May 9, 2025
The Most Underutilized Advocacy Tool You Can Use Right Now to Improve Your Results
If you’ve got great messaging and it’s still not causing decisionmakers to engage with you, chances are you’re dealing with one of the most common advocacy pitfalls that happens to a lot of nonprofit leaders: We worry so much about what we're going to tell a decision maker, and we don't spend nearly enough time thinking about what we want to ask them.
Questions are incredibly powerful tools, and they can really work magic in a conversation with a decisionmaker. They can create engagement. They can create an opportunity to go deep, to get information that the decisionmaker wouldn't volunteer otherwise. You can get advice. You can get all kinds of valuable intel, and at the same time build a connection with that decision maker, and have them leaning in and engaging more with you.
The magic of questions is that they engage other people's brains. We can't help it. When we're asked a question we have to engage. We have to stop and think about that question. If someone's just telling us stuff, it’s easy to lose focus, and not really hear what’s being said. But as soon as a question shows up in the conversation, our subconscious makes us pay attention. We get engaged. Decisionmakers get engaged.
But here's the thing. Not all questions are created equal. The fact is, the smarter your questions, the better your results are going to be. The trick is to come up with really smart questions that are going to yield high-level results for you.
In this episode, we share:
- How low-value questions work against you, and how to avoid them
- The essential advance work that sets you up to ask higher-value questions of decisionmakers
- The two most important questions to ask yourself before you ever meet with a decisionmaker
- Key characteristics of high-value questions that trigger engagement
- How to turn a request for advice into an even higher-value question
- How to use AI to do advance research and craft higher-value questions
- An easy hack to boost your effectiveness as you develop this skill
Link: Episode 67 – Three Keys to Finding the Right Decisionmaker in Any System
I'm preparing to launch a group coaching program that will focus specifically on helping you craft messaging that will shift decisionmakers’ perspectives and get them on board with sustaining and even expanding your funding. This will be a coaching opportunity for a limited number of people to come in and be part of a group. There'll be some training, but most of it will be coaching and helping you to get your messaging dialed in so that you can address this pressing need.
What I'm seeing right now is there's nothing more important than this. If that sounds like something you'd like to be a part of, message me through the podcast website or on LinkedIn .
WEBVTT
00:00:00.050 --> 00:00:02.604
You're listening to the Nonprofit Power Podcast.
00:00:02.983 --> 00:00:10.994
In today's episode, we share the most underutilized advocacy tool that you can use right now to improve your results.
00:00:11.294 --> 00:00:12.644
So stay tuned.
00:00:18.852 --> 00:00:27.972
If you wanna have real and powerful influence over the money and policy decisions that impact your organization and the people you serve, then you're in the right place.
00:00:27.972 --> 00:00:28.001
I.
00:00:28.361 --> 00:00:41.381
I'm Kath Patrick, and I've helped dozens of progressive Nonprofit leaders take their organizations to new and higher levels of impact and success by building powerful influence with the decision makers that matter.
00:00:42.012 --> 00:00:54.551
It is possible to get a critical mass of the money and policy decision makers in your world to be as invested in your success as you are, to have them seeking you out as an equal partner and to have them.
00:00:54.612 --> 00:00:57.402
Bringing opportunities and resources to you.
00:00:58.002 --> 00:01:00.101
This podcast will help you do just that.
00:01:00.612 --> 00:01:03.612
Welcome to the Nonprofit Power Podcast.
00:01:09.316 --> 00:01:10.004
Hey there folks.
00:01:10.004 --> 00:01:13.034
Welcome to another episode of the Nonprofit Power Podcast.
00:01:13.274 --> 00:01:14.593
I'm your host, Kath Patrick.
00:01:14.983 --> 00:01:24.897
I'm so glad you're here for today's episode because we have something fun in store that I think you're gonna appreciate how simple it is and yet how powerful it is.
00:01:25.664 --> 00:01:32.884
There's a short supply of those kinds of things in the world, and right now we can use all the tricks in the toolkit that we can find.
00:01:33.521 --> 00:01:42.721
So here's what I've noticed in years of working with Nonprofit leaders and helping them become more powerfully effective and influential advocates with the decision makers in their world.
00:01:43.493 --> 00:01:54.343
Generally speaking, we worry so much about what we're gonna tell a decision maker, and we don't spend enough time thinking about what we wanna ask them.
00:01:55.191 --> 00:02:03.286
Questions are incredibly powerful tools, and they can really work magic in a conversation with a decision maker.
00:02:03.846 --> 00:02:05.646
They can create engagement.
00:02:06.123 --> 00:02:12.605
They can create an opportunity to go deep to get information that the decision maker wouldn't volunteer otherwise.
00:02:13.185 --> 00:02:14.594
You can get advice.
00:02:15.186 --> 00:02:26.645
You can get all kinds of valuable intel, and at the same time be building a connection with that decision maker and having them leaning in and engaging more with you.
00:02:27.575 --> 00:02:29.765
Because here's the thing about questions.
00:02:29.915 --> 00:02:32.135
They engage other people's brains.
00:02:32.836 --> 00:02:34.575
It's the way the human brain is wired.
00:02:34.575 --> 00:02:35.536
We can't help it.
00:02:35.746 --> 00:02:38.596
When we're asked a question we have to engage.
00:02:38.836 --> 00:02:40.936
We have to stop and think about that question.
00:02:41.550 --> 00:02:48.366
Whereas if someone's telling us stuff, it can start to be like that Charlie Brown teacher, and it's just wah, wah, wah wah wa.
00:02:49.050 --> 00:02:51.241
And we're zoning out, we're not really hearing things.
00:02:51.721 --> 00:02:57.618
As soon as a question shows up in the conversation, our subconscious makes us pay attention.
00:02:57.979 --> 00:03:00.288
We whip around and we start engaging.
00:03:00.618 --> 00:03:02.449
And it's the same with decision makers.
00:03:02.479 --> 00:03:03.889
It's just human behavior.
00:03:04.459 --> 00:03:05.419
But here's the thing.
00:03:05.873 --> 00:03:08.123
Not all questions are created equal.
00:03:08.528 --> 00:03:13.079
The fact is, the smarter your questions, the better your results are gonna be.
00:03:13.902 --> 00:03:21.641
So the trick is to come up with really smart questions that are gonna yield high level results for you.
00:03:22.181 --> 00:03:23.921
And that's what I want to get into today.
00:03:25.879 --> 00:03:29.810
Questions are a hundred percent your friend when you're engaging in advocacy.
00:03:30.263 --> 00:03:41.568
And there's questions that happen with decision makers, there's also questions about decision makers, and there's questions to use in your advocacy research.
00:03:41.927 --> 00:03:47.950
And in all of those cases, the smarter your questions, the more you're gonna get out of the process.
00:03:48.790 --> 00:03:54.837
One of the common mistakes that get made is that folks ask the most basic questions.
00:03:54.837 --> 00:04:00.474
They start with really low level questions and never progress beyond those.
00:04:00.973 --> 00:04:05.326
They do it in their research, and they do it in conversations with decision makers.
00:04:05.959 --> 00:04:10.188
Those are low value questions and they're gonna produce a low value return.
00:04:10.489 --> 00:04:11.389
It's that simple.
00:04:12.258 --> 00:04:18.324
So we wanna get out of the habit of asking really basic stuff.
00:04:18.384 --> 00:04:19.884
And here's a good rule to follow.
00:04:20.230 --> 00:04:27.353
Never ask a decision maker a question that you couldn't have found the answer to on your own with a little bit of effort.
00:04:28.028 --> 00:04:32.440
I probably don't have to tell you why, but just for emphasis.
00:04:32.440 --> 00:04:35.050
If you think about how you would receive a question like that.
00:04:35.591 --> 00:04:39.701
If you have a team member who comes to you asking you a question.
00:04:40.105 --> 00:04:43.014
Saying, Hey boss, hey Leader, I have a question for you.
00:04:43.134 --> 00:04:45.625
Can you tell me the answer to blah, blah, blah?
00:04:46.062 --> 00:04:53.887
And they're asking you a question that they could easily, if they had made a little bit of effort, gone and found the answer to on their own, but they didn't bother.
00:04:54.399 --> 00:04:56.529
They decided it was easier to come and ask you.
00:04:57.331 --> 00:04:58.651
What's your reaction to that?
00:04:58.740 --> 00:05:01.560
Generally speaking, it's kind of annoying, right?
00:05:01.980 --> 00:05:04.740
And you might even start to make judgements about that person.
00:05:05.357 --> 00:05:07.576
You might think, well, that was kind of lazy.
00:05:07.987 --> 00:05:08.978
Why didn't you do your homework?
00:05:08.978 --> 00:05:13.204
Why didn't you just go get the answer to that and then come and ask me something useful?
00:05:13.586 --> 00:05:15.297
Ask me a more sophisticated question.
00:05:16.012 --> 00:05:24.932
The exact same thing applies with decision makers, and the more powerful, the more highly placed the decision maker is, the more critical it is to observe that rule.
00:05:25.112 --> 00:05:30.362
But honestly, we don't wanna disrespect anybody's time or attention span or anything else.
00:05:30.785 --> 00:05:39.326
It's hard enough to get into a room or into a conversation one-to-one with any of the decision makers we're trying to engage.
00:05:39.797 --> 00:05:46.081
To then waste a question when we could have asked one that was gonna produce much higher value.
00:05:46.081 --> 00:05:47.310
It just doesn't make sense.
00:05:47.973 --> 00:05:48.992
So how do we do that?
00:05:48.992 --> 00:05:51.033
How do we ask smarter questions?
00:05:51.505 --> 00:05:58.870
Well, the simplest way I can talk about this is to say that you always start with what it is you want to accomplish in the end.
00:05:58.870 --> 00:06:00.519
What's the end result that you want?
00:06:00.730 --> 00:06:03.639
Why are you engaging this decision maker in the first place?
00:06:04.411 --> 00:06:11.951
Chances are there is an action, a decision, something that ultimately you want them to take.
