Leadership and "Communicationship"

Only the great leader can establish the great company. The reason is that the leader chooses co-workers to make the business together. Also, the great abilities of the leader can successfully manage the company, because the best achievement of a business eventually relies on the leadership and his / her judgement. In addition, I would like to say that a "communicationship" is so important that the organization trains the great employees.

The "communicationship" is not a formal word in a dictionary, but I believe that there is a difference between communication and "communicationship". We can guess the "communicationship" as an ability to use the communication skills effectively. As we know, there is no doubt that a communication skill is so important for a leader. However, how to communicate with co-workers, an employer, or employees is more essential as much as the leadership, in that contemporaries in an organization have numerous diversities individually.

Therefore, leaders have to learn the "communicationship" with others. A leader should improve not only the knowledge about communication method and its importance, but also the spontaneous attitude toward the communication. Some employees dislike to talk about their problems or their thought to their boss, or others want to share their opinion or feelings. The "communicationship" could be called an ability to lead employees at a table to talk, and to make them feel free to talk their opinion.

When I was a engineer at university broadcasting station, I sometimes had some hardship to work with female co-workers because we had different ideas and solutions with the same task. I did not have communication skill yet, I selected working alone. If I was a leader of the organization, I could not be the good leader or the great one. On the other side, my certain male senior researcher had the good ability of "communicationship" with female people. He always is talkative, understandable, and kind to them. He was not a chief manager of the project, but he assumed the role of the team leader.

Although many good leaders have a professional will and knowledge, the great leaders who have a level 5 leadership have a personal humility as well as the professionalism. However, I agree that it is not easy to improve skill like the "communicationship", in which it would be related to the personality. To be the great leader and to improve the "communicationship", we should learn the attitude as thinking first the organization and other employees, as acting in quiet, and as making a sustained-sound relationship with them.

Understanding the communication as not only the skill but also the ability or the strategy, the leader could be a complete one who has both leadership and the "communicationship".

A pleasure of a negotiation

Negotiations exist in industries, non-profit organizations, local markets, and even at home. There are not only many skills and principles of negotiation but also diverse levels and types. Although a negotiation is described as a battle which I absolutely have to win, I have sometimes experienced the pleasure in a negotiation. The reason why the negotiation can give me amusement is because a negotiation is often like an exciting game.

When I first learned what a negotiation is, I thought that the negotiation is very hard to win. The purpose of a negotiation is clearly to gain more advantage, to obtain benefits, not to lose my parts, or to solve my problems. It makes the negotiation harder that my counterpart is also having similar goals in the negotiation.  Absolutely, we should win the big and crucial negotiation like a peace negotiation, an union negotiation, or a hostage negotiation. However, we have continuously participated in trifling matters.

In South Korea, a trifling negotiation is far common in a traditional-local market.  For example, I say hello delightfully to a clerk or manager entering a grocery store. Determining the item I want to buy, I lead a person-to-person talk or wait for the proper time for the talk. In a dialogue, the clerk says “may I help you” and I answer that “how much is the onion” although the price is well-displayed. The clerk says “it is $5 for 10 onions”, and I reply with his brows knitted “oh, it is too expensive” even though I agree that the price is proper. Examining the onions carefully, I complain the a bit rotten part of an onion. Then, I say “let the price $4”, but the clerk refuses my opinion like “no, it is very cheap and good very fresh onions”. Second, I change the plan “then, give me 12 onions for $5”, but the clerk still says no. Finally, I lightly appear the motion leaving the store giving a pause, and I mutter to myself as “I would need it for tomorrow’s dinner”. The clerk or manager unavoidably suggests the alternative one of either $4.5 for 10 onions or 11 onions for $5 because the clerk has invested the time in the negotiation anyway.

TOS (The Other Side) strategy gives a good plan for the successful negotiation.  In this case, I and the clerk know the need with each other. The salesperson wants to take a talk with customer and sell items as a stated price, but he or she has limited time (the salesperson has to sell in the peak time as much as possible). On the other hand, I (customer) would like to buy a good item as a cheaper price. If I have enough time, I have an advantage on the table of a negotiation. Also, I can use the “bad guy/good guy” approach to win the negotiation in this case.

However, the important value of this conversation is the purpose of a pleasure of a negotiation as I mentioned first. Winning the small negotiation, I gain some achievement rather than get one more onion. Though the clerk loses one onion to me, but the store gives me the pleasure and secures a regular customer. This is a win-win result of this negotiation. Hospitality industry also meets numerous customers every day. The pleasure is very attractive motivation for the customers, so it is far meaningful that the marketer thinks the enjoyable event using small negotiations. I believe that a negotiation can be an enjoyable game if it is not related to my life.

How much does people have to be ethical?

     Is the ethics important? It is definitely true that ethical thought and behaviors are essential in our society. In the perspective as a researcher, I think that more meaningful and practical questions should be "How much does people have to be ethical?". The reason is because the performance of perfect ethics in human behavior is almost impossible. Then, the understandable answer may be "There is an appropriate standard". Although the explanation and grounds for the answer become more complex, I would like to think about problems and solutions related to the question about the ethics.

     I am going to assume that we always have both a core and a tool in human's behavior. A tool is used for fulfilling the core value. For example, the Internet and computers are good tool for our convenience or efficiency of working. It is clear that good things are better, but it is sometimes not real. In this case, I believe that I must importantly consider the ethics or justice of the ultimate core rater than the tools. Before the conclusion, I should think about the side effect or abuse which my explain has. For instance, I never have to steal the secret information of my company for my financial benefit. It cannot be allowed that I harm other's body or emotion for my pleasure. Nevertheless, if I face with a tremendous or urgent problem I should make a hard decision about whether I should choose the bad tool for the good result or not. Thus, I would like to add some premises. People should think carefully their behavior, its impacts, and the result confronting ethical dilemma. Plus, they have to agree with the responsibility by themselves. With the strong belief, my choice of the bad tool, not the core, could be justified.

     Second, the ethics consists of an absolute truth and a subjective one. An absolute truth is that the life is the inviolable object. On the other hand, there are many subjective ethics like the regulation of a company, a current general ideas, and an agreed process of work. When it comes to ethical dilemma, the arbitrary tools or methods can be more understandable only for the absolute truth. However, the bad selection in process for subjective ethics could not be allowed. Also, the quality of the sin in the latter case would be bigger.

     It is sorry that I could not explain the detail and exceptional situation. It is very hard question about whether the ethics is absolute or not. However, we should seriously think about this dilemma, because there are so many times of hard choices around us. Maybe, the best answer of the our question might still depend on the person's belief and a sense of responsibility.