The highest level of emotional intelligence in the workplace is to speak well

There is a common confusion that without expression, we are hard to be seen. Expressed wrongly, it is likely to be contrary to one's original intentions.

This is when we desperately wish we could speak.

We also often hear the phrase, "Those who can speak, win when they speak". Is it so powerful to be able to speak?

I. What does it mean to be able to talk?

1. Talking = resources and opportunities

The former executive director of Baidu Marketing University, now its time the Internet CEO said this sentence, "the right communication expression, always a workplace people must be professional qualities, learn to speak, can bring unexpected resources and opportunities."

What is your attitude towards this? Do you agree, or are you skeptical?

To this question, management consultant and vocational trainer Zhang Xinyue gives her insights based on her own experience in the field.

In the workplace person, we are faced with the problem of how to speak from the first hurdle of entering the workplace, which is the interview.

For example, during the interview process, how we introduce ourselves and how we answer the interviewer's questions, which is likely to involve our attitude towards the previous employer and the reasons for leaving ......

In these communications, we are reflecting our professional quality and attitude towards our work, which also determines the interviewer's first impression of us.

For example, how should I answer an interviewer who asks why I left my job?

To get an offer, we should first find out what the interviewer's purpose is in asking this question. At this point, your answer is crucial.

The interviewer is more interested in your attitude towards your past employer and your value than in the specific reasons for leaving. An interviewee who believes that he or she is valuable and appreciative, and who can also see the good in his or her former employer, is obviouslylar with the organisation.

Ask yourself, what organization would want someone who is not confident and grateful and can only see the flaws in others?

Once we enter the workplace, we will find that the vast majority of our work requires collaboration to get things done. Communication, in turn, determines our productivity and work outcomes.

In addition, in the workplace, it also involves all aspects of relationships, such as to the top, to the bottom, to colleagues, to customers, etc. The process of dealing with these relationships is also the process of communication.

Since this is the case, we might as well regard it as a necessary professional quality for people in the workplace.

2. Being able to talk = having the ability to be selective

No matter how much we emphasize organization and the significance of "being able to speak", we can't dismiss the entirety of a person because of one thing: "being able to speak". After all, many jobs do not require a high level of communication skills.

For example, technical staff is less likely to communicate with people at work than sales staff. However, we cannot conclude that technicians are less productive and dismiss the fruits of their labor because there is simply no comparison between the two.

However, there is this saying, "IQ is an eliminative ability, EQ is a selective one." Meaning that if your IQ is too low you will be eliminated; to stand out you need emotional intelligence to help.

The reality at work is that most people's IQs are almost on the same level, and everyday work and learning don't get to the point where you have to fight your IQ. So, if you want to shine at work, it's not how to improve your IQ, but your EQ.

"Talking" happens to be a form of emotional intelligence, so it can also be defined as a selective ability.

Like a technician who develops programs, it is fine if he is technically proficient. But if he wants to advance in his career, for example, to become a supervisor or head of a department, then good technical skills are only a necessary condition, and good communication skills are only a sufficient condition for promotion and more opportunities to be "selected" for better development. development.

Secondly, the misconception of "being able to speak"

Since there are so many benefits to being "articulate", wouldn't it be better if we all started to make ourselves "articulate" from now on?

However, in our working lives, we find that there are always people around us who do not like to talk. These people generally believe that "it is better to speak well than to act well".

From this point of view, it is not important whether you can speak or not, but whether the result of your actions is satisfactory.

So why do we have to emphasize the need to 'speak'?

First of all, let's be clear that 'speaking well' and 'speaking well' are two completely different things.

Here, we must note that speaking beautifully does not mean speaking well. "Speaking beautifully" is more about "talking the talk", but "talking the talk" is about learning to communicate and dealing with people. Those who are always thinking about how to "speak beautifully" will sooner or later suffer.

Secondly, even if a person is really "good at talking" and "good at dealing", it is not a substitute for action, but if you do not communicate in the process of action, it is likely to lead to the failure of action.

