CHAPTER 4

THE MOTIVATION BEHIND THE QUESTION

For many years, Maslow's hierarchy of needs theory was used to explain human motivation. In a 1943 paper entitled “A Theory of Human Motivation,” Abraham Maslow supposedly theorized that people were motivated first and foremost to fulfill their most basic physical needs for things like food and shelter. Once those needs were met, they would address safety and security. Only after that would they be in a position to work on the desire for social belonging and connection. Having fulfilled that, they could then move to addressing the need for self-esteem and, finally, self-actualization, that is, realizing their full potential as people.

We say “supposedly theorized” because a rigid structure of understanding human motivation is often attributed to Maslow, and it shouldn't be. He didn't exactly say what many people said he did. He talked about the role of values and individual appetites, among other factors, in establishing motivation as well as basic needs.

How does all this humanistic and behavioral theory aid your understanding of why people are asking you questions? Because it's easy to make assumptions about why people are motivated to ask you questions—and those suppositions can undermine you.

In a professional situation, one assumption in the back of your mind may be that the customer or job interviewer is asking you questions because he must. It's his job to get certain information from you. “Safety and security” then become prime motivators: If he doesn't ask you the right questions and get the desired answers, he might lose of the security of his job.

That may be the case in some situations, and when it is, there isn't any real interest in how you think, what stories you tell, or how personable you are. You might as well be an android like Data on Star Trek Next Generation—a silicon-based being programmed to provide answers. People who ask questions because they must want nothing more than a functional relationship.

We don't think this need for security is the most common motivator, however. Considering that values and personal interests play a role in our motivations—even according to Maslow—we think that most questions are an invitation to connect.

People who ask questions because they see them as a tool to get to know you, as well as discover information, want a substantial relationship, not merely a functional one.

SUBSTANTIAL RELATIONSHIPS

Giving Maslow credit for keen insights into human need, we might assert that people who want to have a substantial relationship with you are curious about how your values, skills, interests, and priorities match up with theirs and/or their company's. There is a desire to connect with you for a reason other than keeping a job, and that reason might have to do with social belonging, self-esteem, or even self-actualization.

Whether you are selling something, interviewing for a job, in a meeting, or providing information for an article or broadcast, you are seen as one or more of the following:

1. A source of facts that the person might be able to get from multiple sources but enjoys getting from you.
2. A person who has something in common with the questioner like a goal, an agenda, a mission, politics, religion, or a passion for sports cars.
3. A deep pool of wisdom or knowledge that might help him grow and improve.
4. An individual with huge potential who is worth nurturing and helping to discover opportunities.

There are other variations on these themes with the bottom line being that you are not ever perceived as an android like Data. You have far more to offer the questioner than facts. The general motivation is connection; the specific motivation relates to what kind of connection.

To answer that, we will return to the simplistic view of Maslow's hierarchy of needs and use it as a framework for discussion. As part of that discussion, we'll look at how each approach to connecting has potential pitfalls that can “steal” the conversation from you, and we offer tips to augment your control.

Belonging

Four types of questions could indicate that the person you are meeting with wants the relationship to include compatibility. There is a desire for a certain comfort level that allows for easy interaction. You will probably be asked:

NON-PERTINENT QUESTIONS (QUESTIONS THAT AREN'T RELATED TO THE BUSINESS AT HAND TEND TO PUT PEOPLE AT EASE)

Generally, chatting a little about topics of common interest support the kind of bonding that makes it more enjoyable to conduct business. “How was your flight?” is a common opener. Some people use chitchat to avoid talking business, though. If you're in a meeting trying to get something accomplished, use the skill you developed playing Six Degrees of Separation to move back to a work-related topic. For example, the person you are meeting with wants to talk about the heavy snowfall, but you're supposed to walk out of the meeting with a project budget. You might be able to make a leap like, “I hate running numbers about as much as I hate shoveling snow, but we have to do it!”

