How To Win Friends And Influence People

帅哥

fficeffice" /> 

"Six."

Without another word, Schwab chalked a big figure six on the floor,

and walked away.

When the night shift came in, they saw the "6" and asked what it

meant.

"The big boss was in here today," the day people said. "He asked us

how many heats we made, and we told him six. He chalked it down

on the floor."

The next morning Schwab walked through the mill again. The night

shift had rubbed out "6" and replaced it with a big "7."

When the day shift reported for work the next morning, they saw a

big "7" chalked on the floor. So the night shift thought they were

better than the day shift did they? Well, they would show the night

shift a thing or two. The crew pitched in with enthusiasm, and when

they quit that night, they left behind them an enormous, swaggering

"10." Things were stepping up.

Shortly this mill, which had been lagging way behind in production,

was turning out more work than any other mill in the plant.

The principle?

Let Charles Schwab say it in his own words: "The way to get things

done," say Schwab, "is to stimulate competition. I do not mean in a

sordid, money-getting way, but in the desire to excel."

The desire to excel! The challenge! Throwing down the gauntlet! An

infallible way of appealing to people of spirit.

Without a challenge, Theodore Roosevelt would never have been

President of the United States. The Rough Rider, just back from

Cuba, was picked for governor of New York State. The opposition

discovered he was no longer a legal resident of the state, and

Roosevelt, frightened, wished to withdraw. Then Thomas Collier

Platt, then U.S. Senator from New York, threw down the challenge.

Turning suddenly on Theodore Roosevelt, he cried in a ringing voice:

"Is the hero of San Juan Hill a coward?"

Roosevelt stayed in the fight - and the rest is history. A challenge not

only changed his life; it had a real effect upon the future of his

nation.

"All men have fears, but the brave put down their fears and go

forward, sometimes to death, but always to victory" was the motto

of the King's Guard in ancient Greece. What greater challenge can be

offered than the opportunity to overcome those fears?

When Al Smith was governor of New York, he was up against it. Sing

Sing, at the time the most notorious pen-itentiary west of Devil's

Island, was without a warden. Scandals had been sweeping through

the pristin walls, scandals and ugly rumors. Smith needed a strong

man to rule Sing Sing - an iron man. But who? He sent for Lewis E.

Lawes of New Hampton.

"How about going up to take charge of Sing Sing?" he said jovially

when Lawes stood before him. "They need a man up there with

experience."

Lawes was flabbergasted. He knew the dangers of Sing Sing. It was

a political appointment, subject to the vagaries of political whims.

Wardens had come and gone - one had lasted only three weeks. He

had a career to consider. Was it worth the risk?

Then Smith, who saw his hesitation, leaned back in his chair and

smiled. "Young fellow," he said, "I don't blame you for being scared.

It's a tough spot. It'll take a big person to go up there and stay."

So Smith was throwing down a challenge, was he? Lawes liked the

idea of attempting a job that called for someone "big."

So he went. And he stayed. He stayed, to become the most famous

warden of his time. His book 20,000 Years in Sing Sing sold into the

hundred of thousands of copies. His broadcasts on the air and his

stories of prison life have inspired dozens of movies. His

"humanizing" of criminals wrought miracles in the way of prison

reform.

"I have never found," said Harvey S. Firestone, founder of the great

Firestone Tire and Rubber Company, "that pay and pay alone would

either bring together or hold good people. I think it was the game

itself."

帅哥

fficeffice" /> 

Frederic Herzberg, one of the great behavorial scientists, concurred.

He studied in depth the work attitudes of thousands of people

ranging from factory workers to senior executives. What do you think

he found to be the most motivating factor - the one facet of the jobs

that was most stimulating? Money? Good working conditions? Fringe

benefits? No - not any of those. The one major factor that motivated

people was the work itself. If the work was exciting and interesting,

the worker looked forward to doing it and was motivated to do a

good job.

That is what every successful person loves: the game. The chance

for self-expression. The chance to prove his or her worth, to excel, to

win. That is what makes foot-races and hog-calling and pie-eating

contests. The desire to excel. The desire for a feeling of importance.

• Principle 12 - Throw down a challenge.

In A Nutshell - Win People To Your Way Of Thinking

• Principle 1 The only way to get the best of an argument is to avoid

it.