00:06:12.396 --> 00:06:16.596
That's going to help your organization or the people you serve, or both in some way.
00:06:16.987 --> 00:06:18.456
Maybe it's a decision about funding.
00:06:18.456 --> 00:06:20.166
Maybe it's a decision about policy.
00:06:20.552 --> 00:06:22.262
Maybe it's a decision about practice.
00:06:22.322 --> 00:06:23.072
Could be anything.
00:06:23.629 --> 00:06:29.269
But you have in mind what it is you want them to do for you, and that's the reason you're engaging them.
00:06:29.269 --> 00:06:36.970
You're trying to bring them to the place where they're in agreement that yes, that would be a good idea to do the thing you want.
00:06:37.240 --> 00:06:38.769
And yes, I'll do that for you.
00:06:39.576 --> 00:06:49.512
I'm actually gonna start with the research piece, because good advance research is how you make sure you're asking smarter questions in the first place.
00:06:50.189 --> 00:06:58.432
The most important question to start with always is, who's really in charge of the result that I want?
00:06:58.904 --> 00:07:03.454
Who's the ultimate decider, the decision maker, or more than one sometimes.
00:07:03.985 --> 00:07:04.795
Who's in charge of this?
00:07:04.795 --> 00:07:06.175
Who gets to say yes or no?
00:07:07.038 --> 00:07:14.281
That may seem super obvious, but I frequently hear from Nonprofit leaders who come to me and say, Well, I'm just so frustrated.
00:07:14.492 --> 00:07:24.899
We've been trying to get this county agency, this city department, this state agency, we've been trying to get them to do a thing for us forever.
00:07:24.899 --> 00:07:26.908
We wanna at least talk to them about it.
00:07:27.088 --> 00:07:29.309
And they won't tell us who's in charge.
00:07:29.309 --> 00:07:37.158
They just send out some super junior person to take our concerns, and we never get to meet with anybody important.
00:07:37.158 --> 00:07:39.648
And we never get to talk to the people who are really in charge.
00:07:39.887 --> 00:07:41.358
And we're just beyond frustrated.
00:07:41.975 --> 00:07:45.312
And the first question I always ask them is, so who is in charge?
00:07:45.322 --> 00:07:48.802
Who is the decision maker that you really want to get in a room with?
00:07:49.319 --> 00:07:52.348
And the number of times they say to me,"well, we don't know.
00:07:52.348 --> 00:07:56.423
That's part of the problem" is surprisingly frequent.
00:07:57.297 --> 00:08:00.673
And I don't doubt that it feels that way.
00:08:01.218 --> 00:08:09.487
But if you ever find yourself saying that, realize that what's happening is that you are agreeing to be disempowered.
00:08:10.057 --> 00:08:19.689
You are accepting that you're just gonna be stuck with this low level person, and there's no way to even know who the true decision makers really are, nevermind get in a room with them.
00:08:20.038 --> 00:08:27.916
It's easier to just complain about the agency and bash them about how opaque they are and how unwilling they are to engage.
00:08:28.127 --> 00:08:32.236
And furthermore, they should be engaging with us because this, this, this, and this reason.
00:08:32.506 --> 00:08:35.746
And then you get worked up and get in a fuss about it.
00:08:36.167 --> 00:08:37.697
Which feels better for a minute.
00:08:37.937 --> 00:08:44.746
But in the end, you still don't have the access you need in order to create the influence you need to get the result you want.
00:08:45.443 --> 00:08:50.301
So the most basic research is to figure out who the heck is in charge.
00:08:50.952 --> 00:08:54.903
And this is always obtainable information.
00:08:55.457 --> 00:09:01.437
Unless you're dealing with some sort of bizarre, covert operation somewhere, which I'm pretty sure most of you are not.
00:09:01.864 --> 00:09:07.960
If you're doing normal Nonprofit business providing direct services, the decision makers are knowable.
00:09:08.559 --> 00:09:10.659
They are identifiable, they are knowable.
00:09:10.960 --> 00:09:14.200
But they are not always immediately obvious.
00:09:14.620 --> 00:09:17.169
So we have to be willing to be detectives.
00:09:17.620 --> 00:09:23.690
And the detective part is actually pretty fun once you develop the skills for it.
00:09:24.049 --> 00:09:25.820
And this is a skill set by the way.
00:09:26.408 --> 00:09:34.999
Once you develop a familiarity with how decision making structures are organized in different types of environments.
00:09:35.269 --> 00:09:45.649
Once you get a feel for that, it starts to get a lot faster and a lot easier to do the detective work of, okay, well it's gonna be likely one of these kinds of decision makers, or one of those kinds.
00:09:45.889 --> 00:09:48.859
Let me just even search on those titles and see what I come up with.
00:09:49.432 --> 00:10:00.894
As you begin to learn decision making structures, you begin to see patterns and then that helps you look for similar patterns in places where you don't yet have working knowledge.
00:10:01.702 --> 00:10:04.552
You have lots of options for how you do that research.
00:10:04.812 --> 00:10:09.775
I did at least one episode on this, and I'll go back and link that up in the show notes.
00:10:10.208 --> 00:10:16.119
I did a whole episode on just how you map out decision making structures for yourself so that you know what's going on.
00:10:16.772 --> 00:10:17.881
But you gotta start there.
00:10:18.000 --> 00:10:19.919
You gotta know who the decision makers are.
00:10:20.100 --> 00:10:25.110
And then the next layer of research is to learn as much about them as possible.
00:10:25.600 --> 00:10:27.250
You wanna know everything you can.
00:10:27.850 --> 00:10:36.924
You wanna know about their background, about their family, about their pets, where they went to school, what they majored in, what other jobs they've had.
00:10:37.404 --> 00:10:39.684
A lot of this is available on social media.
00:10:40.139 --> 00:10:45.298
You can learn a ton about people on LinkedIn, especially people in decision making roles.
00:10:45.897 --> 00:10:49.475
Start with a Google search, or your search engine of choice.
00:10:50.054 --> 00:11:00.168
Also, remember that YouTube is a search engine, and these days, particularly public facing decision makers, a lot of them will be found on YouTube in one form or another.
00:11:00.541 --> 00:11:06.474
In podcast interviews or even interview clips from traditional media will sometimes pop up on YouTube.
00:11:06.474 --> 00:11:12.024
So always search YouTube in addition to whatever your favorite regular search engine is.
00:11:12.495 --> 00:11:18.193
Always check LinkedIn and check the other socials as well, but those are gonna be your best prospects.
00:11:18.553 --> 00:11:21.182
And then ask around, work your connections.
00:11:21.677 --> 00:11:35.836
I promise you that you know somebody who knows something about that decision maker who has a connection to them, who can maybe introduce you, who can tell you what really goes on behind the scenes over there, what their preferred ways of engaging are.
00:11:35.836 --> 00:11:37.756
There's people who can tell you that stuff.
00:11:38.232 --> 00:11:40.692
So do the research, ask the questions.
00:11:41.130 --> 00:11:52.035
Think about this like a job interview, If you've been in the job market for more than a minute, you would never just show up for the interview without having done any research on the company or the interviewer.
00:11:52.245 --> 00:11:53.265
You just wouldn't do that.
00:11:53.355 --> 00:11:54.196
That'd be crazy.
00:11:55.083 --> 00:12:01.384
You wanna go in as prepared as possible, but it's not like you're carrying the person's dossier in there with you.
00:12:01.384 --> 00:12:04.894
You're just coming in with a feeling of familiarity.
00:12:05.214 --> 00:12:09.143
You wanna feel like, gosh, I feel like I already know this person.
00:12:09.600 --> 00:12:10.889
I know where they went to school.
00:12:10.889 --> 00:12:15.820
I know that they're in this high power job now, but gosh, 20 years ago they were working in nonprofits.
00:12:15.820 --> 00:12:16.629
That's really cool.
00:12:16.809 --> 00:12:18.549
That's something I can talk to them about.
00:12:19.341 --> 00:12:30.740
The more background information you have, the more you can just allow that to percolate in your brain and rise naturally to the surface at an appropriate moment in the conversation.
00:12:31.504 --> 00:12:33.904
Now I have seen people mess this up.
00:12:33.904 --> 00:12:40.888
I've seen people go in loaded to the gills with background information they got and they're just burning for the chance to use it.
00:12:41.128 --> 00:12:45.508
And they'll say something like, well, and I know you went to school at Blabbity blah.
00:12:45.508 --> 00:12:47.248
And now they feel like they're being stalked.
00:12:47.869 --> 00:12:51.134
And that pushes people away, needless to say.
00:12:51.583 --> 00:12:58.985
So you wanna just have it in your head and be prepared to allow it to come up naturally in the conversation.
00:13:00.139 --> 00:13:06.469
But the more you have to work with, the more you know and understand about what their journey has been so far.
00:13:06.926 --> 00:13:13.653
'Cause most of us have taken very circuitous paths to the place we are now, and that journey continues.
00:13:13.984 --> 00:13:16.984
10 years from now, we'll probably be in a different spot.
00:13:17.402 --> 00:13:30.493
It's a winding, meandering journey, and it's more typical than not that people who are in a position of decision making authority, they've meandered quite a bit on their way to that place.
00:13:31.009 --> 00:13:41.649
And they may have a lot of really interesting background that makes them a kind of fascinating person, but also informs who they are and how they look at the world.
00:13:42.340 --> 00:13:57.226
So if you haven't bothered to do even that basic research, you've deprived yourself of insight and perspective on how they might very well be thinking about the issue that you've brought to them and the problem that you solve.
00:13:57.697 --> 00:14:08.816
So the more we can understand about what informs their thinking, about what their journey has looked like up to this point, the better questions we can ask once we're in the room with them.
00:14:09.543 --> 00:14:15.243
Because then instead of saying, well, you know, I really just wanna know how the decision making works here.
00:14:15.890 --> 00:14:17.541
That's not just what you want to know.