Being able to talk and act is a real strength.

Finally, silence is not golden.

Since childhood, we have learned this idiom, "Silence is golden", but slowly we find that in the workplace, silence is not golden, but poisonous. Because of silence, gradually lost the opportunity to express themselves; because of silence, an embarrassment in the meeting to the extreme; because of silence, lost the contract ......

So, is silence gold, or is it cancer?

The best answer to this question is "A baby in the wrong place becomes a waste." In the same way, in communication, "silence" becomes a "cancer" when it is misplaced. To overcome this curse, we need to know when to be silent and when not to be.

How can we make ourselves talk?

Now that we have cleared the fog of "talking" in our minds, let's look at how we can make ourselves "talk".

In the workplace, our communication is always more "efficient" and result-oriented. So how do we improve our communication skills in the workplace?

1. Position your role and communicate progressively

In the workplace, the most frequent dealings are with colleagues who are relevant to your work. So, how should we express our opinions or suggestions in the process of getting along with them?

Firstly, we need to understand that we can set off emotional bombs in conversations that require others to influence us, such as when we desire understanding, express expectations, pass on advice, express rejection, or seek support. We must speak 'powerfully' to achieve the desired effect.

Let's try the recursive expression ABC.

A - affairs, telling the reality of the situation, presenting facts, data, and reasoning.

All the facts are unquestionable, objective, and neutral, without subjective overtones. As the saying goes, facts speak louder than words, so it is difficult to question them.

Telling the truth is the power of "telling but not telling" communication.

B - boring, expressing feelings that bother you, resonating with you.

Purely emotional expressions are easier to accept because emotions are subjective feelings. When we express our feelings without judgment, without feelings, without judgment, it is difficult for the other person to question the emotion, because all emotions are common.

C - change, a clear request for change.

When speaking about demands, we generally need to observe the following five principles: demands should be clear, demands should be specific, demands should be quantified, demands should be positive and demands should be moderate.

If your claims are not clear and specific, it means that your position is not fully established, so why should you ask others to do so?

If you are professional, people around you will naturally be professional; conversely, why should you ask others to do the same?

The reason why demands should be positive is that people are generally more receptive to positive information than negative information.

The reason why you should be moderate in your demands is that you can't eat a fat person in one go.

For example, in the workplace, we often encounter: a one-hour meeting that is promised, but only three points are said, but one point is talked about for almost an hour, and there is no intention to stop, the key is to talk about the same issue.

How can you, as a participant, politely and without embarrassment remind the presenter of the meeting?

The first step in communication is to look at roles. As an attendee, is your role sufficient to remind? Is it useful to remind? This needs to be weighed up. After all, it is only when the name is right that the words are right. When the name is not right, there needs to be silence.

Assuming the name is right, what do we do next? Follow the recursive expression ABC.

First, speak the truth. "XX, take a break with a glass of water, there's something I need to communicate to you, our meeting has been going on for 45 minutes and there are still two points left to cover." (Use data to support the facts)

Next, speak about feelings. "The first point was made clear at the 15th minute, but the next half hour was spent repeating what had been saying before in a different way, and people were anxious. (Expressing feelings to trigger empathy)

Finally, speak about the appeal. "Can we finish the next two points in half an hour? How about keeping the pace of the first 15 minutes of narration?" (Clarify the claim)

This is polite and appropriate without embarrassing the other person, and it solves the problem quickly.

2. Listen well and read people's minds

When you look at a problem, you have to get to the essence of it to find the most appropriate way as quickly as possible.

First of all, we need to be clear that in communication, there are two fatal mistakes: "I thought I understood" and "I thought you understood". Each person weaves a world of his or her own with words, and each world is so "amazingly" different from the other.

But if everyone lives on their own so there is no way to hear the voices of others and o way to "get to the point"!

A scientist once tracked a group of salespeople and found that

They found that the huge difference in performance between the top 10% of performers and the bottom 10% of performers was expected to be related to whether they were good listeners or not.