• Principle 2 Show respect for the other person's opinions. Never say,

"You're wrong."

• Principle 3 If you are wrong, admit it quickly and emphatically.

• Principle 4 Begin in a friendly way.

• Principle 5 Get the other person saying "yes, yes" immediately.

• Principle 6 Let the other person do a great deal of the talking.

• Principle 7 Let the other person feel that the idea is his or hers.

• Principle 8 Try honestly to see things from the other person's point

of view.

• Principle 9 Be sympathetic with the other person's ideas and

desires.

• Principle 10 Appeal to the nobler motives.

• Principle 11 Dramatize your ideas.

• Principle 12 Throw down a challenge.

-----------------------

Part Four - Be a Leader: How to Change People Without Giving

Offense or Arousing Resentment

1 - If You Must Find Fault, This Is The Way To Begin

A friend of mine was a guest at the White House for a weekend

during the administration of Calvin Coolidge. Drifting into the

President's private office, he heard Coolidge say to one of his

secretaries, "That's a pretty dress you are wearing this morning, and

you are a very attractive young woman."

That was probably the most effusive praise Silent Cal had ever

bestowed upon a secretary in his life. It was so unusual, so

unexpected, that the secretary blushed in confusion. Then Coolidge

said, "Now, don't get stuck up. I just said that to make you feel

good. From now on, I wish you would be a little bit more careful with

your Punctuation."

His method was probably a bit obvious, but the psychology was

superb. It is always easier to listen to unpleasant things after we

have heard some praise of our good points.

A barber lathers a man before he shaves him; and that is precisely

what McKinley did back in 1896, when he was running for President.

One of the prominent Republicans of that day had written a

campaign speech that he felt was just a trifle better than Cicero and

Patrick Henry and Daniel Webster all rolled into one. With great glee,

this chap read his immortal speech aloud to McKinley. The speech

had its fine points, but it just wouldn't do. It would have raised a

tornado of criticism. McKinley didn't want to hurt the man's feelings.

He must not kill the man's splendid enthusiasm, and yet he had to

say "no." Note how adroitly he did it.

帅哥

fficeffice" /> 

"My friend, that is a splendid speech, a magnificent speech,"

McKinley said. "No one could have prepared a better one. There are

many occasions on which it would be precisely the right thing to say,

but is it quite suitable to this particular occasion? Sound and sober as

it is from your standpoint, I must consider its effect from the party's

standpoint. Now you go home and write a speech along the lines I

indicate, and send me a copy of it."

He did just that. McKinley blue-penciled and helped him rewrite his

second speech, and he became one of the effective speakers of the

campaign.

Here is the second most famous letter that Abraham Lincoln ever

wrote. (His most famous one was written to Mrs. Bixby, expressing

his sorrow for the death of the five sons she had lost in battle.)

Lincoln probably dashed this letter off in five minutes; yet it sold at

public auction in 1926 for twelve thousand dollars, and that, by the

way, was more money than Lincoln was able to save during half a

century of hard work. The letter was written to General Joseph

Hooker on April 26, 1863, during the darkest period of the Civil War.

For eighteen months, Lincoln's generals had been leading the Union

Army from one tragic defeat to another. Nothing but futile, stupid

human butchery. The nation was appalled. Thousands of soldiers

had deserted from the army, and en the Republican members of the

Senate had revolted and wanted to force Lincoln out of the White

House. "We are now on the brink of destruction," Lincoln said. It

appears to me that even the Almighty is against us. I can hardly see

a ray of hope." Such was the black sorrow and chaos out of which

this letter came.

I am printing the letter here because it shows how Lincoln tried to

change an obstreperous general when the very fate of the nation

could have depended upon the general's action.

This is perhaps the sharpest letter Abe Lincoln wrote after he

became President; yet you will note that he praised General Hooker

before he spoke of his grave faults.

Yes, they were grave faults, but Lincoln didn't call them that. Lincoln

was more conservative, more diplomatic. Lincoln wrote: "There are

some things in regard to which I am not quite satisfied with you."

Talk about tact! And diplomacy!

Here is the letter addressed to General Hooker:

I have placed you at the head of the Army of the Potomac. Of

course, I have done this upon what appears to me to be sufficient

reasons, and yet I think it best for you to know that there are some

things in regard to which I am not quite satisfied with you.