00:14:17.600 --> 00:14:26.177
That may have been the most frustrating thing up to this point, but even if you wanted more clarity about that, there's different ways to ask.
00:14:26.875 --> 00:14:31.739
A really basic question would be well, can you just tell me how the decision making works here?
00:14:32.302 --> 00:14:32.631
Okay.
00:14:32.902 --> 00:14:35.302
That's a request for facts.
00:14:35.759 --> 00:14:42.750
Requests for facts are the lowest value question you can ask because almost always you can research that answer somewhere else.
00:14:43.277 --> 00:14:47.884
Requests for perspective and insight are a much higher value question.
00:14:48.360 --> 00:14:52.904
So instead of saying, tell me how the decision making structure works here.
00:14:53.235 --> 00:14:55.816
You might say, you know, it's interesting.
00:14:56.017 --> 00:15:01.267
different pieces of responsibility for this issue that we see as unified.
00:15:01.529 --> 00:15:11.019
We see this as a single problem, but I notice that in this agency piece A is assigned over here and piece B is assigned over there.
00:15:11.302 --> 00:15:13.312
And I'm wondering a couple of things.
00:15:13.312 --> 00:15:24.234
I'm wondering how that works for you all, and I would love some of your insight as to how you all think about the problem and what brought you to divide the responsibilities that way.
00:15:24.881 --> 00:15:40.735
And beyond that, I'm interested in your advice higher value question your advice on how we might navigate that bifurcated system when we operate with a view of this as a single problem.
00:15:41.307 --> 00:15:42.807
And then sit back and listen.
00:15:43.136 --> 00:15:46.677
Because what's gonna happen first is that's a high level question.
00:15:46.826 --> 00:15:48.386
That requires thinking.
00:15:48.854 --> 00:15:52.244
And that tells them a whole bunch of things right away.
00:15:52.394 --> 00:15:54.464
First of all, it tells'em you did your homework.
00:15:54.583 --> 00:15:58.004
It tells them you understand something about how their agency works.
00:15:58.063 --> 00:16:04.693
It tells them that you are genuinely trying to understand and figure out a way to work more effectively with them.
00:16:05.235 --> 00:16:09.556
And you've asked a question that they actually have to think about before they can answer it.
00:16:10.186 --> 00:16:19.336
All of that engages their brain, it engages their emotions, it pulls them in, it draws them into the conversation and has them speaking with you as a peer.
00:16:19.855 --> 00:16:24.073
Massive difference than if you go in and ask for factual information.
00:16:24.722 --> 00:16:32.823
I try not to say never, but very rarely should there be the case where you ask a factual question of a decision maker.
00:16:32.913 --> 00:16:33.724
Just don't do it.
00:16:34.293 --> 00:16:47.158
Now, you could ask for their advice about, for example, if there's a choice between decision maker A and decision maker B, and you've gotten an indication that the person you're talking with is supportive of you, then you can say.
00:16:47.609 --> 00:16:53.278
So we also know that we need to engage at least one of decision maker A or B.
00:16:53.519 --> 00:16:55.349
Do you have thoughts on that?
00:16:55.528 --> 00:16:56.938
Do you have any advice?
00:16:57.379 --> 00:16:59.448
And then just sit back and hear what they have to say.
00:16:59.448 --> 00:17:08.959
And then you can ask follow up questions, building on what they've shared with you, to try to probe a little deeper to ask an even more complex or higher level question.
00:17:09.606 --> 00:17:12.969
And basically, I define higher level two ways.
00:17:13.148 --> 00:17:16.449
Higher level is it engages their brain at a higher level.
00:17:16.509 --> 00:17:18.459
They have to think about the answer.
00:17:18.608 --> 00:17:21.324
They have to actually noodle on it for a minute.
00:17:21.785 --> 00:17:23.015
They can't just spit it out.
00:17:23.347 --> 00:17:24.278
Cause it's not a fact.
00:17:24.357 --> 00:17:25.198
It's an assessment.
00:17:25.198 --> 00:17:26.428
It's an analysis.
00:17:26.729 --> 00:17:27.778
It's calling for insight.
00:17:27.778 --> 00:17:28.979
It's calling for perspective.
00:17:29.685 --> 00:17:34.057
Asking for advice is great because it does the additional thing of stroking their ego.
00:17:34.446 --> 00:17:39.217
Everybody loves to be asked for advice, so you could never go wrong asking for advice.
00:17:39.727 --> 00:17:45.156
But again, try to make that request for advice a high level question.
00:17:45.663 --> 00:17:55.907
Ask for advice about something that's a really good and interesting strategic question, not just should I talk to person A or person B first?
00:17:56.208 --> 00:18:07.888
I mean, that's not terrible, but better would be, now that you understand a little bit about how we see the problem, how would you approach decision makers A and B?
00:18:08.250 --> 00:18:11.824
Do you have strategic advice for me about how I might want to tackle that?
00:18:12.448 --> 00:18:13.678
That's a better question.
00:18:14.132 --> 00:18:16.291
Because again, it's asking them to really think.
00:18:16.342 --> 00:18:20.364
You've asked them for strategy, not just a yes/ no, A/B question.
00:18:20.972 --> 00:18:27.976
Yes/ no, true/ false, A/B are lower level strategic questions than, how would you approach this?
00:18:27.976 --> 00:18:30.496
What would be your strategic thinking behind it?
00:18:30.866 --> 00:18:34.166
That's asking for much higher level analysis and brain engagement.
00:18:34.406 --> 00:18:40.767
And you always want the highest level of brain engagement possible because that's what pulls them in.
00:18:41.366 --> 00:18:43.586
That's a conversation they'll remember.
00:18:44.136 --> 00:18:50.942
They might remember somebody who asked them for a name or for a factual answer, but they might not remember it kindly.
00:18:51.440 --> 00:18:58.539
Or more likely it'll just be in one ear and out the other, and they won't even remember that they talked with you because nothing interesting was said.
00:18:59.045 --> 00:19:02.694
You were there, you were talking, but their brain didn't engage.
00:19:02.694 --> 00:19:05.450
And if their brain didn't engage, they're not really gonna remember the conversation.
00:19:06.348 --> 00:19:07.878
You gotta engage'em some kind of way.
00:19:08.352 --> 00:19:15.511
And the best way when you're in advocacy mode, you wanna engage their emotions for sure, but you also wanna engage their intellect.
00:19:15.830 --> 00:19:24.256
And questions are gold for doing that as long as you're asking the highest level question you can possibly achieve in that setting.
00:19:24.828 --> 00:19:26.598
So hopefully that difference is clear.
00:19:27.138 --> 00:19:30.941
And you can see why one is going to engage them much more.
00:19:31.560 --> 00:19:36.348
The other thing is, quite honestly, it's a lot more interesting and fun for you too, right?
00:19:36.348 --> 00:19:41.898
Because once they lean in and engage, then you're having a two-way conversation and all kinds of stuff is gonna come up.
00:19:42.442 --> 00:19:47.157
Then the trick is you also gotta be listening with two different ears.
00:19:47.534 --> 00:19:49.213
I know you got two, so you can do this.
00:19:49.624 --> 00:19:51.753
You're listening for two separate things.
00:19:52.084 --> 00:19:59.983
Whenever you've asked a question or just in general when you're in conversation, but particularly when they're fully engaged, you're listening for two things.
00:20:00.013 --> 00:20:04.674
One, you're listening for, is their understanding increasing?
00:20:05.032 --> 00:20:08.272
Is their affinity toward my position increasing?
00:20:08.662 --> 00:20:18.458
Are they moving toward where I need them to be in their thinking, in their beliefs, in their attitudes, to make them closer to a yes?
00:20:18.667 --> 00:20:20.198
Or are they moving away?
00:20:20.898 --> 00:20:28.820
And then the other thing you're listening for is stuff you can use as your next follow-up comment or question.
00:20:29.470 --> 00:20:31.390
So that's a lot.
00:20:31.849 --> 00:20:37.251
The other thing I advise is that, when you can, tag team your meetings with decision makers.
00:20:37.693 --> 00:20:42.644
Even when you have been doing this for decades as I have.
00:20:43.125 --> 00:20:47.625
I still most of the time would rather have a second person in the room with me.
00:20:48.429 --> 00:20:56.923
I like to tag team, but when I tag team, I always have a brief pre-meeting where we clarify that we both know what it is we're after.
00:20:57.478 --> 00:21:02.278
What is our desired result long term, and what is our desired result for this meeting, for this encounter.
00:21:02.855 --> 00:21:06.246
And then if we're dividing up roles in any way, then we do that.
00:21:06.659 --> 00:21:08.801
You cover this angle, I'll cover that angle.
00:21:09.565 --> 00:21:15.243
But then it's also understood that each of our job is to keep track of what's going on.
00:21:15.243 --> 00:21:17.463
And if the other one flakes for a second.
00:21:17.821 --> 00:21:21.872
And you know what should come next and they're not doing it, you step in.
00:21:22.286 --> 00:21:25.736
Cause if they're not doing it, it means that they flaked for a second.
00:21:26.215 --> 00:21:30.905
They went down a rabbit hole in their mind, or their brain just froze up for a second.
00:21:30.905 --> 00:21:31.715
It happens.
00:21:31.895 --> 00:21:36.726
Happens all the time, especially if you're doing a lot of these meetings in short succession.
00:21:37.270 --> 00:21:40.810
Sometimes your brain just goes, eh, and doesn't work for a second.
00:21:41.171 --> 00:21:50.711
So when that happens and there's somebody else there, they can perceive that and just dive right in and keep the conversation going while you sit over there and get your wits back about you.
00:21:50.711 --> 00:21:55.952
And then you're ready to jump in as needed when it's time for you to return the favor.
00:21:56.843 --> 00:22:07.930
It doesn't matter whether it's subject matter expertise or whether it's the advocacy subject at hand, or whether it's any other topic that has come up that you've found a way to engage and connect over.
00:22:08.500 --> 00:22:17.703
Always ask the highest level of question you can manage to ask, because the purpose of it is not principally to seek information.
