It seems to me that what you’re really trying to avoid with this analysis is wasting your time on a potential new client, which is commendable otherwise you’d have every loser in the business (or not) bending your ear about things their way…You might want to say up front you will allow no more than an hour/half hour free initially to whack through the most obvious questions

The greatest source of my frustration are those who call me with a fixed agenda (a hammer). They have what they consider to be a singular problem (a nail) that I can easily fix by looking through my rolodex to pull out the name of a sewing contractor or a fabric supplier. Iow, they aren’t looking to hire me at all, they’re looking for referrals. The conflict arises when I explain I don’t give referrals to someone unless I know them.

Among those who do want to hire me, there’s a mismatch of needs, expectations and what I am prepared to do for them so I didn’t mention this in the discussion. Most in this category are looking for a relationship and guidance but that’s not what I do (outside of the forum or emails) so I recommend them to other colleagues who specialize in it. I’m best utilized as a short term problem solver, I thrive on crisis resolution. I’m at my best working with people who just need a fire put out and I really can’t commit to long term relationships. In fact, most of the people I work with already have pattern makers etc. My role is to solve the problem and provide closure by training their people and the client how to resolve similar problems in the future. Or if they’re the one doing the work, I train them to do it.

It seems to me that what you’re really trying to avoid with this analysis is wasting your time on a potential new client, which is commendable otherwise you’d have every loser in the business (or not) bending your ear about things their way. Yes nowaks’ socratic questions method is obviously the best in terms of people really listening (although some concrete exemples on her part would be more helpful). But the the socratic method takes a lot more time initially for you than the other way, even though it might be more effective in the long term. So actually I think the evaluation part needs to be paid up, for you.

You might want to say up front you will allow no more than an hour/half hour free initially to whack through the most obvious questions (and stick to that no matter what). You could then want to send them a sheet of questions to think about ahead of time (like your initial 3, or more, or evolve that list over time) and tell them that you’ll consider taking them on only if you can have a formal session to discuss these initial topics. This initial session must be paying for them, and on your side you must firmly stick to your topics (their motivation to change and ability to listen) and not drift into their agenda, you can limit the time of course so you have a clear contract ahead of time, which will be establishing good practice. And then you’ll have a good basis for further discussion without having been totally ripped off. And any consulting relationship you engage in will be much more consensual, and especially they’ll know that you have to be consenting too..

I’d guess many times just the questioning of people’s willingness to change and ability to listen will be helpful to them, even if they don’t wish to pursue further consulting right at the moment. At least they’ll hear loud and clear that an expert thinks that there are things wrong besides what they think their problems are, and that she thinks they’re not ready to listen. If they’re at all open-minded, that alone should send them down a much better slope. So paying for the initial session won’t be a waste for them, you can feel you’re doing good work. And your time and expertise will eventually be more respected, and meanwhile you will get something out of all those false leads. Even if you never thought to make a living telling people they aren’t ready to listen to you, it can be a useful part of your income .

Intake interview:
People need to feel appreciated before they can accept advice. The client must have the positive impression that he told you everything he thought was important and that you listened. You will have to find positive points before you can provide constructive criticism.
* Give feedback if expectations aren’t met, even if the effort is good.

Problem definition:
* What do you think is the problem?
* What could also be wrong that you aren’t sure is a problem?
* How convinced are you that your way will work? (percentage).

Toward resolution:
* What do you want me to do for you?
* Do you want my advice? Or do you only want me to help you make your way work?
* What would you have to hear to be convinced the problems are different from what you think?

Closure:
* Make boundaries clear, volleying the responsibility of making the project work back to the client. It’s not my project.
———————-
There’s one central problem to the above. The vast majority of callers have a concrete definition of their problem, such as needing to find a “manufacturer”. They think I can resolve their problem in five minutes with a quick perusal of my rolodex. It is insignificant that they don’t want to pay (and most don’t) for information they think I am hoarding for profit (their profit expectation is okay but I’m greedy for wanting to pay my bills?) when this is the greater problem. But they don’t want to listen as to why this matters.

Your account was deleted for inactivity, just sign up again but do *read* the membership agreement, many don’t and I always know who has or hasn’t

I can’t wait to go explore these links. The back trails on your blog are great fun, always!

One truth that can not be overrated is: If someone does not want to listen… just find out as quick as possible not to loose time.

On the other hand… if someone calls you, comes to see you,… this means that he has at least a small motivation to listen (it may be so small that it is hardly visible, but be sure, it is there) and that means you have something to work with.

What works best is when people find out themselves that they still have deficits. Instead of telling them what is wrong, make them find out by themselves. Best way to achive that are questions. Ask question, very neutral question, questions, they do not have an answer for. (It took me some time to figure out the “key questions” for my clients, but the better I knew them, the easier my work got.) And that is the moment the client feels a need to listen to you.

(And of course, ask them, what they want you to do for them. If they don’t have an answer tell them to call back once they know.)

Another important thing are indeed emotions. I know that theoretically it should be possible to talk objective, accept critique businesslike and so on. Some people are able to do that. But most people can not. Better accept this as a fact. (Sorry… *g*)

So people need to feel appreciated before they can accept advice. And this means you have to listen first. (Even though you already know 90 % of what he will tell you. And even though the other 10% will be irrelevant.) So your client will have the positive impression that he told you everything he wanted. And that you did listen.
And yes, you will have to find positive points before you can start criticizing. (Which will be way easier once the client has found out that he needs advice… as mentioned above.)

Then he is ready to listen to your advice.

I frequently think it’s useful to try to think of why I might be wrong, what I am missing, what are the known unknowns and the unknown unknowns. I think the second test (what would convince you of your wrongness) may be a restatement of something Karl Popper, the philosopher of refutability, had said.