I believe you to be a brave and skillful soldier, which, of course, I

like. I also believe you do not mix politics with your profession, in

which you are right. You have confidence in yourself, which is a

valuable if not an indispensable quality.

You are ambitious, which, within reasonable bounds, does good

rather than harm, But I think that during General Burnside's

command of the army you have taken counsel of your ambition and

thwarted him as much as you could, in which you did a great wrong

to the country and to a most meritorious and honorable brother

officer.

I have heard, in such a way as to believe it, of your recently saying

that both the army and the Government needed a dictator. Of

course, it was not for this, but in spite of it, that I have given you

command.

Only those generals who gain successes can set up as dictators.

What I now ask of you is military success and I will risk the

dictatorship.

帅哥

fficeffice" /> 

The Government will support you to the utmost of its ability, which is

neither more nor less than it has done and will do for all

commanders. I much fear that the spirit which you have aided to

infuse into the army, of criticizing their commander and withholding

confidence from him, will now turn upon you. I shall assist you, as

far as I can, to put it down.

Neither you nor Napoleon, if he were alive again, could get any good

out of an army while such spirit prevails in it, and now beware of

rashness. Beware of rashness, but with energy and sleepless

vigilance go forward and give us victories.

You are not a Coolidge, a McKinley or a Lincoln. You want to know

whether this philosophy will operate for you in everyday business

contacts. Will it? Let's see. Let's take the case of W. P. Gaw of the

Wark Company, Philadelphia.

The Wark Company had contracted to build and complete a large

office building in Philadelphia by a certain specified date. Everything

was going along well; the building was almost finished, when

suddenly the sub-contractor making the ornamental bronze work to

go on the exterior of this building declared that he couldn't make

delivery on schedule. What! An entire building held up! Heavy

penalties! Distressing losses! All because of one man!

Long-distance telephone calls. Arguments! Heated conversations! All

in vain. Then Mr. Gaw was sent to New York to beard the bronze lion

in his den.

"Do you know you are the only person in Brooklyn with your name,?"

Mr Gaw asked the president of the subcontracting firm shortly after

they were introduced. The president was surprised. "No, I didn't

know that."

"Well," said Mr. Gaw, "when I got off the train this morning, I looked

in the telephone book to get your address, and you're the only

person in the Brooklyn phone book with your name."

"I never knew that," the subcontractor said. He checked the phone

book with interest. "Well, it's an unusual name," he said proudly. "My

family came from Holland and settled in New York almost two

hundred years ago. " He continued to talk about his family and his

ancestors for several minutes. When he finished that, Mr. Gaw

complimented him on how large a plant he had and compared it

favorably with a number of similar plants he had visited. "It is one of

the cleanest and neatest bronze factories I ever saw," said Gaw.

"I've spent a lifetime building up this business," the subcontractor

said, "and I am rather proud of it. Would you like to take a look

around the factory?"

During this tour of inspection, Mr. Gaw complimented the other man

on his system of fabrication and told him how and why it seemed

superior to those of some of his competitors. Gaw commented on

some unusual machines, and the subcontractor announced that he

himself had invented those machines. He spent considerable time

showing Gaw how they operated and the superior work they turned

out. He insisted on taking his visitor to lunch. So far, mind you, not a

word had been said about the real purpose of Gaw's visit.

After lunch, the subcontractor said, "Now, to get down to business.

Naturally, I know why you're here. I didn't expect that our meeting

would be so enjoyable. You can go back to Philadelphia with my

promise that your material will be fabricated and shipped, even if

other orders have to be delayed."

Mr. Gaw got everything that he wanted without even asking for it.

The material arrived on time, and the building was completed on the

day the completion contract specified.

Would this have happened had Mr. Gaw used the hammer-anddynamite method generally employed on such occasions?

帅哥

fficeffice" /> 

Dorothy Wrublewski, a branch manager of the Fort Monmouth, New

Jersey, Federal Credit Union, reported to one of our classes how she

was able to help one of her employees become more productive.

"We recently hired a young lady as a teller trainee. Her contact with

our customers was very good. She was accurate and efficient in

handling individual transactions. The problem developed at the end

of the day when it was time to balance out.

"The head teller came to me and strongly suggested that I fire this

woman. 'She is holding up everyone else because she is so slow in

balancing out. I've shown her over and over, but she can't get it.

She's got to go.'