00:22:18.213 --> 00:22:23.253
The purpose is principally to create engagement, to draw them in.
00:22:23.689 --> 00:22:31.219
To have them engaging with you enthusiastically, energetically, and with their full brain engaged.
00:22:31.578 --> 00:22:35.866
Once you get that, now you've got a relationship.
00:22:36.609 --> 00:22:43.423
I have been in first encounters with decision makers where I had done my research, done my homework.
00:22:43.932 --> 00:22:51.944
And I got in there and we were discussing subject matter, and I asked a question and they just took off running with it.
00:22:52.575 --> 00:22:57.603
And it was clear that that was a passion subject for them and it was for me too.
00:22:57.692 --> 00:23:02.820
So we just took off and nerded out over that piece of it.
00:23:03.358 --> 00:23:07.128
That piece of it was not what I had come there to lobby them about.
00:23:07.640 --> 00:23:10.430
In that moment that wasn't what was important.
00:23:10.670 --> 00:23:13.460
This was my first meeting with this decision maker.
00:23:14.150 --> 00:23:19.130
I had no expectations that I was gonna get terribly far in that conversation.
00:23:19.220 --> 00:23:21.049
This was beginning to build a relationship.
00:23:21.470 --> 00:23:29.208
But all of a sudden, here we are nerding out together on a piece that's related, but it's not what I came there to lobby for.
00:23:30.153 --> 00:23:31.053
I went with it.
00:23:31.353 --> 00:23:39.048
We talked for 20 minutes about that piece, and in that process we got to know each other.
00:23:39.147 --> 00:23:52.480
We developed great mutual respect based on the fact that obviously each of us had a lot of knowledge and expertise in that arena, that we were both really interested and passionate about it and could talk intelligently about it.
00:23:53.036 --> 00:23:56.117
That we both cared about a same thing in the world.
00:23:56.676 --> 00:23:58.656
That's the basis for relationship.
00:23:59.141 --> 00:24:06.131
They remembered that conversation and the next time I came to meet with them, they greeted me with open arms.
00:24:06.730 --> 00:24:18.332
And I was able to get a lot done with them because I had gone deep with them on something they cared about, and asked really good questions and contributed my own ideas.
00:24:19.122 --> 00:24:28.972
The only thing that's more exciting than them going deep when you ask them a question, is them turning around and asking you one, too, that's equally high level.
00:24:29.490 --> 00:24:31.049
And then you're off to the races.
00:24:31.569 --> 00:24:34.779
When that happens, you're creating relationship gold.
00:24:35.338 --> 00:24:49.431
You're creating respect, you're creating a reputation as someone who not only has subject matter expertise, but also is a thinking person who can have that kind of higher level intellectual conversation.
00:24:49.872 --> 00:24:51.971
That is huge.
00:24:52.480 --> 00:24:53.740
It will open doors for you.
00:24:54.155 --> 00:25:01.115
They will remember that experience fondly and they will be interested in having more of that kind of experience.
00:25:01.355 --> 00:25:07.955
And they start to figure that anytime you walk through the door, this is gonna be interesting, this is gonna be fun.
00:25:08.135 --> 00:25:09.965
We're gonna talk about cool stuff.
00:25:10.376 --> 00:25:16.586
And I'm not just gonna have somebody yammering at me about, well, I'm come here to talk to you about this and this is blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
00:25:16.586 --> 00:25:17.787
Talking, talking, talking.
00:25:18.297 --> 00:25:19.797
No, it's engagement.
00:25:20.244 --> 00:25:21.835
It's two-way engagement.
00:25:22.585 --> 00:25:26.699
Questions are the key to two-way engagement.
00:25:27.159 --> 00:25:34.723
And the sky's the limit, as long as you learn to ask the highest level question you can come up with in any given setting.
00:25:35.295 --> 00:25:42.537
And avoid at all costs, asking questions that are simply a request for factual information.
00:25:43.076 --> 00:25:48.596
Find that out on your own or ask someone who is not in a decision making role.
00:25:48.896 --> 00:25:51.777
It's not saying you can't ask a person to find that out.
00:25:52.189 --> 00:25:54.528
I'm not saying you can only search this online.
00:25:55.000 --> 00:26:07.028
Only to say don't waste a decision maker's time asking them a question that you could have asked someone, quite honestly, lower in the pecking order, who's not a decision maker, but who knows the system.
00:26:07.483 --> 00:26:12.013
There's plenty of people working wherever that decision maker is who can answer your question.
00:26:12.349 --> 00:26:14.180
Who's not as hard to get in a room with.
00:26:14.817 --> 00:26:16.708
I wanna make sure you know, you can ask people.
00:26:16.708 --> 00:26:20.290
Just don't waste a decision maker's time asking for facts.
00:26:20.840 --> 00:26:23.961
You can ask for clarification, but not just for straight facts.
00:26:24.766 --> 00:26:34.645
And so if they've said something in one part of the conversation, and then they say something that is somewhat contradictory to that later in the conversation, it is a hundred percent okay to say.
00:26:35.221 --> 00:26:36.421
Can we just pause for a second?
00:26:36.471 --> 00:26:40.250
It would be great if you could help me put this together.
00:26:40.701 --> 00:26:52.548
So if I heard you right, I think in the beginning you said A, and then just now it felt like you kind of said the opposite of A, so I think there must be something I'm missing.
00:26:52.548 --> 00:26:54.472
Can you kind of knit that together for me?
00:26:55.107 --> 00:26:59.397
That's a higher level question than saying, well, is it A or is it the opposite of A?
00:26:59.856 --> 00:27:00.787
You see the difference?
00:27:01.352 --> 00:27:03.481
Also, it's not an open challenge.
00:27:03.662 --> 00:27:05.912
It's not saying, Hey, I just caught you in a contradiction.
00:27:06.061 --> 00:27:07.105
Now defend yourself.
00:27:07.472 --> 00:27:18.903
It's like, it felt contradictory to me, but that says to me I probably am missing a piece of perspective here that I would really appreciate having,'cause it would help me see this problem better, more completely.
00:27:19.430 --> 00:27:25.339
And if in fact they were just shooting their mouth off and they did in fact contradict themselves, now they know that you noticed.
00:27:25.811 --> 00:27:29.221
And they will either correct themselves or do something.
00:27:29.727 --> 00:27:34.531
But again, it's a higher level question than just saying, well, is it A, or is it the opposite of A, which is it?
00:27:35.488 --> 00:27:36.028
So.
00:27:36.290 --> 00:27:40.344
Ask your research questions before you get in the meeting.
00:27:40.777 --> 00:27:41.946
Do the research.
00:27:41.946 --> 00:27:48.897
Query wherever, query online, query in archives, query other humans who can tell you this.
00:27:49.393 --> 00:27:57.363
There are lots of people in your world, who have connections to or have knowledge of the decision maker you're trying to engage.
00:27:57.722 --> 00:28:02.345
So liberally employ your contacts to help you gather insight about this person.
00:28:02.615 --> 00:28:03.724
Do all of that.
00:28:04.364 --> 00:28:16.766
And then what I think is really valuable is before you go into the meeting, bullet out all the things you feel like you need to know in order to have a clear understanding of what the heck is really going on.
00:28:17.387 --> 00:28:32.471
Cause a lot of times when we're trying to break into a decision making system and we're not fully in there yet, and don't have clarity about all the pieces of it or how it works, it can feel very confusing and opaque and frustrating.
00:28:33.162 --> 00:28:41.863
So it's good to kind of bullet out, well, if I only knew this, this, this, and this, then I would have a much better understanding of this.
00:28:42.303 --> 00:28:50.849
First of all, simply identifying those questions is now an opportunity for you to take one more run at your preparatory research.
00:28:51.478 --> 00:29:07.105
And I will say that with the current state of AI, it's getting a lot more productive to ask much more complicated, complete questions of even a basic Google search or whatever your favorite search engine is.
00:29:07.765 --> 00:29:15.684
Because the learning models are getting so sophisticated, it can now take a very complicated request and give you a complex answer.
00:29:16.285 --> 00:29:21.085
And what that'll do is very likely provoke more questions.
00:29:21.673 --> 00:29:28.750
The one caveat is never take an AI assembly of information at face value.
00:29:29.200 --> 00:29:31.569
Always confirm it some other way.
00:29:31.599 --> 00:29:36.175
Confirm it from an original source because it makes mistakes still a lot.
00:29:37.036 --> 00:29:37.875
Just confirm it.
00:29:38.506 --> 00:29:45.556
Because you don't want to go in and start saying, well, I know that blah, blah, blah is true, and the decision maker's like, where did you get that idea?
00:29:46.246 --> 00:29:48.135
That's not how it works.
00:29:48.375 --> 00:29:49.695
You don't want that reaction.
00:29:50.385 --> 00:29:55.614
So once you've done that and you've answered as much as you can in preparation.
00:29:56.171 --> 00:30:15.586
If you're not yet comfortable generating higher level questions on the fly, write out a couple of ones that can kind of be your backup higher level questions that ask for analysis, insight, perspective, advice on strategy.
00:30:16.061 --> 00:30:20.682
Any one of those kinds of questions is much higher level than a request for information.
00:30:21.220 --> 00:30:23.710
And you don't have to ask a lot, don't badger them.
00:30:24.271 --> 00:30:29.489
But have a few that are teed up that if they come up and it's appropriate.
00:30:29.548 --> 00:30:42.403
Some of them they may answer on their own without you ever having to ask, but you'll know when is the right time in the conversation to insert one of your higher level questions, if you're feeling like you haven't had a chance to go high level in a question yet.
00:30:42.973 --> 00:30:52.814
That's always a good trick to have up your sleeve until you get a lot of practice at this, and you just start to know automatically based on the flow of the conversation.
00:30:52.814 --> 00:30:54.854
Well, what's the next high level question I should be asking?
00:30:55.334 --> 00:30:57.973
Because when you get your skill level high enough, that's what'll happen.
00:30:58.523 --> 00:31:10.608
I very rarely create a pre-written set of questions unless it's a very technical subject area where I'm not as familiar and I wanna make sure I have my framing right.
00:31:11.298 --> 00:31:15.746
But other than that, I've been doing this so long that it comes fairly easily.
00:31:16.226 --> 00:31:19.165
And with practice it will come easily for you as well.
00:31:19.932 --> 00:31:28.861
That is my number one secret for you for getting massively better results out of every single encounter with a decision maker.
00:31:29.414 --> 00:31:32.363
Is ask smarter questions.
00:31:32.925 --> 00:31:36.195
And then build on them in the course of the conversation.
00:31:36.821 --> 00:31:38.231
Always do your homework.
00:31:38.518 --> 00:31:42.688
Always research anything that can be answered by another source.
00:31:42.807 --> 00:31:51.718
Get that done, get that answered before you go into that encounter so that you can ask the smarter question and come out ahead with some real engagement and real progress.
00:31:52.377 --> 00:31:57.587
Thanks for listening, and I'll see you in the next episode right here on the Nonprofit Power Podcast.
00:00:00.050 --> 00:00:02.604
You're listening to the Nonprofit Power Podcast.
00:00:02.983 --> 00:00:10.994
In today's episode, we share the most underutilized advocacy tool that you can use right now to improve your results.
00:00:11.294 --> 00:00:12.644
So stay tuned.
00:00:18.852 --> 00:00:27.972
If you wanna have real and powerful influence over the money and policy decisions that impact your organization and the people you serve, then you're in the right place.
00:00:27.972 --> 00:00:28.001
I.
00:00:28.361 --> 00:00:41.381
I'm Kath Patrick, and I've helped dozens of progressive Nonprofit leaders take their organizations to new and higher levels of impact and success by building powerful influence with the decision makers that matter.
00:00:42.012 --> 00:00:54.551
It is possible to get a critical mass of the money and policy decision makers in your world to be as invested in your success as you are, to have them seeking you out as an equal partner and to have them.
00:00:54.612 --> 00:00:57.402
Bringing opportunities and resources to you.
00:00:58.002 --> 00:01:00.101
This podcast will help you do just that.
00:01:00.612 --> 00:01:03.612
Welcome to the Nonprofit Power Podcast.
00:01:09.316 --> 00:01:10.004
Hey there folks.
00:01:10.004 --> 00:01:13.034
Welcome to another episode of the Nonprofit Power Podcast.
00:01:13.274 --> 00:01:14.593
I'm your host, Kath Patrick.
00:01:14.983 --> 00:01:24.897
I'm so glad you're here for today's episode because we have something fun in store that I think you're gonna appreciate how simple it is and yet how powerful it is.
00:01:25.664 --> 00:01:32.884
There's a short supply of those kinds of things in the world, and right now we can use all the tricks in the toolkit that we can find.
00:01:33.521 --> 00:01:42.721
So here's what I've noticed in years of working with Nonprofit leaders and helping them become more powerfully effective and influential advocates with the decision makers in their world.
00:01:43.493 --> 00:01:54.343
Generally speaking, we worry so much about what we're gonna tell a decision maker, and we don't spend enough time thinking about what we wanna ask them.
00:01:55.191 --> 00:02:03.286
Questions are incredibly powerful tools, and they can really work magic in a conversation with a decision maker.
00:02:03.846 --> 00:02:05.646
They can create engagement.
00:02:06.123 --> 00:02:12.605
They can create an opportunity to go deep to get information that the decision maker wouldn't volunteer otherwise.
00:02:13.185 --> 00:02:14.594
You can get advice.
00:02:15.186 --> 00:02:26.645
You can get all kinds of valuable intel, and at the same time be building a connection with that decision maker and having them leaning in and engaging more with you.
00:02:27.575 --> 00:02:29.765
Because here's the thing about questions.
00:02:29.915 --> 00:02:32.135
They engage other people's brains.
00:02:32.836 --> 00:02:34.575
It's the way the human brain is wired.
00:02:34.575 --> 00:02:35.536
We can't help it.
00:02:35.746 --> 00:02:38.596
When we're asked a question we have to engage.
00:02:38.836 --> 00:02:40.936
We have to stop and think about that question.
00:02:41.550 --> 00:02:48.366
Whereas if someone's telling us stuff, it can start to be like that Charlie Brown teacher, and it's just wah, wah, wah wah wa.
00:02:49.050 --> 00:02:51.241
And we're zoning out, we're not really hearing things.
00:02:51.721 --> 00:02:57.618
As soon as a question shows up in the conversation, our subconscious makes us pay attention.
00:02:57.979 --> 00:03:00.288
We whip around and we start engaging.
00:03:00.618 --> 00:03:02.449
And it's the same with decision makers.
00:03:02.479 --> 00:03:03.889
It's just human behavior.
00:03:04.459 --> 00:03:05.419
But here's the thing.
00:03:05.873 --> 00:03:08.123
Not all questions are created equal.
00:03:08.528 --> 00:03:13.079
The fact is, the smarter your questions, the better your results are gonna be.
00:03:13.902 --> 00:03:21.641
So the trick is to come up with really smart questions that are gonna yield high level results for you.
00:03:22.181 --> 00:03:23.921
And that's what I want to get into today.
00:03:25.879 --> 00:03:29.810
Questions are a hundred percent your friend when you're engaging in advocacy.
00:03:30.263 --> 00:03:41.568
And there's questions that happen with decision makers, there's also questions about decision makers, and there's questions to use in your advocacy research.
00:03:41.927 --> 00:03:47.950
And in all of those cases, the smarter your questions, the more you're gonna get out of the process.
00:03:48.790 --> 00:03:54.837
One of the common mistakes that get made is that folks ask the most basic questions.
00:03:54.837 --> 00:04:00.474
They start with really low level questions and never progress beyond those.
00:04:00.973 --> 00:04:05.326
They do it in their research, and they do it in conversations with decision makers.
00:04:05.959 --> 00:04:10.188
Those are low value questions and they're gonna produce a low value return.
00:04:10.489 --> 00:04:11.389
It's that simple.
00:04:12.258 --> 00:04:18.324
So we wanna get out of the habit of asking really basic stuff.
00:04:18.384 --> 00:04:19.884
And here's a good rule to follow.
00:04:20.230 --> 00:04:27.353
Never ask a decision maker a question that you couldn't have found the answer to on your own with a little bit of effort.
00:04:28.028 --> 00:04:32.440
I probably don't have to tell you why, but just for emphasis.
00:04:32.440 --> 00:04:35.050
If you think about how you would receive a question like that.
00:04:35.591 --> 00:04:39.701
If you have a team member who comes to you asking you a question.
00:04:40.105 --> 00:04:43.014
Saying, Hey boss, hey Leader, I have a question for you.
00:04:43.134 --> 00:04:45.625
Can you tell me the answer to blah, blah, blah?
00:04:46.062 --> 00:04:53.887
And they're asking you a question that they could easily, if they had made a little bit of effort, gone and found the answer to on their own, but they didn't bother.
00:04:54.399 --> 00:04:56.529
They decided it was easier to come and ask you.
00:04:57.331 --> 00:04:58.651
What's your reaction to that?
00:04:58.740 --> 00:05:01.560
Generally speaking, it's kind of annoying, right?
00:05:01.980 --> 00:05:04.740
And you might even start to make judgements about that person.
00:05:05.357 --> 00:05:07.576
You might think, well, that was kind of lazy.
00:05:07.987 --> 00:05:08.978
Why didn't you do your homework?
00:05:08.978 --> 00:05:13.204
Why didn't you just go get the answer to that and then come and ask me something useful?
00:05:13.586 --> 00:05:15.297
Ask me a more sophisticated question.
00:05:16.012 --> 00:05:24.932
The exact same thing applies with decision makers, and the more powerful, the more highly placed the decision maker is, the more critical it is to observe that rule.
00:05:25.112 --> 00:05:30.362
But honestly, we don't wanna disrespect anybody's time or attention span or anything else.
00:05:30.785 --> 00:05:39.326
It's hard enough to get into a room or into a conversation one-to-one with any of the decision makers we're trying to engage.
00:05:39.797 --> 00:05:46.081
To then waste a question when we could have asked one that was gonna produce much higher value.
00:05:46.081 --> 00:05:47.310
It just doesn't make sense.
00:05:47.973 --> 00:05:48.992
So how do we do that?
00:05:48.992 --> 00:05:51.033
How do we ask smarter questions?
00:05:51.505 --> 00:05:58.870
Well, the simplest way I can talk about this is to say that you always start with what it is you want to accomplish in the end.
00:05:58.870 --> 00:06:00.519
What's the end result that you want?
00:06:00.730 --> 00:06:03.639
Why are you engaging this decision maker in the first place?
00:06:04.411 --> 00:06:11.951
Chances are there is an action, a decision, something that ultimately you want them to take.
00:06:12.396 --> 00:06:16.596
That's going to help your organization or the people you serve, or both in some way.
00:06:16.987 --> 00:06:18.456
Maybe it's a decision about funding.
00:06:18.456 --> 00:06:20.166
Maybe it's a decision about policy.
00:06:20.552 --> 00:06:22.262
Maybe it's a decision about practice.
00:06:22.322 --> 00:06:23.072
Could be anything.
00:06:23.629 --> 00:06:29.269
But you have in mind what it is you want them to do for you, and that's the reason you're engaging them.
00:06:29.269 --> 00:06:36.970
You're trying to bring them to the place where they're in agreement that yes, that would be a good idea to do the thing you want.
00:06:37.240 --> 00:06:38.769
And yes, I'll do that for you.
00:06:39.576 --> 00:06:49.512
I'm actually gonna start with the research piece, because good advance research is how you make sure you're asking smarter questions in the first place.
00:06:50.189 --> 00:06:58.432
The most important question to start with always is, who's really in charge of the result that I want?
00:06:58.904 --> 00:07:03.454
Who's the ultimate decider, the decision maker, or more than one sometimes.
