FOR YOU: How to win or to lose BILATERAL TRUST?


BLOGGER:You read the four selected quotes below (with my notes
attached),
consider how you might use these same techniques to build trust in you
or your organisation…

When referring to Senator George Mitchell and his upcoming peace
negotiations in the Middle East, Obama says… What I’ve told him is,
start by listening,

1.Trust building technique: Seek first to understand and then be
understood.

..............

…because all too often the United States has started by dictating in
the past on some of these issues


2.Trust building technique: Candor:… and we don’t always know all the
factors that are involved
Candor again. It often helps to build trust if you can admit your
shortcomings.

...................

… Ultimately, we cannot tell either the Israeli’s or the Palestinian’s
what’s best for them. They’re going to have to make some decisions.

3. Trust building technique: Catering to the stakeholder’s ‘in control
need’.

ONE SIDE EFFECT, IF PARTY IS ACTING AS THE VIOLATOR OF INTERPERSONAL
INTERORGANIZATIONAL RULES
AND IS NOT THE 'PARTY IN NEED' ( ALREDY HAS CONTROL) IS BEING RUN OVER
BY OWN PIGMALION.

.....................

… I want to make sure that expectations are not raised so that
everyone thinks this is going
    to be resolved in a few months.

4. Trust building technique: Under-promise and over-deliver.
     ( HILLARY!) PLUS DEMANDS!

...

THE INTERPERSONAL ( INTER- ORGANISATION PATTERNS) BY ITS VERY NATURE
ARE A PROGRESSIVE AND DITRIBUTED VARIABLES WITH SEVERAL POSIBILTIES OF
SQUEING THE NATURAL DISTRIBUTION:

1. EVER KNOWN WIN -WIN VERSUS WIN- LOSE ...AND, WHO FORGOT, DIVIDE TO
CONCUR!
    SURELY TO UNDERSTAND FIRST IS THE WINNER FOR GETTING UNDERSTOOD -
RECIPROCATION
     IS NATURAL FOR HUMANS, AND NOT PSYCHOPATHS.

2. TRUST SEEMS TO BE IN OPPOSITION TO OVER-CONTROL UNIFORMELLY; THE
PRISE OF CONTROL
     IS FAKE COMPLIENCE AND DENIAL OF COMMUNICATING OWN  POSITION, NOT
BENEFITING THE CONTROLLER,
     MORE OR LESS PASSIVE  'CIVIL DISOBIENCE' TO .. SURVIVE THE
CONTROLLER

3. KNOWING AND NOT KNOWING ENOUGH FACTORS THAT MATTER IS AGAIN
DISTRIBUTED VALUE, YET CAN BECOME THE DEFENCE IN NEGOTIATING THE
RELATIONSHIP AND OR AGREEMENT. THERE IS REMEDY FOR IT TOO - GOOD
ENOUGH RAMIFICATIONS AND THEIR RVELATION ARE ..GOOG;; IF IT GETS TO
CRAMBLE THE BASELINE FOR THE MINIMUM KNOWN RAMIFICATIONS IN, FOR BOTH
PARTIES, CAN BE FIRST SET, BUT THAN OBEYED BY BOTH. This intervention
suggested only if depletion of morals showed up at the negotiative
table and setting the limits on manipulation
 is in order, therefore taking the negotiation pass the trust. When is
teh trust lostg? When it is irrevocable? Satisfying unilateral demand
is outside of trust already - party needed to give enough information
for the trust top emerge.

4. RESTLESS POLITICAL MANIPULATOR, PRIMARILY NEVER SURE OF HIMSELF,
THAT MAKES ANYTHING AND EVERYTING FOR SALE, IS NOT EXPECTED TO DO
MORE THAN 'DISORGANISED CRAZINES' ( BRZEZINSKI - DID HE PLAY THE
PART?) . IT APPARENTLY IS BEYOND TRUST ON THE ARRIVAL.