"The next day I observed her working quickly and accurately when

handling the normal everyday transactions, and she was very

pleasant with our customers.

"It didn't take long to discover why she had trouble balancing out.

After the office closed, I went over to talk with her. She was

obviously nervous and upset. I praised her for being so friendly and

outgoing with the customers and complimented her for the accuracy

and speed used in that work. I then suggested we review the

procedure we use in balancing the cash drawer. Once she realized I

had confidence in her, she easily followed my suggestions and soon

mastered this function. We have had no problems with her since

then."

Beginning with praise is like the dentist who begins his work with

Novocain. The patient still gets a drilling, but the Novocain is painkilling. A leader will use ...

• Principle 1 - Begin with praise and honest appreciation.

~~~~~~~

2 - How To Criticize-And Not Be Hated For It

Charles Schwab was passing through one of his steel mills one day at

noon when he came across some of his employees smoking.

Immediately above their heads was a sign that said "No Smoking."

Did Schwab point to the sign and say, "Can't you read.? Oh, no not

Schwab. He walked over to the men, handed each one a cigar, and

said, "I'll appreciate it, boys, if you will smoke these on the outside."

They knew that he knew that they had broken a rule - and they

admired him because he said nothing about it and gave them a little

present and made them feel important. Couldn't keep from loving a

man like that, could you?

John Wanamaker used the same technique. Wanamaker used to

make a tour of his great store in Philadelphia every day. Once he

saw a customer waiting at a counter. No one was paying the

slightest attention to her. The salespeople? Oh, they were in a

huddle at the far end of the counter laughing and talking among

themselves. Wanamaker didn't say a word. Quietly slipping behind

the counter, he waited on the woman himself and then handed the

purchase to the salespeople to be wrapped as he went on his way.

Public officials are often criticized for not being accessible to their

constituents. They are busy people, and the fault sometimes lies in

overprotective assistants who don't want to overburden their bosses

with too many visitors. Carl Langford, who has been mayor of

Orlando,

Florida, the home of Disney World, for many years, frequently

admonished his staff to allow people to see him. clamed he had an

"open-door" policy; yet the citizens of his community were blocked

by secretaries and administrators when they called.

Finally the mayor found the solution. He removed the door from his

office! His aides got the message, and the mayor has had a truly

open administration since the day his door was symbolically thrown

away.

Simply changing one three-letter word can often spell the difference

between failure and success in changing people without giving

offense or arousing resentment.

Many people begin their criticism with sincere praise followed by the

word "but" and ending with a critical statement. For example, in

trying to change a child's careless attitude toward studies, we might

say, "We're really proud of you, Johnnie, for raising your grades this

term. But if you had worked harder on your algebra, the results

would have been better."

帅哥

fficeffice" /> 

In this case, Johnnie might feel encouraged until he heard the word

"but." He might then question the sincerity of the original praise. To

him, the praise seemed only to be a contrived lead-in to a critical

inference of failure. Credibility would be strained, and we probably

would not achieve our objectives of changing Johnnie's attitude

toward his studies.

This could be easily overcome by changing the word "but" to "and."

"We're really proud of you, Johnnie, for raiseing your grades this

term, and by continuing the same conscientious efforts next term,

your algebra grade can be up with all the others."

Now, Johnnie would accept the praise because there was no followup of an inference of failure. We have called his attention to the

behavior we wished to change indirectly and the chances are he will

try to live up to our expectations.

Calling attention to one's mistakes indirectly works wonders with

sensitive people who may resent bitterly any direct criticism. Marge

Jacob of Woonsocket, Rhode Island, told one of our classes how she

convinced some sloppy construction workers to clean up after

themselves when they were building additions to her house.

For the first few days of the work, when Mrs. Jacob returned from

her job, she noticed that the yard was strewn with the cut ends of

lumber. She didn't want to antagonize the builders, because they did

excellent work. So after the workers had gone home, she and her

children picked up and neatly piled all the lumber debris in a corner.

The following morning she called the foreman to one side and said,

"I'm really pleased with the way the front lawn was left last night; it

is nice and clean and does not offend the neighbors." From that day

forward the workers picked up and piled the debris to one side, and

the foreman came in each day seeking approval of the condition the

lawn was left in after a day's work.

One of the major areas of controversy between members of the

army reserves and their regular army trainers is haircuts. The

reservists consider themselves civilians (which they are most of the

time) and resent having to cut their hair short.

Master Sergeant Harley Kaiser of the 542nd USAR School addressed

himself to this problem when he was working with a group of reserve

noncommissioned officers. As an old-time regular-army master

sergeant, he might have been expected to yell at his troops and

threaten them. Instead he chose to make his point indirectly.

"Gentlemen," he started, "you are leaders. You will be most effective

when you lead by example. You must be the example for your men

to follow. You know what the army regulations say about haircuts. I

am going to get my hair cut today, although it is still much shorter

than some of yours. You look at yourself in the mirror, and if you feel

you need a haircut to be a good example, we'll arrange time for you

to visit the post barbership."

The result was predictable. Several of the candidates did look in the

mirror and went to the barbershop that afternoon and received

"regulation" haircuts. Sergeant Kaiser commented the next morning

that he already could see the development of leadership qualities in

some of the members of the squad.

On March 8, 1887, the eloquent Henry Ward Beecher died. The

following Sunday, Lyman Abbott was invited to speak in the pulpit

left silent by Beecher's passing. Eager to do his best, he wrote,

rewrote and polished his sermon with the meticulous care of a

Flaubert. Then he read it to his wife. It was poor - as most written

speeches are. She might have said, if she had had less judgment,

"Lyman, that is terrible. That'll never do. You'll put people to sleep. It

reads like an encyclopedia. You ought to know better than that after

all the years you have been preaching. For heaven's sake, why don't

you talk like a human being? Why don't you act natural? You'll

disgrace yourself if you ever read that stuff."

That's what she might have said. And, if she had, you know what

would have happened. And she knew too. So, she merely remarked

that it would make an excellent article for the North American

Review. In other words, she praised it and at the same time subtly

suggested that it wouldn't do as a speech. Lyman Abbott saw the

point, tore up his carefully prepared manuscript and preached

without even using notes.

An effective way to correct others' mistakes is ...

• Principle 2 - Call attention to people's mistakes indirectly.