00:07:03.985 --> 00:07:04.795
Who's in charge of this?
00:07:04.795 --> 00:07:06.175
Who gets to say yes or no?
00:07:07.038 --> 00:07:14.281
That may seem super obvious, but I frequently hear from Nonprofit leaders who come to me and say, Well, I'm just so frustrated.
00:07:14.492 --> 00:07:24.899
We've been trying to get this county agency, this city department, this state agency, we've been trying to get them to do a thing for us forever.
00:07:24.899 --> 00:07:26.908
We wanna at least talk to them about it.
00:07:27.088 --> 00:07:29.309
And they won't tell us who's in charge.
00:07:29.309 --> 00:07:37.158
They just send out some super junior person to take our concerns, and we never get to meet with anybody important.
00:07:37.158 --> 00:07:39.648
And we never get to talk to the people who are really in charge.
00:07:39.887 --> 00:07:41.358
And we're just beyond frustrated.
00:07:41.975 --> 00:07:45.312
And the first question I always ask them is, so who is in charge?
00:07:45.322 --> 00:07:48.802
Who is the decision maker that you really want to get in a room with?
00:07:49.319 --> 00:07:52.348
And the number of times they say to me,"well, we don't know.
00:07:52.348 --> 00:07:56.423
That's part of the problem" is surprisingly frequent.
00:07:57.297 --> 00:08:00.673
And I don't doubt that it feels that way.
00:08:01.218 --> 00:08:09.487
But if you ever find yourself saying that, realize that what's happening is that you are agreeing to be disempowered.
00:08:10.057 --> 00:08:19.689
You are accepting that you're just gonna be stuck with this low level person, and there's no way to even know who the true decision makers really are, nevermind get in a room with them.
00:08:20.038 --> 00:08:27.916
It's easier to just complain about the agency and bash them about how opaque they are and how unwilling they are to engage.
00:08:28.127 --> 00:08:32.236
And furthermore, they should be engaging with us because this, this, this, and this reason.
00:08:32.506 --> 00:08:35.746
And then you get worked up and get in a fuss about it.
00:08:36.167 --> 00:08:37.697
Which feels better for a minute.
00:08:37.937 --> 00:08:44.746
But in the end, you still don't have the access you need in order to create the influence you need to get the result you want.
00:08:45.443 --> 00:08:50.301
So the most basic research is to figure out who the heck is in charge.
00:08:50.952 --> 00:08:54.903
And this is always obtainable information.
00:08:55.457 --> 00:09:01.437
Unless you're dealing with some sort of bizarre, covert operation somewhere, which I'm pretty sure most of you are not.
00:09:01.864 --> 00:09:07.960
If you're doing normal Nonprofit business providing direct services, the decision makers are knowable.
00:09:08.559 --> 00:09:10.659
They are identifiable, they are knowable.
00:09:10.960 --> 00:09:14.200
But they are not always immediately obvious.
00:09:14.620 --> 00:09:17.169
So we have to be willing to be detectives.
00:09:17.620 --> 00:09:23.690
And the detective part is actually pretty fun once you develop the skills for it.
00:09:24.049 --> 00:09:25.820
And this is a skill set by the way.
00:09:26.408 --> 00:09:34.999
Once you develop a familiarity with how decision making structures are organized in different types of environments.
00:09:35.269 --> 00:09:45.649
Once you get a feel for that, it starts to get a lot faster and a lot easier to do the detective work of, okay, well it's gonna be likely one of these kinds of decision makers, or one of those kinds.
00:09:45.889 --> 00:09:48.859
Let me just even search on those titles and see what I come up with.
00:09:49.432 --> 00:10:00.894
As you begin to learn decision making structures, you begin to see patterns and then that helps you look for similar patterns in places where you don't yet have working knowledge.
00:10:01.702 --> 00:10:04.552
You have lots of options for how you do that research.
00:10:04.812 --> 00:10:09.775
I did at least one episode on this, and I'll go back and link that up in the show notes.
00:10:10.208 --> 00:10:16.119
I did a whole episode on just how you map out decision making structures for yourself so that you know what's going on.
00:10:16.772 --> 00:10:17.881
But you gotta start there.
00:10:18.000 --> 00:10:19.919
You gotta know who the decision makers are.
00:10:20.100 --> 00:10:25.110
And then the next layer of research is to learn as much about them as possible.
00:10:25.600 --> 00:10:27.250
You wanna know everything you can.
00:10:27.850 --> 00:10:36.924
You wanna know about their background, about their family, about their pets, where they went to school, what they majored in, what other jobs they've had.
00:10:37.404 --> 00:10:39.684
A lot of this is available on social media.
00:10:40.139 --> 00:10:45.298
You can learn a ton about people on LinkedIn, especially people in decision making roles.
00:10:45.897 --> 00:10:49.475
Start with a Google search, or your search engine of choice.
00:10:50.054 --> 00:11:00.168
Also, remember that YouTube is a search engine, and these days, particularly public facing decision makers, a lot of them will be found on YouTube in one form or another.
00:11:00.541 --> 00:11:06.474
In podcast interviews or even interview clips from traditional media will sometimes pop up on YouTube.
00:11:06.474 --> 00:11:12.024
So always search YouTube in addition to whatever your favorite regular search engine is.
00:11:12.495 --> 00:11:18.193
Always check LinkedIn and check the other socials as well, but those are gonna be your best prospects.
00:11:18.553 --> 00:11:21.182
And then ask around, work your connections.
00:11:21.677 --> 00:11:35.836
I promise you that you know somebody who knows something about that decision maker who has a connection to them, who can maybe introduce you, who can tell you what really goes on behind the scenes over there, what their preferred ways of engaging are.
00:11:35.836 --> 00:11:37.756
There's people who can tell you that stuff.
00:11:38.232 --> 00:11:40.692
So do the research, ask the questions.
00:11:41.130 --> 00:11:52.035
Think about this like a job interview, If you've been in the job market for more than a minute, you would never just show up for the interview without having done any research on the company or the interviewer.
00:11:52.245 --> 00:11:53.265
You just wouldn't do that.
00:11:53.355 --> 00:11:54.196
That'd be crazy.
00:11:55.083 --> 00:12:01.384
You wanna go in as prepared as possible, but it's not like you're carrying the person's dossier in there with you.
00:12:01.384 --> 00:12:04.894
You're just coming in with a feeling of familiarity.
00:12:05.214 --> 00:12:09.143
You wanna feel like, gosh, I feel like I already know this person.
00:12:09.600 --> 00:12:10.889
I know where they went to school.
00:12:10.889 --> 00:12:15.820
I know that they're in this high power job now, but gosh, 20 years ago they were working in nonprofits.
00:12:15.820 --> 00:12:16.629
That's really cool.
00:12:16.809 --> 00:12:18.549
That's something I can talk to them about.
00:12:19.341 --> 00:12:30.740
The more background information you have, the more you can just allow that to percolate in your brain and rise naturally to the surface at an appropriate moment in the conversation.
00:12:31.504 --> 00:12:33.904
Now I have seen people mess this up.
00:12:33.904 --> 00:12:40.888
I've seen people go in loaded to the gills with background information they got and they're just burning for the chance to use it.
00:12:41.128 --> 00:12:45.508
And they'll say something like, well, and I know you went to school at Blabbity blah.
00:12:45.508 --> 00:12:47.248
And now they feel like they're being stalked.
00:12:47.869 --> 00:12:51.134
And that pushes people away, needless to say.
00:12:51.583 --> 00:12:58.985
So you wanna just have it in your head and be prepared to allow it to come up naturally in the conversation.
00:13:00.139 --> 00:13:06.469
But the more you have to work with, the more you know and understand about what their journey has been so far.
00:13:06.926 --> 00:13:13.653
'Cause most of us have taken very circuitous paths to the place we are now, and that journey continues.
00:13:13.984 --> 00:13:16.984
10 years from now, we'll probably be in a different spot.
00:13:17.402 --> 00:13:30.493
It's a winding, meandering journey, and it's more typical than not that people who are in a position of decision making authority, they've meandered quite a bit on their way to that place.
00:13:31.009 --> 00:13:41.649
And they may have a lot of really interesting background that makes them a kind of fascinating person, but also informs who they are and how they look at the world.
00:13:42.340 --> 00:13:57.226
So if you haven't bothered to do even that basic research, you've deprived yourself of insight and perspective on how they might very well be thinking about the issue that you've brought to them and the problem that you solve.
00:13:57.697 --> 00:14:08.816
So the more we can understand about what informs their thinking, about what their journey has looked like up to this point, the better questions we can ask once we're in the room with them.
00:14:09.543 --> 00:14:15.243
Because then instead of saying, well, you know, I really just wanna know how the decision making works here.
00:14:15.890 --> 00:14:17.541
That's not just what you want to know.
00:14:17.600 --> 00:14:26.177
That may have been the most frustrating thing up to this point, but even if you wanted more clarity about that, there's different ways to ask.
00:14:26.875 --> 00:14:31.739
A really basic question would be well, can you just tell me how the decision making works here?
00:14:32.302 --> 00:14:32.631
Okay.
00:14:32.902 --> 00:14:35.302
That's a request for facts.
00:14:35.759 --> 00:14:42.750
Requests for facts are the lowest value question you can ask because almost always you can research that answer somewhere else.
00:14:43.277 --> 00:14:47.884
Requests for perspective and insight are a much higher value question.
00:14:48.360 --> 00:14:52.904
So instead of saying, tell me how the decision making structure works here.
00:14:53.235 --> 00:14:55.816
You might say, you know, it's interesting.
00:14:56.017 --> 00:15:01.267
different pieces of responsibility for this issue that we see as unified.
00:15:01.529 --> 00:15:11.019
We see this as a single problem, but I notice that in this agency piece A is assigned over here and piece B is assigned over there.
00:15:11.302 --> 00:15:13.312
And I'm wondering a couple of things.
