Has anyone here read 'How to Win Friends and Influence People'?

[krazyjosh5]

I just finished reading the first chapter and was having trouble understanding it. I was hoping someone whos read it could help me to draw the correct conclusion.

It says not to criticise people, complain, etc...

How do you do this??

If I rely on someone to do a job, and they do a shitty job because they were just lazy, for example, Id get angry. Thats a pretty legitimate response, Id say, but I dont understand how in that situation, where someone's choice to be lazy, should not be criticised.

Or, if someone is just acting immature, wouldnt you want to call them out and repremand them for acting so.

I mean if someone makes a conscious decision to be lazy, how can you NOT criticise that? It would seem like not criticising them would be letting them get away with it, perpetuating the cycle of lazyness.

Also, how would one repremand people in those instances? It seems like Carnegie almost wants someone to be a 'crafty pushover'. Crafty in the sense that we should make some kind of witty comment about someone messing up and pushover in the sense that we should let/hope they take that witty comment into consideration and correct themselves.

 

[grimtrigger]

Carnegie is a pussy. Read Machiavelli.

 

[barman]

Carnegie is a pussy. Read Machiavelli.

 

[Miguel]

Carnegie is a pussy. Read Machiavelli.

Lol now that's a first post.

 

[engaged]

listen, doesn't he give some examples... like someone fucked up a plane or something, but he says i understand you're a fuck up, but I'm certain you won't do this again... something like that... of course dealing with indians its a little different, b/c they'll keep doing it over and over. it's b/c they're retarded... unfortunately there isn't a chapter about dealing with retards in business, sorry.

 

[wesley]

Read chapter 2.. Just read the entire book before asking questions (note i have never read this particular book)

 

[Cellphone]

I just finished reading the first chapter and was having trouble understanding it. I was hoping someone whos read it could help me to draw the correct conclusion.

It says not to criticise people, complain, etc...

How do you do this??

If I rely on someone to do a job, and they do a shitty job because they were just lazy, for example, Id get angry. Thats a pretty legitimate response, Id say, but I dont understand how in that situation, where someone's choice to be lazy, should not be criticised.

Or, if someone is just acting immature, wouldnt you want to call them out and repremand them for acting so.

I mean if someone makes a conscious decision to be lazy, how can you NOT criticise that? It would seem like not criticising them would be letting them get away with it, perpetuating the cycle of lazyness.

Also, how would one repremand people in those instances? It seems like Carnegie almost wants someone to be a 'crafty pushover'. Crafty in the sense that we should make some kind of witty comment about someone messing up and pushover in the sense that we should let/hope they take that witty comment into consideration and correct themselves.

You should read the entire book first instead of jumping to conclusions.

 

[Christopher]

I know some people that read Carnegie every day like the Bible - it is ridiculous!!!

by the the way, who can recommend me good NLP (neuro-linguistic psicology) books???

 

[ExEnigma]

Totally different topics. Carnegie is more about human relations and Machiavelli is about diplomacy. I've read most of Carnegie's books and also Machiavelli (The Prince and Art of War) and the basic philosophies of influencing humans never change.

The best book on the topic is Cialdini's Influence -- The Psychology of Persuasion. It's even far better than Dale's book.

Unless Machiavelli was a 6th Century Chinese Military Strategist I think you might be a little off.

-Ex

 

[DaveEMG]

LOL, you guys. Simmer down.

Anyways, to the OP, yes, you really do need to read the whole book to get what Carnegie talks about in Chapter 1. Basically, Carnegie follows old school presentation format: First let me tell you what I'm about to tell you, then I'll tell you what I said I was going to tell you, and then I'll tell you what I just told you.

Great book though, I read that when I first got in to sales, and it really made a difference, but it works in nearly any situation, from trying to score a date, land a job, get something in a negotiation, etc...

 

[krazyjosh5]

Great feedback from most.

Re: engaged, he did give that example where the mechanic fucked up and put the wrong fuel and the plane and damn near killed the pilot. But when the pilot landed, the mechanic was clearly distraught. The situation could have gone 2 ways because the mechanic already knew he fucked up. But lazy people are just fucking lazy and dont care, my question was what is the ideal way to deal with people who fuck up and dont care as opposed to those who do care?