~~~~~~~

3 - Talk About Your Own Mistakes First

帅哥

fficeffice" /> 

My niece, Josephine Carnegie, had come to New York to be my

secretary. She was nineteen, had graduated from high school three

years previously, and her business experience was a trifle more than

zero. She became one of the most proficient secretaries west of

Suez, but in the beginning, she was - well, susceptible to

improvement. One day when I started to criticize her, I said to

myself: "Just a minute, Dale Carnegie; just a minute. You are twice

as old as Josephine. You have had ten thousand times as much

business experience. How can you possibly expect her to have your

viewpoint, your judgment, your initiative - mediocre though they

may be? And just a minute, Dale, what were you doing at nineteen?

Remember the asinine mistakes and blunders you made? Remember

the time you did this ... and that ... ?"

After thinking the matter over, honestly and impartially, I concluded

that Josephine's batting average at nineteen was better than mine

had been - and that, I'm sorry to confess, isn't paying Josephine

much of a compliment.

So after that, when I wanted to call Josephine's attention to a

mistake, I used to begin by saying, "You have made a mistake,

Josephine, but the Lord knows, it's no worse than many I have

made. You were not born with judgment. That comes only with

experience, and you are better than I was at your age. I have been

guilty of so many stupid, silly things myself, I have very little incliion

to criticize you or anyone. But don't you think it would have been

wiser if you had done so and so?"

It isn't nearly so difficult to listen to a recital of your faults if the

person criticizing begins by humbly admitting that he, too, is far from

impeccable.

E.G. Dillistone, an engineer in Brandon, Manitoba, Canada, was

having problems with his new secretary. Letters he dictated were

coming to his desk for signature with two or three spelling mistakes

per page. Mr. Dillistone reported how he handled this:

"Like many engineers, I have not been noted for my excellent

English or spelling. For years I have kept a little black thumb - index

book for words I had trouble spelling. When it became apparent that

merely pointing out the errors was not going to cause my secretary

to do more proofreading and dictionary work, I resolved to take

another approach. When the next letter came to my attention that

had errors in it, I sat down with the typist and said:

" 'Somehow this word doesn't look right. It's one of the words I

always have had trouble with. That's the reason I started this

spelling book of mine. [I opened the book to the appropriate page.]