00:15:13.312 --> 00:15:24.234
I'm wondering how that works for you all, and I would love some of your insight as to how you all think about the problem and what brought you to divide the responsibilities that way.
00:15:24.881 --> 00:15:40.735
And beyond that, I'm interested in your advice higher value question your advice on how we might navigate that bifurcated system when we operate with a view of this as a single problem.
00:15:41.307 --> 00:15:42.807
And then sit back and listen.
00:15:43.136 --> 00:15:46.677
Because what's gonna happen first is that's a high level question.
00:15:46.826 --> 00:15:48.386
That requires thinking.
00:15:48.854 --> 00:15:52.244
And that tells them a whole bunch of things right away.
00:15:52.394 --> 00:15:54.464
First of all, it tells'em you did your homework.
00:15:54.583 --> 00:15:58.004
It tells them you understand something about how their agency works.
00:15:58.063 --> 00:16:04.693
It tells them that you are genuinely trying to understand and figure out a way to work more effectively with them.
00:16:05.235 --> 00:16:09.556
And you've asked a question that they actually have to think about before they can answer it.
00:16:10.186 --> 00:16:19.336
All of that engages their brain, it engages their emotions, it pulls them in, it draws them into the conversation and has them speaking with you as a peer.
00:16:19.855 --> 00:16:24.073
Massive difference than if you go in and ask for factual information.
00:16:24.722 --> 00:16:32.823
I try not to say never, but very rarely should there be the case where you ask a factual question of a decision maker.
00:16:32.913 --> 00:16:33.724
Just don't do it.
00:16:34.293 --> 00:16:47.158
Now, you could ask for their advice about, for example, if there's a choice between decision maker A and decision maker B, and you've gotten an indication that the person you're talking with is supportive of you, then you can say.
00:16:47.609 --> 00:16:53.278
So we also know that we need to engage at least one of decision maker A or B.
00:16:53.519 --> 00:16:55.349
Do you have thoughts on that?
00:16:55.528 --> 00:16:56.938
Do you have any advice?
00:16:57.379 --> 00:16:59.448
And then just sit back and hear what they have to say.
00:16:59.448 --> 00:17:08.959
And then you can ask follow up questions, building on what they've shared with you, to try to probe a little deeper to ask an even more complex or higher level question.
00:17:09.606 --> 00:17:12.969
And basically, I define higher level two ways.
00:17:13.148 --> 00:17:16.449
Higher level is it engages their brain at a higher level.
00:17:16.509 --> 00:17:18.459
They have to think about the answer.
00:17:18.608 --> 00:17:21.324
They have to actually noodle on it for a minute.
00:17:21.785 --> 00:17:23.015
They can't just spit it out.
00:17:23.347 --> 00:17:24.278
Cause it's not a fact.
00:17:24.357 --> 00:17:25.198
It's an assessment.
00:17:25.198 --> 00:17:26.428
It's an analysis.
00:17:26.729 --> 00:17:27.778
It's calling for insight.
00:17:27.778 --> 00:17:28.979
It's calling for perspective.
00:17:29.685 --> 00:17:34.057
Asking for advice is great because it does the additional thing of stroking their ego.
00:17:34.446 --> 00:17:39.217
Everybody loves to be asked for advice, so you could never go wrong asking for advice.
00:17:39.727 --> 00:17:45.156
But again, try to make that request for advice a high level question.
00:17:45.663 --> 00:17:55.907
Ask for advice about something that's a really good and interesting strategic question, not just should I talk to person A or person B first?
00:17:56.208 --> 00:18:07.888
I mean, that's not terrible, but better would be, now that you understand a little bit about how we see the problem, how would you approach decision makers A and B?
00:18:08.250 --> 00:18:11.824
Do you have strategic advice for me about how I might want to tackle that?
00:18:12.448 --> 00:18:13.678
That's a better question.
00:18:14.132 --> 00:18:16.291
Because again, it's asking them to really think.
00:18:16.342 --> 00:18:20.364
You've asked them for strategy, not just a yes/ no, A/B question.
00:18:20.972 --> 00:18:27.976
Yes/ no, true/ false, A/B are lower level strategic questions than, how would you approach this?
00:18:27.976 --> 00:18:30.496
What would be your strategic thinking behind it?
00:18:30.866 --> 00:18:34.166
That's asking for much higher level analysis and brain engagement.
00:18:34.406 --> 00:18:40.767
And you always want the highest level of brain engagement possible because that's what pulls them in.
00:18:41.366 --> 00:18:43.586
That's a conversation they'll remember.
00:18:44.136 --> 00:18:50.942
They might remember somebody who asked them for a name or for a factual answer, but they might not remember it kindly.
00:18:51.440 --> 00:18:58.539
Or more likely it'll just be in one ear and out the other, and they won't even remember that they talked with you because nothing interesting was said.
00:18:59.045 --> 00:19:02.694
You were there, you were talking, but their brain didn't engage.
00:19:02.694 --> 00:19:05.450
And if their brain didn't engage, they're not really gonna remember the conversation.
00:19:06.348 --> 00:19:07.878
You gotta engage'em some kind of way.
00:19:08.352 --> 00:19:15.511
And the best way when you're in advocacy mode, you wanna engage their emotions for sure, but you also wanna engage their intellect.
00:19:15.830 --> 00:19:24.256
And questions are gold for doing that as long as you're asking the highest level question you can possibly achieve in that setting.
00:19:24.828 --> 00:19:26.598
So hopefully that difference is clear.
00:19:27.138 --> 00:19:30.941
And you can see why one is going to engage them much more.
00:19:31.560 --> 00:19:36.348
The other thing is, quite honestly, it's a lot more interesting and fun for you too, right?
00:19:36.348 --> 00:19:41.898
Because once they lean in and engage, then you're having a two-way conversation and all kinds of stuff is gonna come up.
00:19:42.442 --> 00:19:47.157
Then the trick is you also gotta be listening with two different ears.
00:19:47.534 --> 00:19:49.213
I know you got two, so you can do this.
00:19:49.624 --> 00:19:51.753
You're listening for two separate things.
00:19:52.084 --> 00:19:59.983
Whenever you've asked a question or just in general when you're in conversation, but particularly when they're fully engaged, you're listening for two things.
00:20:00.013 --> 00:20:04.674
One, you're listening for, is their understanding increasing?
00:20:05.032 --> 00:20:08.272
Is their affinity toward my position increasing?
00:20:08.662 --> 00:20:18.458
Are they moving toward where I need them to be in their thinking, in their beliefs, in their attitudes, to make them closer to a yes?
00:20:18.667 --> 00:20:20.198
Or are they moving away?
00:20:20.898 --> 00:20:28.820
And then the other thing you're listening for is stuff you can use as your next follow-up comment or question.
00:20:29.470 --> 00:20:31.390
So that's a lot.
00:20:31.849 --> 00:20:37.251
The other thing I advise is that, when you can, tag team your meetings with decision makers.
00:20:37.693 --> 00:20:42.644
Even when you have been doing this for decades as I have.
00:20:43.125 --> 00:20:47.625
I still most of the time would rather have a second person in the room with me.
00:20:48.429 --> 00:20:56.923
I like to tag team, but when I tag team, I always have a brief pre-meeting where we clarify that we both know what it is we're after.
00:20:57.478 --> 00:21:02.278
What is our desired result long term, and what is our desired result for this meeting, for this encounter.
00:21:02.855 --> 00:21:06.246
And then if we're dividing up roles in any way, then we do that.
00:21:06.659 --> 00:21:08.801
You cover this angle, I'll cover that angle.
00:21:09.565 --> 00:21:15.243
But then it's also understood that each of our job is to keep track of what's going on.
00:21:15.243 --> 00:21:17.463
And if the other one flakes for a second.
00:21:17.821 --> 00:21:21.872
And you know what should come next and they're not doing it, you step in.
00:21:22.286 --> 00:21:25.736
Cause if they're not doing it, it means that they flaked for a second.
00:21:26.215 --> 00:21:30.905
They went down a rabbit hole in their mind, or their brain just froze up for a second.
00:21:30.905 --> 00:21:31.715
It happens.
00:21:31.895 --> 00:21:36.726
Happens all the time, especially if you're doing a lot of these meetings in short succession.
00:21:37.270 --> 00:21:40.810
Sometimes your brain just goes, eh, and doesn't work for a second.
00:21:41.171 --> 00:21:50.711
So when that happens and there's somebody else there, they can perceive that and just dive right in and keep the conversation going while you sit over there and get your wits back about you.
00:21:50.711 --> 00:21:55.952
And then you're ready to jump in as needed when it's time for you to return the favor.
00:21:56.843 --> 00:22:07.930
It doesn't matter whether it's subject matter expertise or whether it's the advocacy subject at hand, or whether it's any other topic that has come up that you've found a way to engage and connect over.
00:22:08.500 --> 00:22:17.703
Always ask the highest level of question you can manage to ask, because the purpose of it is not principally to seek information.
00:22:18.213 --> 00:22:23.253
The purpose is principally to create engagement, to draw them in.
00:22:23.689 --> 00:22:31.219
To have them engaging with you enthusiastically, energetically, and with their full brain engaged.
00:22:31.578 --> 00:22:35.866
Once you get that, now you've got a relationship.
00:22:36.609 --> 00:22:43.423
I have been in first encounters with decision makers where I had done my research, done my homework.
00:22:43.932 --> 00:22:51.944
And I got in there and we were discussing subject matter, and I asked a question and they just took off running with it.
00:22:52.575 --> 00:22:57.603
And it was clear that that was a passion subject for them and it was for me too.
00:22:57.692 --> 00:23:02.820
So we just took off and nerded out over that piece of it.
00:23:03.358 --> 00:23:07.128
That piece of it was not what I had come there to lobby them about.
00:23:07.640 --> 00:23:10.430
In that moment that wasn't what was important.
00:23:10.670 --> 00:23:13.460
This was my first meeting with this decision maker.
00:23:14.150 --> 00:23:19.130
I had no expectations that I was gonna get terribly far in that conversation.
