Rule 6. Bring your tactics in line with the aims.

The talk can be easily directed by asking questions. The questions can be divided into so called "overt" and "cov­ered".

Overt is a kind of question that cannot be answered monosyllabically (yes, no, don't know), but requires ex­pansion. For instance: "Tell me please...", "What do you know about...?", "What do you think of...?", "And why...?" "Your opinion?", "Your propositions?", "How do you ac­count for this?".

Overt questions are indispensable in obtaining informa­tion.

The reverse to overt questions are covert questions which require answers "yes — no". Such questions are effective in persuasion, getting consent, leading the partner to giving up something, overcoming opposition.

For instance, you have to give an assignment to your employee who (you know it from experience) is expected to argue, try to prove that this is none of his duties, etc. Here is a possible variant of the dialogue:

The boss: "You attended the conference on... ?"

The subordinate: "I did".

The boss: "You have certainly paid attention to item 4 of the resolution?"

The subordinate: "I have, and what?"

The boss: "This item directly concerns You: you should..." (he gives the assignment and sets the term).

The logic of a succession of questions is that the freedom of choice on the respondent's part narrows down every time after each next reply of his because the respondent determines his position and more and more becomes a captive of the choice he has made.

The slack subordinate from the considered example may have simply sneaked away from the conference or sat there reading a detective story (all these are not excluded by the boss) but he does not dare to say "no" to save his face. And as he says "yes" he denies himself the chance of declining the assignment.

More complicated cases might require a greater number of covert questions "to drive the opponent into a corner".

• Art of talk also include skills to keep to the set aim.

For example, if you have no possibility to decide a ques­tion which is important to the visitor and you have to be content with getting information from him, keep yourself from any assignments (even partial) on which the visitor can either start to argue or erroneously twist your position. Neither alternative meets your purposes. The rule follows — do not get diverted from the set purpose to save you from this mistake.

Rule 7. Try to keep your partner talking most of the time.

Of two conversing people the psychological advantage be­longs to the one who asks questions but not to the one who keeps talking.

Even persuasion with the help of logically verified ques­tions is more effective than with mere eloquence.

True, the chief (as well as the majority of people) quite of­ten wants to speak himself, but nothing doing, he has to choose: either to have an effective conversation or enjoy talk­ing out.

As you allow the partner to speak and direct his story with questions, you gain the following:

• maximum sympathy on the part of the partner;

• the most complete information about the partner's state of affairs and work, his attitude to his job and even his relationships with his milieu. It is useful to know all this to com­plete your talk effectively.

(People always like to be listened to!);

• it will be easier to persuade your partner because you have gained his sympathy and maximum information about him;

• this tactics ("To speak less - to ask more") helps the chief to come out victorious from rather difficult situations.

Here is a description of one of them. A specialist turns to his boss for help. It happens that the chief is unable to help—either the question comes up against engineering niceties which the subordinate knows well enough or the chief is new and has not yet gained the required knowledge to render help. However, the chief does not think it right to refuse to help, he is afraid to lose his authority.

What is the best way out? — Use the discussed method. Ask for explanation of the problem. Then, stimulate the subordinate with the help of questions to tell, finer and finer and the finest details.

How often does the talk end up with an exclamation of the specialist: "I've got it!" Though, the chief did no more than had him tell everything in the right order, bring his own knowledge into a system and substitute intuition for clear-cut formula­tions.

This method can be called a method of indirect consulta­tion. And it is obviously rooted in the same (Rule 7.).

There is no need to make a fetish of this rule (nor of any other rules) and demand its fulfilment in any case. For in­stance, the partner may appear to be rather reserved (because of his nature or under pressure of the situation), so, compel­ling him to talk turns out to be a torment for both. The gist of the rule remains — to have the partner speak out all that he wants to.

Rule 7 is aimed at remedying the situation in which the talk initiator or the superior speaks much more than the other party.