Yes, here it is. I'm very conscious of my spelling now because people

do judge us by our letters and misspellings make us look less

professional.

"I don't know whether she copied my system or not, but since that

conversation, her frequency of spelling errors has been significantly

reduced."

The polished Prince Bernhard von Bьlow learned the sharp necessity

of doing this back in 1909. Von Bьlow was then the Imperial

Chancellor of Germany, and on the throne sat Wilhelm II-Wilhelm,

the haughty; Wilhelm the arrogant; Wilhelm, the last of the German

Kaisers, building an army and navy that he boasted could whip their

weight in wildcats

Then an astonishing thing happened. The Kaiser said things,

incredible things, things that rocked the continent and started a

series of explosions heard around the world. To make matters

infinitely worse, the Kaiser made silly, egotistical, absurd

announcements in public, he made them while he was a guest in

England, and he gave his royal permission to have them printed in

the Daily Telegraph. For example, he declared that he was the only

German who felt friendly toward the English; that he was

constructing a navy against the menace of Japan; that he, and he

alone, had saved England from being humbled in the dust by Russia

and France; that it had been his campaign plan that enabled

England's Lord Roberts to defeat the Boers in South Africa; and so

on and on.

No other such amazing words had ever fallen from the lips of a

European king in peacetime within a hundred years. The entire

continent buzzed with the fury of a hornet's nest. England was

incensed. German statesmen were aghast. And in the midst of all

this consternation, the Kaiser became panicky and suggested to

Prince von Bьlow, the Imperial Chancellor, that he take the blame.

Yes, he wanted von Bьlow to announce that it was all his

responsibility, that he had advised his monarch to say these

incredible things.

帅哥

fficeffice" /> 

"But Your Majesty," von Bьlow protested, "it seems to me utterly

impossible that anybody either in Germany or England could suppose

me capable of having advised Your Majesty to say any such thing."

The moment those words were out of von Bьlow's mouth, he

realized he had made a grave mistake. The Kaiser blew up.

"You consider me a donkey," he shouted, "capable of blunders you

yourself could never have committed!"

Von Bьlow's knew that he ought to have praised before he

condemned; but since that was too late, he did the next best thing.

He praised after he had criticized. And it worked a miracle.

"I'm far from suggesting that," he answered respectfully. "Your

Majesty surpasses me in manv respects; not only of course, in naval

and military knowledge but above all, in natural science. I have often

listened in admiration when Your Majesty explained the barometer,

or wireless telegraphy, or the Roentgen rays. I am shamefully

ignorant of all branches of natural science, have no notion of

chemistry or physics, and am quite incapable of explaining the

simplest of natural phenomena. But," von Bьllow continued, "in

compensation, I possess some historical knowledge and perhaps

certain qualities useful in politics, especially in diplomacy."

The Kaiser beamed. Von Bulow had praised him. Von Bьlow had

exalted him and humbled himself. The Kaiser could forgive anything

after that. "Haven't I always told you," he exclaimed with

enthusiasm, "that we complete one another famously? We should

stick together, and we will!"

He shook hands with von Bьlow, not once, but several times. And

later in the day he waxed so enthusiastic that he exclaimed with

doubled fists, "If anyone says anything to me against Prince von

Bьlow, I shall punch him in the nose."

Von Bьlow saved himself in time - but, canny diplomat that he was,

he nevertheless had made one error: he should have begun by

talking about his own shortcomings and Wilhelm's superiority - not

by intimating that the Kaiser was a half-wit in need of a guardian.

If a few sentences humbling oneself and praising the other party can

turn a haughty, insulted Kaiser into a staunch friend, imagine what

humility and praise can do for you and me in our daily contacts.

Rightfully used, they will work veritable miracles in human relations.

Admitting one's own mistakes - even when one hasn't corrected

them - can help convince somebody to change his behavior. This

was illustrated more recently by Clarence Zerhusen of Timonium,

Maryland, when he discovered his fifteen-year-old son was

experimenting with cigarettes.

"Naturally, I didn't want David to smoke," Mr. Zerhusen told us, "but

his mother and I smoked cigarettes; we were giving him a bad

example all the time. I explained to Dave how I started smoking at

about his age and how the nicotine had gotten the best of me and

now it was nearly impossible for me to stop. I reminded him how

irritating my cough was and how he had been after me to give up

cigarettes not many years before.