QUESTIONS THAT INVOLVE A QUID PRO QUO

Divulging a fact that seems personal is a method some people use get others to open up. They figure that giving you a “secret” means that you will respond in kind. “I get really frustrated with people who dash off an email without putting any thought into it. How about you?”

Handled well, the quid pro quo tactic supports a stronger connection. It's part of the standard repertoire of elicitation techniques that spies and interrogators use. (More on that later in this chapter.) We caution you here that, regardless of what is revealed to you, do not respond in kind if the information is sensitive or personal. Control slips away from you quickly if you reveal something that is private or confidential.

QUESTIONS ASKING FOR OPINION RATHER THAN FACT

People who are genuinely interested in your opinion respect your knowledge or expertise enough to appreciate it. They think they will benefit from hearing your views. Unless you know someone well, however, offering an extreme opinion makes you vulnerable in the conversation. It's one more way to lose control. Scholastic, which publishes books and educational materials, has a website with components for teachers, parents, students, and others involved in the educational system. They offer a list of “opinion clues”¹ that we think is a good list of words to avoid when offering your opinion in a professional setting:

• Always/Never
• Awful/Wonderful
• Beautiful/Ugly
• Better/Best/Worst
• Delicious/Disgusting
• Definitely
• Enjoyable/Horrible
• Favorite
• For/Against
• Good/Bad
• Inferior/Superior
• Oppose/Support
• Terrible
• Unfair
• Worthwhile

QUESTIONS ABOUT CHOICES

“Why” questions often engage people in explaining their decision process, and that provides insights into their priorities: “Why did you choose the University of Colorado for graduate school instead of staying at Stanford?”

You can reveal important information about your logic, primary concerns, and agenda with a thoughtful answer to these kinds of why questions. They can also take you down a rabbit hole, however. If the example question occurs during a meeting with a new client or a job interview, you want to stay away from sordid details like your fiancé at Stanford running off with your best friend.

Identify all these types of questions as signals that the questioner is exploring a connection with you. Be conscious of that as a goal of the meeting or interview without letting it overtake the encounter.

Esteem

Someone who sees your presence and contributions as ways to build self-esteem will question you about your accomplishments and your shortcomings. A manager who is considering hiring you wants assurances that you will make her look good. A customer evaluating your product hopes for guarantees that you, your company, and your product will perform better than the competition.

We know a consultant who was flown to Taipei, Taiwan, for a week-long series of interviews with board members of an international technology organization. Expecting mostly questions about how she planned to address their financial challenges, she was caught a bit off guard by the detailed questions related to her work with other clients. She eventually realized that the board members felt their personal reputations were linked to her turning around the organization's deficit situation—but they were not interested in speculation about how that would happen. They were all technical people with an orientation toward documented accomplishments rather than projection about how expertise could be applied to their problems. Had she realized that sooner in the process, she might have gotten the contract.

Sometimes without even realizing what's happening, people recognize the motivation of the questioner and try to exploit it. Exaggerating accomplishments, bypassing shortcomings, over-promising results—these are the traps people create for themselves. They raise suspicions, possibly having the opposite effect of what was intended.

Keep in mind that someone questioning you with a self-esteem motivation has to know she can trust you. Every overstatement potentially pushes you down a slippery slope of lies and out the door.

Self-Actualization

In Body Language Sales Secrets, Jim McCormick examines the needs and desires of people who are considering sizable donations to a charity. These are all related to self-actualization and include reasons that are practical, moral, social, spiritual, and historical.² You will hear questions related to legacy and affiliation, for example, when the person's motivation is self-actualization, whether the conversation is about a major contribution or a major purchase.

“Major” is not necessarily defined by a dollar amount, either. When Jim Pyle was selling plots in Forest Lawn Memorial Park, he engendered thoughts about legacy by focusing on what the decision to buy would signify to children and grandchildren. And because Forest Lawn is the final resting place for so many celebrities since the early 1900s, the sense of affiliation with them is a selling point. A question such as, “How close will I be to Walt Disney?” would be relevant to some buyers.