Re: Lord Briar, Ive read this very carefully. I just cant see it, otherwise I wouldnt be here asking, now would I? I got the bottom line but I just dont see how it can apply as universally as he makes it out to be. I know this is a powerful book and Id like to get as much as I can out of it, hence, the thread since on not understanding part of the first chapter.


Thanks for the feedback!

 

[chatmasta]

There are two ways to point out a negative point -- direct and indirect. And you must always choose the indirect way.

Someone once said, I don't remember who, "you can only truly tell the quality of a person by how he/she interacts with her inferiors." If you ask me, you have to think about that with your employees. It's the same thing with teachers/students. Every teacher I've ever had that I considered good, and learned a lot from, treated us (the students) as his/her EQUALS.

Being condescending like "HOW COULD YOU FUCK THIS UP?!?!" is going to get you nowhere. You need to put yourself in the guy's shoes. Now obviously, if someone makes a mistake, let them know. But be careful how you do it - be indirect, almost. You could tell them about a time you made a similar mistake, too...but don't spend too much time dwelling on the mistake, either! Move forward.

I guess what it all comes down to is just putting yourself in the other person's shoes. "Treat others how you would like to be treated."

 

[Blastyourass]

Josh just read the fucken book like 5 times learn and apply.

 

[Cellphone]

Great feedback from most.

Re: engaged, he did give that example where the mechanic fucked up and put the wrong fuel and the plane and damn near killed the pilot. But when the pilot landed, the mechanic was clearly distraught. The situation could have gone 2 ways because the mechanic already knew he fucked up. But lazy people are just fucking lazy and dont care, my question was what is the ideal way to deal with people who fuck up and dont care as opposed to those who do care?


Re: Lord Briar, Ive read this very carefully. I just cant see it, otherwise I wouldnt be here asking, now would I? I got the bottom line but I just dont see how it can apply as universally as he makes it out to be. I know this is a powerful book and Id like to get as much as I can out of it, hence, the thread since on not understanding part of the first chapter.


Thanks for the feedback!

Don't be so defensive. We're trying to help. I don't see why a discussion about a book has to turn into a flame war.

 

[halfpc]

what is the ideal way to deal with people who fuck up and dont care as opposed to those who do care?

I read a book about how the CIA train their people and in the case above they'd just get rid of them immediately.
They will even get rid of people on a hint, no need to actually fuck up.

 

[BlondeTM]

I have no idea. I haven't read the book, and today is one of those days I want to write this as a landing page, which tells me that I just may need that book :

"Hey you, the one sucking up my bandwidth and perusing all the free content that took me forever to write or cost a lot to buy. Quit being a freeloader and fill out a lead, buy something, or just get your ass to a library and quit wasting my time and web space you loser. I want money, and if you're not going to give it to me go away."

However, I doubt it would be anything remotely like the book suggests.

 

[halfpc]

Then you should better spend time reading some HR books. Read the link in my signature for heavens sake before stereotyping.

he's probably talking about marrying your cousin, that's a popular practice known to produce retards

 

[neumann]

To the OP, Carnegie isn't saying BE A NICE GUY. He's saying that when you directly attack someone (e.g. doing something wrong), all it does is foster resentment. Instead, keep things in their perspective. They don't give a shit if their inability to sack groceries make YOU less money. But you can bet they'll sack groceries correctly if they're made aware THEIR benefits.

Think about the last time your boss bitched at you for doing something wrong. He probably degraded the respect you had for him, but especially, it's not like you now have a sudden urge to prove yourself to him. In fact, most people would do just the opposite when bitched at.

Not overtly bitching/complaining/critiquing at someone doesn't make you a nice guy. There are more effective ways to get what you want. How do you make someone do something? Give them a selfish reason to do it.

 

[krazyjosh5]

GREAT feedback. Thanks for the advice all!!

cellphone: i didnt mean to sound defensive, sorry if it came across that way

bya: got ya. im actually reading it as per YOUR recommendation when i first joined here.

neumann: great advice. thanks

 

[sam-i-am]

I suggest reading the book of 5 rings by Miyomoto Musashi. It's about how to kill people.