"I didn't exhort him to stop or make threats or warn him about their

dangers. All I did was point out how I was hooked on cigarettes and

what it had meant to me.

"He thought about it for a while and decided he wouldn't smoke until

he had graduated from high school. As the years went by David

never did start smoking and has no intention of ever doing so.

"As a result of that conversation I made the decision to stop smoking

cigarettes myself, and with the support of my family, I have

succeeded."

A good leader follows this principle:

• Principle 3 - Talk about your own mistakes before criticizing the

other person.

~~~~~~~

4 - No One Likes To Take Orders

I once had the pleasure of dining with Miss Ida Tarbell, the dean of

American biographers. When I told her I was writing this book, we

began discussing this all-important subject of getting along with

people, and she told me that while she was writing her biography of

Owen D. Young, she interviewed a man who had sat for three years

in the same office with Mr. Young. This man declared that during all

that time he had never heard Owen D. Young give a direct order to

anyone. He always gave suggestions, not orders. Owen D. Young

never said, for example, "Do this or do that," or "Don't do this or

don't do that." He would say, "You might consider this," or "Do you

think that would work?" Frequently he would say, after he had

dictated a letter, "What do you think of this?" In looking over a letter

of one of his assistants, he would say, "Maybe if we were to phrase it

this way it would be better." He always gave people the opportunity

to do things themselves; he never told his assistants to do things; he

let them do them, let them learn from their mistakes.

帅哥

fficeffice" /> 

A technique like that makes it easy for a person to correct errors. A

technique like that saves a person's pride and gives him or her a

feeling of importance. It encourages cooperation instead of rebellion.

Resentment caused by a brash order may last a long time -even if

the order was given to correct an obviously bad situation. Dan

Santarelli, a teacher at a vocational school in Wyoming,

Pennsylvania, told one of our classes how one of his students had

blocked the entrance way to one of the school's shops by illegally

parking his car in it. One of the other instructors stormed into the

classroom and asked in an arrogant tone, "Whose car is blocking the

driveway?" When the student who owned the car responded, the

instructor screamed: "Move that car and move it right now, or I'll

wrap a chain around it and drag it out of there."

Now that student was wrong. The car should not have been parked

there. But from that day on, not only did that student resent the

instructor's action, but all the students in the class did everything

they could to give the instructor a hard time and make his job

unpleasant.

How could he have handled it differently? If he had asked in a

friendly way, "Whose car is in the driveway?" and then suggested

that if it were moved, other cars could get in and out, the student

would have gladly moved it and neither he nor his classmates would

have been upset and resentful.

Asking questions not only makes an order more palatable; it often

stimulates the creativity of the persons whom you ask. People are

more likely to accept an order if they have had a part in the decision

that caused the order to be issued.

When Ian Macdonald of Johannesburg, South Africa, the general

manager of a small manufacturing plant specializing in precision

machine parts, had the opportunity to accept a very large order, he

was convinced that he would not meet the promised delivery date.

The work already scheduled in the shop and the short completion

time needed for this order made it seem impossible for him to accept

the order.

Instead of pushing his people to accelerate their work and rush the

order through, he called everybody together, explained the situation

to them, and told them how much it would mean to the company

and to them if they could make it possible to produce the order on

time. Then he started asking questions:

"Is there anything we can do to handle this order?"

"Can anyone think of different ways to process it through the shop

that will make it possible to take the order?"

"Is there any way to adjust our hours or personnel assignments that

would help?"

The employees came up with many ideas and insisted that he take

the order. They approached it with a "We can do it" attitude, and the

order was accepted, produced and delivered on time.

An effective leader will use ...

• Principle 4 - Ask questions instead of giving direct orders.

~~~~~~~

5 - Let The Other Person Save Face

Years ago the General Electric Company was faced with the delicate

task of removing Charles Steinmetz from the head of a department.

Steinmetz, a genius of the first magnitude when it came to

electricity, was a failure as the head of the calculating department.

Yet the company didn't dare offend the man. He was indispensable -

and highly sensitive. So they gave him a new title. They made him

Consulting Engineer of the General Electric Company - a new title for

work he was already doing -and let someone else head up the

department.

Steinmetz was happy.

So were the officers of G.E. They had gently maneuvered their most

temperamental star, and they had done it without a storm - by

letting him save face.