Maryann encountered a physician who hired a publicist to help him promote lifestyle changes. It wasn't that he wanted to be famous; he wanted his insights and discoveries to become part of popular conversation to help people improve their lives. In interviewing people for the publicity position, the doctor asked a lot of affiliation questions such as “Who inspires you?” and “Who has been your greatest teacher?” The doctor wanted to be sure that the person who would help him in his trek toward self-actualization was more likely to read Eckhart Tolle than Stephen King (although we know plenty of people who would put Stephen King on a pedestal).

If you are in the relatively unusual situation of fielding questions shaped by self-actualization concerns, one of the best things to do may be to ask questions in response. Get clarity on how the person defines legacy, for example, and what kind of people he wants to be associated with.

THEIR MOTIVATION VERSUS YOURS

When there is a mismatch between your motivation in an encounter and the other person's, you can very easily lose control of the conversation. You're basically working at odds.

In some cases, people interview for a job for which they are well suited, and they don't care what the environment is or who else works there. They want a functional relationship and nothing more. We heard from one senior manager in a small New York office that applicants are told people from the office get together occasionally at the bar across the street. “How do you feel about that?” she'd ask them. Usually, that was welcome news, but in one case, an applicant said, “I'm a single mom with three kids. This may not be the best fit for me.”

Probably just as often, the reverse is the case. Right out of college, Maryann interviewed for a job with a financial services company. That was probably one of her worst ideas given that the nature of the work was highly impersonal. The manager who interviewed her was looking for a functional relationship and realized after fifteen minutes of questioning that Maryann should walk out the door. The essence of his message was that she liked interacting with people too much to do a job like this. It was a valuable lesson, and to this day, she is grateful for verbally booting her out of the office.

And then there are the miscues that send both parties scrambling to figure out what the other means. We've seen this many times over through the years. Whether it's an office holiday party or a reception at a professional conference, questions that suggest a desire to connect tumble out of someone who's still savoring that last sip of Chardonnay. It's still a work environment, and you're better off following the same guidelines on answering as though you were in a meeting.

Countering Uncertainty

In any situation where the motivation is uncertain, your skill set needs to include maneuvers to determine what it is. Three elicitation techniques used by people in the intelligence community are quid pro quo, being deferential, and active listening. Elicitation is generally defined as psychological techniques to get people to talk to you about sensitive subjects.

As we previously noted, when you hear the questioner introduce quid pro quo, it's a sign that he wants to connect with you. You are being set up to exchange like-for-like information. You can initiate it as a way of exhibiting trust, and even a little vulnerability. The other person's response may give you a better sense of whether he is leaning toward a substantial relationship or a functional one. For example, the product you are discussing has a distinctive red color—part of its brand identity—but you might admit that the engineers who designed it had painted it black and no one paid attention to it. Instead of engaging in some give-and-take conversation, the customer moves on to how much it costs. You are going toward a functional relationship, not a substantial one.

Being deferential to the other person's expertise is an invitation to get her to talk—about herself. For example, halfway into your meeting, you hear a question that puts you on the spot and seems to bely your presumption that the person respects you and is motivated to bond professionally. She seems to challenge you with, “What kind of mistakes led to that project failure?”

“You may be in a much better position to assess that than I am,” you respond. “Your work on the Acme building is a case study in success, so I'm guessing you have a better grasp of what mistakes kill a project than I do!”

Active listening is a technique covered in Chapter 5 and described more fully in Chapter 6. For now, let's just say that most people love the sound of their own voice. If you ask a question and keep nodding and doing other gestures that display your interest in the response, you encourage the person to keep talking. Listen—endlessly—and make discoveries.

EXERCISE

When you are in an environment where you are certain that people want to connect with you—something low-key and social—pay attention to the kinds of questions people ask you. The black-and-white contrast to these kinds of questions are the ones from someone more interested in a functional relationship than a substantial one.