The top performers spoke for an average of 12 minutes per pitch, while the worst performers spoke for an average of 30 minutes or more per pitch.

When you talk more, you listen less. When you listen less, you don't catch the other person's true needs. In a social experiment, psychologists found that those who spent 80% of their time talking and only 20% of their time listening in conversations were the least popular people.

It seems that people who are not good listeners are generally unable to "get to the point" of communication because they can only hear their own voices. Only those who are good livoicesrs are more likely to be able to read people's minds and get to the heart of the matter in communication.

So how do we become good listeners in the workplace? Here, I would like to briefly share with you the "5+3+3" rule of listening.

① 5 with "heart"

a. Curiosity

When listening to a conversation, it is important to be curious. If you label the topic as "boring", "dull" or "monotonous" before the conversation, you are bound to miss a lot of the important information that the other person is saying while listening. The important information.

b. Accountability

Listening is a very important skill for a communicator, and it is also an important responsibility for the communicator to take on in the listening process. This is because the success of your listening is very important to the outcome of your communication.

"Listening" itself is a very important part of the conversation, and it is not enough for us to speak clearly.

c. Altruism

When listening, we need to be more considerate of the other person, more aware of their position, and always put ourselves aside first. Don't interrupt the other person as soon as you hear something you are interested in and say it yourself, and don't tell the other person what to do as soon as you hear something you have experience with.

d. Patience

Often, the other person is not very clear, or not very smooth, or even because of some emotional problems, andtalksk "back and forth"talksssy", the listener must have enough patience.

This patience is not only a courtesy to the other person, but good listening can also help the other person to calm down and organize his or her thoughts.

e. Equality of mind

When you are "superior" to the other person in terms of status, talent and, power, you as a listener should be more aware of maintaining an equal listening posture. Especially when we don't understand or agree with the other person, we must also respect them.

② 3 "feelings"

"This is the basis of our ability to read other people's thoughts, so we need to learn to "feel" in our communication, in three ways.

Firstly, using our eyes and ears to feel and gather more information.

Secondly, to feel with the body, to be on the same channel as the other person.

Thirdly, communicating with emotions to get into a deeper empathy.

③ 3 "actions"

The first is to copy and follow.

Using words such as "yes", "yes", "yes", "yes", and "I updated understand", implies that you are listening intently and encourages the speaker to share your feelings. and can encourage the speaker to share more information with you. Or simply repeat the key wokeywordsear, such as "Well, you can't do that".

Often, simple repetition can have a magical effect.

Secondly, supportive questioning.

Supportive questioning is not leading questions and interruptions. Supportive here means paying attention to what the other person is saying and supporting them to make the emotions and events more complete.

Third, confirming feedback.

When you are sure you have understood the other person's feelings and want to reach a consensus, do so in a way thatan emotionally empathic way in the agreement or not.

3. defuse emotions and be brave enough to say "no"

In life and at work, there are always people who are trapped like animals in a cage where they can't say "no". Although they really want to say "no", it is difficult to say "no" in their hearts.

Many, it is not that others do not give allow a "no", but that we always find a lot of reasons for ourselves not to say "no".

However, not saying "no" may end up hurting people's feelings; fear of causing unnecessary conflict does not necessarily mean that you can avoid it; being a quality person does not mean that you have to give up your position ......

So, how should we be brave enough to say "no"?

First of all, we need to know a simple truth.

The other side is not rationally unable to accept the rejection of your "no", but emotionally unable to accept it.

So, if we can defuse the other party's resistance, the unhappy words to say happy, we will have found the key to saying "no".

Secondly, the other person's resistance can be divided into several categories: disappointment, anger, love of face, and aggression. We need to treat the different, emotions accordingly

For disappointment, say it encouragingly and express your sincerity; for anger, wait and see, don't rush to respond, let it air out first, but refuse to reopen old scores; for confrontation, say it agreeably, start with a consistent issue and seriously appreciate the other person's position; for face-saving, say it politely; for aggression, say it directly.

Finally, I hope everyone speaks from the heart and becomes who they are.