1953); Weinberg (1965); Stenning& Lambalgen (2011); Wethernick (2002); Joll (2010); Gray (2011); Rollinger (2009); Shushan (2009); Merida & Jorge (2009)

A research based system (cognitive science, logic, etc.)

Provide a checklist (minimises guesswork)

They are very flexible (build any message)

RA SO P


Seahorses© 2013 16

Proposal: You want to make recommendations or sales to someone else or influence them to use the information (get action)

Options: You want to explain a set of options or approaches and get your target to use the information (get selection from alternatives)

Analytical: You want to get people to reach a conclusion from the information you provide (get them to gain understanding)

Sequential: You want to explain a sequence of events or a process (get them to understand the sequence)

Relational: You want to explain interrelated items (literally link anything & make it understandable)

RA S

O P

RA S

O P

RA S

O P

A RS

O P

RA S

O P

PART 3PART 2PART 1 Element 1

Element 2

etc.

Element 1

Element 2

etc.

Element 1

Element 2

etc.

Include all of the parts (this is important)

Only use needed elements (you may not need them all)


Element 2

etc.

Element 1

Element 2

etc.

Element 1

Element 2

etc.


Seahorses© 2013 17

Cover them in as much detail as required

You can cover them in a diagram

Single sentence or word


Element 2

etc.

Element 1

Element 2

etc.

Element 1

Element 2

etc.

BODY OF RESPONSE

EXPLAIN NEED FOR CHANGE

DETAIL CONS & PROS

DESCRIBE PROPOSAL

ConclusionIntroduction

Dominant Template = Proposal Template

Often only 1 required


Seahorses© 2013 18

Often only 1 required

BODY OF RESPONSE


DETAIL CONS & PROS

DESCRIBE PROPOSAL



If the Elements

are simple

If Elements

are complex

Overview

Detailed Description

Clear Path/Process

Discredit the Cons. (Link to WIIFMs)

Explain Pros (Link to WIIFMs)

State Problem/s or Opportunities

Explain Ramifications (Link to WIIFMs)

If Elements

are complex

BODY OF RESPONSE


DETAIL CONS & PROS

DESCRIBE PROPOSAL



Overview


Clear Path/Process





Clear Path/Process

Discuss Cons & Pros


Clear Path/ProcessInterpretationEvidenceBackground

Summarise Sequence

DescribeDetailedStages

OutlineSequence

Overviewof the

Relationships

DescribeIssues

Whole Picture View

Analytical Template

Sequential Template

Relational Template


Seahorses© 2013 19

BODY OF RESPONSE


DETAIL CONS & PROS

DESCRIBE PROPOSAL



Discuss Cons & Pros


InterpretationEvidenceBackground

Summarise Sequence

DescribeDetailedStages

Overviewof the

Relationships

DescribeIssues

Whole Picture View

Analytical Template

Sequential Template

Relational Template

ARS R

A SP

Align to universal principles

OA P

P R S R

RA SO P


Seahorses© 2013 20

RA S

O P

EXPLAIN NEED

FOR CHANGE

DESCRIBE

PROPOSAL

Overview


Clear Path/Process



IdentifyProblem orOpportunity

Evaluate Decision

DevelopAlternatives

Choose BestAlternative

1 2 3ImplementSolution

Give them something to do soon

RA S

O P

EXPLAIN NEED

FOR CHANGE

DESCRIBE

PROPOSAL

Overview


Clear Path/Process





Seahorses© 2013 21

EXPLAIN NEED

FOR CHANGE

DESCRIBE

PROPOSAL

Overview


Clear Path/Process




TIME

HIGH

LOW

Source: Ariely & Zakay (2001)

Chance of applying information or

taking action falls rapidly

Time the Recommendation is made

RA S

O P

EXPLAIN NEED

FOR CHANGE

DETAIL

CONS & PROS

DESCRIBE

PROPOSAL

Overview


Clear Path/Process






Seahorses© 2013 22

Source: Eichenbaum (2004)

Hippocampi

Last in – Lasts longest

RA S

O P

EXPLAIN NEED

FOR CHANGE

DETAIL

CONS & PROS

DESCRIBE

PROPOSAL

Overview


Clear Path/Process






Seahorses© 2013 23


Seahorses© 2013 24

BUY WHAT I AM SELLING

Allocating Time

Overlaying Styles

Setting theStructure

Selecting theTemplates

Laying Out Work out TimingsWriting/

ScriptingBounding Focussing

Theme Title Points

ConciseContent

Pulling the Content Together

These are all coveredin the book


Seahorses© 2013 25

EnhanceSales/Marketing

Outcomes

Improve all formsof communication

Cut Development

Time


Seahorses© 2013 26

www.seahorses‐consulting.com info@seahorses‐consulting.com

Go to the web site:

info@seahorses‐consulting.com

www.seahorses‐consulting.com

Send an email:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00GWC00AAOrder the book online:

Documents

SPEAKING THEIR LANGUAGE - seahorses-consulting.comseahorses-consulting.com/.../SpeakingTheirLanguage_V3-Handout.pdf · Shapes Individual Comfort Zones ... Roach (1986); Natter (1981);