Letting one save face! How important, how vitally important that is!

And how few of us ever stop to think of it! We ride roughshod over

the feelings of others, getting our own way, finding fault, issuing

threats, criticizing a child or an employee in front of others, without

even considering the hurt to the other person's pride. Whereas a few

minutes' thought, a considerate word or two, a genuine

understanding of the other person's attitude, would go so far toward

alleviating the sting!

Let's remember that the next time we are faced with the distasteful

necessity of discharging or reprimanding an employee.

"Firing employees is not much fun. Getting fired is even less fun."

(I'm quoting now from a letter written me by Marshall A. Granger, a

certified public accountant.) "Our business is mostly seasonal.

Therefore we have to let a lot of people go after the income tax rush

is over.

帅哥

fficeffice" /> 

It's a byword in our profession that no one enjoys wielding the ax.

Consequently, the custom has developed of getting it over as soon

as possible, and usually in the following way: 'Sit down, Mr. Smith.

The season's over, and we don't seem to see any more assignments

for you. Of course, you understood you were only employed for the

busy season anyhow, etc., etc.'

"The effect on these people is one of disappointment and a feeling of

being 'let down.' Most of them are in the accounting field for life, and

they retain no particular love for the firm that drops them so

casually.

"I recently decided to let our seasonal personnel go with a little more

tact and consideration. So I call each one in only after carefully

thinking over his or her work during the winter. And I've said

something like this: 'Mr. Smith, you've done a fine job (if he has).

That time we sent you to Newark, you had a tough assignment. You

were on the spot, but you came through with flying colors, and we

want you to know the firm is proud of you. You've got the stuff -

you're going a long way, wherever you're working. This firm believes

in you, and is rooting for you, and we don't want you to forget it.'

"Effect? The people go away feeling a lot better about being fired.

They don't feel 'let down.' They know if we had work for them, we'd

keep them on. And when we need them again, they come to us with

a keen personal affection."

At one session of our course, two class members discussed the

negative effects of faultfinding versus the positive effects of letting

the other person save face.

Fred Clark of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, told of an incident that

occurred in his company: "At one of our production meetings, a vice

president was asking very pointed questions of one of our production

supervisors regarding a production process. His tone of voice was

aggressive and aimed at pointing out faulty performance on the part

of the supervisor. Not wanting to be embarrassed in front of his

peers, the supervisor was evasive in his responses. This caused the

vice president to lose his temper, berate the supervisor and accuse

him of lying.

"Any working relationship that might have existed prior to this

encounter was destroyed in a few brief moments. This supervisor,

who was basically a good worker, was useless to our company from

that time on. A few months later he left our firm and went to work

for a competitor, where I understand he is doing a fine job."

Another class member, Anna Mazzone, related how a similar incident

had occurred at her job - but what a difference in approach and

results! Ms. Mazzone, a marketing specialist for a food packer, was

given her first major assignment - the test-marketing of a new

product. She told the class: "When the results of the test came in, I

was devastated. I had made a serious error in my planning, and the

entire test had to be done all over again. To make this worse, I had

no time to discuss it with my boss before the meeting in which I was

to make my report on the project.

"When I was called on to give the report, I was shaking with fright. I

had all I could do to keep from breaking down, but I resolved I

would not cry and have all those men make remarks about women

not being able to handle a management job because they are too

emotional. I made my report briefly and stated that due to an error I

would repeat the study before the next meeting. I sat down,

expecting my boss to blow up.

"Instead, he thanked me for my work and remarked that it was not

unusual for a person to make an error on a new project and that he

had confidence that the repeat survey would be accurate and

meaningful to the company. He Assured me, in front of all my

colleagues, that he had faith in me and I knew I had done my best,

and that my lack of experience, not my lack of ability, was the

reason for the failure.

I left that meeting with my head in the air and with the

determination that I would never let that boss of mine down again."

Even if we are right and the other person is definitely wrong, we only

destroy ego by causing someone to lose face. The legendary French

aviation pioneer and author Antoine de Saint-Exupйry wrote: "I have

no right to say or do anything that diminishes a man in his own eyes.

What matters is not what I think of him, but what he thinks of

himself. Hurting a man in his dignity is a crime."

A real leader will always follow ...

• Principle 5 - Let the other person save face.