00:23:19.220 --> 00:23:21.049
This was beginning to build a relationship.
00:23:21.470 --> 00:23:29.208
But all of a sudden, here we are nerding out together on a piece that's related, but it's not what I came there to lobby for.
00:23:30.153 --> 00:23:31.053
I went with it.
00:23:31.353 --> 00:23:39.048
We talked for 20 minutes about that piece, and in that process we got to know each other.
00:23:39.147 --> 00:23:52.480
We developed great mutual respect based on the fact that obviously each of us had a lot of knowledge and expertise in that arena, that we were both really interested and passionate about it and could talk intelligently about it.
00:23:53.036 --> 00:23:56.117
That we both cared about a same thing in the world.
00:23:56.676 --> 00:23:58.656
That's the basis for relationship.
00:23:59.141 --> 00:24:06.131
They remembered that conversation and the next time I came to meet with them, they greeted me with open arms.
00:24:06.730 --> 00:24:18.332
And I was able to get a lot done with them because I had gone deep with them on something they cared about, and asked really good questions and contributed my own ideas.
00:24:19.122 --> 00:24:28.972
The only thing that's more exciting than them going deep when you ask them a question, is them turning around and asking you one, too, that's equally high level.
00:24:29.490 --> 00:24:31.049
And then you're off to the races.
00:24:31.569 --> 00:24:34.779
When that happens, you're creating relationship gold.
00:24:35.338 --> 00:24:49.431
You're creating respect, you're creating a reputation as someone who not only has subject matter expertise, but also is a thinking person who can have that kind of higher level intellectual conversation.
00:24:49.872 --> 00:24:51.971
That is huge.
00:24:52.480 --> 00:24:53.740
It will open doors for you.
00:24:54.155 --> 00:25:01.115
They will remember that experience fondly and they will be interested in having more of that kind of experience.
00:25:01.355 --> 00:25:07.955
And they start to figure that anytime you walk through the door, this is gonna be interesting, this is gonna be fun.
00:25:08.135 --> 00:25:09.965
We're gonna talk about cool stuff.
00:25:10.376 --> 00:25:16.586
And I'm not just gonna have somebody yammering at me about, well, I'm come here to talk to you about this and this is blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
00:25:16.586 --> 00:25:17.787
Talking, talking, talking.
00:25:18.297 --> 00:25:19.797
No, it's engagement.
00:25:20.244 --> 00:25:21.835
It's two-way engagement.
00:25:22.585 --> 00:25:26.699
Questions are the key to two-way engagement.
00:25:27.159 --> 00:25:34.723
And the sky's the limit, as long as you learn to ask the highest level question you can come up with in any given setting.
00:25:35.295 --> 00:25:42.537
And avoid at all costs, asking questions that are simply a request for factual information.
00:25:43.076 --> 00:25:48.596
Find that out on your own or ask someone who is not in a decision making role.
00:25:48.896 --> 00:25:51.777
It's not saying you can't ask a person to find that out.
00:25:52.189 --> 00:25:54.528
I'm not saying you can only search this online.
00:25:55.000 --> 00:26:07.028
Only to say don't waste a decision maker's time asking them a question that you could have asked someone, quite honestly, lower in the pecking order, who's not a decision maker, but who knows the system.
00:26:07.483 --> 00:26:12.013
There's plenty of people working wherever that decision maker is who can answer your question.
00:26:12.349 --> 00:26:14.180
Who's not as hard to get in a room with.
00:26:14.817 --> 00:26:16.708
I wanna make sure you know, you can ask people.
00:26:16.708 --> 00:26:20.290
Just don't waste a decision maker's time asking for facts.
00:26:20.840 --> 00:26:23.961
You can ask for clarification, but not just for straight facts.
00:26:24.766 --> 00:26:34.645
And so if they've said something in one part of the conversation, and then they say something that is somewhat contradictory to that later in the conversation, it is a hundred percent okay to say.
00:26:35.221 --> 00:26:36.421
Can we just pause for a second?
00:26:36.471 --> 00:26:40.250
It would be great if you could help me put this together.
00:26:40.701 --> 00:26:52.548
So if I heard you right, I think in the beginning you said A, and then just now it felt like you kind of said the opposite of A, so I think there must be something I'm missing.
00:26:52.548 --> 00:26:54.472
Can you kind of knit that together for me?
00:26:55.107 --> 00:26:59.397
That's a higher level question than saying, well, is it A or is it the opposite of A?
00:26:59.856 --> 00:27:00.787
You see the difference?
00:27:01.352 --> 00:27:03.481
Also, it's not an open challenge.
00:27:03.662 --> 00:27:05.912
It's not saying, Hey, I just caught you in a contradiction.
00:27:06.061 --> 00:27:07.105
Now defend yourself.
00:27:07.472 --> 00:27:18.903
It's like, it felt contradictory to me, but that says to me I probably am missing a piece of perspective here that I would really appreciate having,'cause it would help me see this problem better, more completely.
00:27:19.430 --> 00:27:25.339
And if in fact they were just shooting their mouth off and they did in fact contradict themselves, now they know that you noticed.
00:27:25.811 --> 00:27:29.221
And they will either correct themselves or do something.
00:27:29.727 --> 00:27:34.531
But again, it's a higher level question than just saying, well, is it A, or is it the opposite of A, which is it?
00:27:35.488 --> 00:27:36.028
So.
00:27:36.290 --> 00:27:40.344
Ask your research questions before you get in the meeting.
00:27:40.777 --> 00:27:41.946
Do the research.
00:27:41.946 --> 00:27:48.897
Query wherever, query online, query in archives, query other humans who can tell you this.
00:27:49.393 --> 00:27:57.363
There are lots of people in your world, who have connections to or have knowledge of the decision maker you're trying to engage.
00:27:57.722 --> 00:28:02.345
So liberally employ your contacts to help you gather insight about this person.
00:28:02.615 --> 00:28:03.724
Do all of that.
00:28:04.364 --> 00:28:16.766
And then what I think is really valuable is before you go into the meeting, bullet out all the things you feel like you need to know in order to have a clear understanding of what the heck is really going on.
00:28:17.387 --> 00:28:32.471
Cause a lot of times when we're trying to break into a decision making system and we're not fully in there yet, and don't have clarity about all the pieces of it or how it works, it can feel very confusing and opaque and frustrating.
00:28:33.162 --> 00:28:41.863
So it's good to kind of bullet out, well, if I only knew this, this, this, and this, then I would have a much better understanding of this.
00:28:42.303 --> 00:28:50.849
First of all, simply identifying those questions is now an opportunity for you to take one more run at your preparatory research.
00:28:51.478 --> 00:29:07.105
And I will say that with the current state of AI, it's getting a lot more productive to ask much more complicated, complete questions of even a basic Google search or whatever your favorite search engine is.
00:29:07.765 --> 00:29:15.684
Because the learning models are getting so sophisticated, it can now take a very complicated request and give you a complex answer.
00:29:16.285 --> 00:29:21.085
And what that'll do is very likely provoke more questions.
00:29:21.673 --> 00:29:28.750
The one caveat is never take an AI assembly of information at face value.
00:29:29.200 --> 00:29:31.569
Always confirm it some other way.
00:29:31.599 --> 00:29:36.175
Confirm it from an original source because it makes mistakes still a lot.
00:29:37.036 --> 00:29:37.875
Just confirm it.
00:29:38.506 --> 00:29:45.556
Because you don't want to go in and start saying, well, I know that blah, blah, blah is true, and the decision maker's like, where did you get that idea?
00:29:46.246 --> 00:29:48.135
That's not how it works.
00:29:48.375 --> 00:29:49.695
You don't want that reaction.
00:29:50.385 --> 00:29:55.614
So once you've done that and you've answered as much as you can in preparation.
00:29:56.171 --> 00:30:15.586
If you're not yet comfortable generating higher level questions on the fly, write out a couple of ones that can kind of be your backup higher level questions that ask for analysis, insight, perspective, advice on strategy.
00:30:16.061 --> 00:30:20.682
Any one of those kinds of questions is much higher level than a request for information.
00:30:21.220 --> 00:30:23.710
And you don't have to ask a lot, don't badger them.
00:30:24.271 --> 00:30:29.489
But have a few that are teed up that if they come up and it's appropriate.
00:30:29.548 --> 00:30:42.403
Some of them they may answer on their own without you ever having to ask, but you'll know when is the right time in the conversation to insert one of your higher level questions, if you're feeling like you haven't had a chance to go high level in a question yet.
00:30:42.973 --> 00:30:52.814
That's always a good trick to have up your sleeve until you get a lot of practice at this, and you just start to know automatically based on the flow of the conversation.
00:30:52.814 --> 00:30:54.854
Well, what's the next high level question I should be asking?
00:30:55.334 --> 00:30:57.973
Because when you get your skill level high enough, that's what'll happen.
00:30:58.523 --> 00:31:10.608
I very rarely create a pre-written set of questions unless it's a very technical subject area where I'm not as familiar and I wanna make sure I have my framing right.
00:31:11.298 --> 00:31:15.746
But other than that, I've been doing this so long that it comes fairly easily.
00:31:16.226 --> 00:31:19.165
And with practice it will come easily for you as well.
00:31:19.932 --> 00:31:28.861
That is my number one secret for you for getting massively better results out of every single encounter with a decision maker.
00:31:29.414 --> 00:31:32.363
Is ask smarter questions.
00:31:32.925 --> 00:31:36.195
And then build on them in the course of the conversation.
00:31:36.821 --> 00:31:38.231
Always do your homework.
00:31:38.518 --> 00:31:42.688
Always research anything that can be answered by another source.
00:31:42.807 --> 00:31:51.718
Get that done, get that answered before you go into that encounter so that you can ask the smarter question and come out ahead with some real engagement and real progress.
00:31:52.377 --> 00:31:57.587
Thanks for listening, and I'll see you in the next episode right here on the Nonprofit Power Podcast.
