but in an ideal world, customers are
colleagues like cinderella are delicate
they are rouge in doses like snow white and
members partners are beautiful
asleep in the woods you read it wants
that in the working life of all
days we are dealing with one
tide of joker lex luthor and magneto is
the problem is that magneto is not too
a crazy cool guy like fassbender and li
we typically have four options
first option is to go to
let it go, but we can not
always let loose a customer
we need it at that moment because it pays
bill the house accounts or
hypothesis b and that we have a head that yes
it is unbearable as I keep but al
moment we do not have another solution
prosthesis 2 that we adapt ourselves undergo the
hypothesis 3 situation and that we force there
we impose if we can afford it
so hypothesis 4 is made that the most
Frequently we try to collaborate
now what is the problem however of the
collaboration in these cases is that you
do not cooperate with one you go with
agree do not cooperate with one with whom
you have a shared plan working with con
which you have a problem with is a solution
identified collaborate with one from a
side do not bear but on the other side the
the real problem is that you can not even
define what the problem is not
can not even define which one is
shared solution there is no agreement on
nothing
and then what is done in these cases is a
nice mess to find some ideas
of the proven ideas to recover me a
booklet of adam cohen he wrote
collaborating with enemy collaborate with
the enemy and this gentleman because he is
interesting because one who does
negotiated or better facilitated
collaboration in a lot of contexts
difficult
paginate when discussing the climate
change or there are initiatives to be defined
in contexts where I am war where i
actors do not get along with anyone
the other and everyone sees it differently
and so interesting to see what
developed over the last 20 25 years
career as models of reasoning
three interesting ideas that
personally brings me home that I hope
can come in handy to someone on
first you do not need to go
agree to work together that is a
counterintuitive concept because you
always try to create teams where
everyone agrees truth is that in
some contexts you can not go
agree
it’s the key to getting out of the stall and
abandon the illusion of control
put aside the classic question e
I personally always do maybe
some of you even as I do
convince him that no here is that question
there it can not be done because it is not there
control and for him a continuous passing
between conflict and connection to the gods
moments when certain to be more in
gage in connect to listen and the moments
this is more assertive what i
our ancestors said stick and carrot
petersen that management professor on
this makes a good example many the iter
they try to make their own grow
plants sitting on it and above
astounding of the fact that not
they grow better on the other hand
these cases which is to create the right one
context and then hope that the plants
they grow in other words requirement
number one to collaborate with gods
pain in the ass and become excellent
gardeners the second idea
interesting is that the path does not
it exists but is built while
let’s walk what is the mistake one makes
usually and that creates a strategy a
a priori to a plan in the head instead here it is
an emerging strategy in these cases
it is a continuous experimentation is more
an artistic process if we think about it
how to paint a picture while painting
what theoretically comes out comes out
you did not decide before that
it’s not easy for nothing for the reason for
which he says he must succeed in having this
defines negatives that enable one
sort of ability to be comfortable in the
uncomfortable third and last idea you have it
present the classic phrase that yes
say if you are not part of the solution 6
part of the problem here is instead
the exact opposite if you are not part of the
problem
you can not be part of the solution in
practice is the same difference that there is
if you’re driving, someone calls and says
where are you and you say are in traffic
or a different way of seeing the
situation is that you are the traffic
this for me is the cue more
interesting because it forces us to reason
in these situations that the author
defines a torn collaboration
in a way where we are not
we are not the protagonists in the center
of the attention we are part of the
problem and if we are part of the problem
but how can we change what
we can modify and any changes
what new 3-way options we are going to see
collaborate with the enemy or with i
pain in the ass
it’s not easy for nothing this is
truth, however, some ideas maybe there
it can help develop this
abilities like proverbs in these cases
the only way to discover a new land
is to be ready not to see
the land for a lot of time
colleagues like cinderella are delicate
they are rouge in doses like snow white and
members partners are beautiful
asleep in the woods you read it wants
that in the working life of all
days we are dealing with one
tide of joker lex luthor and magneto is
the problem is that magneto is not too
a crazy cool guy like fassbender and li
we typically have four options
first option is to go to
let it go, but we can not
always let loose a customer
we need it at that moment because it pays
bill the house accounts or
hypothesis b and that we have a head that yes
it is unbearable as I keep but al
moment we do not have another solution
prosthesis 2 that we adapt ourselves undergo the
hypothesis 3 situation and that we force there
we impose if we can afford it
so hypothesis 4 is made that the most
Frequently we try to collaborate
now what is the problem however of the
collaboration in these cases is that you
do not cooperate with one you go with
agree do not cooperate with one with whom
you have a shared plan working with con
which you have a problem with is a solution
identified collaborate with one from a
side do not bear but on the other side the
the real problem is that you can not even
define what the problem is not
can not even define which one is
shared solution there is no agreement on
nothing
and then what is done in these cases is a
nice mess to find some ideas
of the proven ideas to recover me a
booklet of adam cohen he wrote
collaborating with enemy collaborate with
the enemy and this gentleman because he is
interesting because one who does
negotiated or better facilitated
collaboration in a lot of contexts
difficult
paginate when discussing the climate
change or there are initiatives to be defined
in contexts where I am war where i
actors do not get along with anyone
the other and everyone sees it differently
and so interesting to see what
developed over the last 20 25 years
career as models of reasoning
three interesting ideas that
personally brings me home that I hope
can come in handy to someone on
first you do not need to go
agree to work together that is a
counterintuitive concept because you
always try to create teams where
everyone agrees truth is that in
some contexts you can not go
agree
it’s the key to getting out of the stall and
abandon the illusion of control
put aside the classic question e
I personally always do maybe
some of you even as I do
convince him that no here is that question
there it can not be done because it is not there
control and for him a continuous passing
between conflict and connection to the gods
moments when certain to be more in
gage in connect to listen and the moments
this is more assertive what i
our ancestors said stick and carrot
petersen that management professor on
this makes a good example many the iter
they try to make their own grow
plants sitting on it and above
astounding of the fact that not
they grow better on the other hand
these cases which is to create the right one
context and then hope that the plants
they grow in other words requirement
number one to collaborate with gods
pain in the ass and become excellent
gardeners the second idea
interesting is that the path does not
it exists but is built while
let’s walk what is the mistake one makes
usually and that creates a strategy a
a priori to a plan in the head instead here it is
an emerging strategy in these cases
it is a continuous experimentation is more
an artistic process if we think about it
how to paint a picture while painting
what theoretically comes out comes out
you did not decide before that
it’s not easy for nothing for the reason for
which he says he must succeed in having this
defines negatives that enable one
sort of ability to be comfortable in the
uncomfortable third and last idea you have it
present the classic phrase that yes
say if you are not part of the solution 6
part of the problem here is instead
the exact opposite if you are not part of the
problem
you can not be part of the solution in
practice is the same difference that there is
if you’re driving, someone calls and says
where are you and you say are in traffic
or a different way of seeing the
situation is that you are the traffic
this for me is the cue more
interesting because it forces us to reason
in these situations that the author
defines a torn collaboration
in a way where we are not
we are not the protagonists in the center
of the attention we are part of the
problem and if we are part of the problem
but how can we change what
we can modify and any changes
what new 3-way options we are going to see
collaborate with the enemy or with i
pain in the ass
it’s not easy for nothing this is
truth, however, some ideas maybe there
it can help develop this
abilities like proverbs in these cases
the only way to discover a new land
is to be ready not to see
the land for a lot of time
Please follow and like us: