When you're forced to deal with a condescending co-worker, the first thing you need to do is understand why their comment bothered you so much. What about what this person said irritated you? You might even consider taking time to write it out. Try to recall exactly what this person said. You’ll probably find that it was a specific word or tone this person used, or the way it was delivered, that set you off. It’s important that you identify this because you need to be able to articulate it when you go talk to the person.

The Best Way To Deal With A Condescending Co-Worker

This is not the time to bury it, ignore it, or let it slide. The moment you allow condescending behaviour to happen, you are defining how you are to be treated. People treat us the way that we ALLOW them to treat us. If you don’t want to deal with a condescending co-worker, you have to nip this behaviour in the bud.So, understand exactly what about their comment bothered you. If you need to, talk it out with someone else before you bring it up to your co-worker. Then, confront your co-worker privately so they are aware of how you feel.

Confronting The Person And The Problem

When you have this conversation, your co-worker might act defensively. However, they will likely be more shocked and surprised. They might not have intended the comment to come out that way.If someone is being condescending, whether they realize it or not, it’s important to call them out on it. But make sure to do it in a calm and structured way. Even for those who dislike any sort of confrontation, remember: don't just brush it off! You'll be glad you said something when you did.

Handling The Bull By Its Horns

When you're forced to deal with a condescending co-worker, the first thing you need to do is understand why their comment bothered you so much. What about what this person said irritated you? You might even consider taking time to write it out. Try to recall exactly what this person said. You’ll pro...

career

Career

communication

Communication

teamwork

Teamwork

The sheer number of social media posts about the Will Smith-Chris Rock incident at the Oscars is proof that it’s hard to resist the attraction to drama—especially when it’s not happening to you. As companies start to return to the office and watercooler talk is easier to engage in, office drama might start to pick up, especially after going through the pandemic for the past two years.

The Lure Of Office Drama

We are social creatures who learn by comparing and contrasting ourselves with others. So when gossip and drama enter the scene and we are ‘invited’ to participate, our natural, biological inclination is to jump right into the toxicity because it affirms that we belong, and our perspective is valued.While not everyone is attracted to office drama, those who are may also find it to be a good method for battling under-stimulation or mundane daily surroundings at the office.

A Natural Inclination Towards Gossip and Drama

Many people in the workplace—at every level of an organization—have brains that crave novelty, and the juicy intrigue of an office spat can deliver on that need. However, as a bystander to the drama and not the subject of it, they may believe they are going to be viewed by the decision-makers as more stable, reliable employees, worthy of retention and better compensation when compared to the more conspicuous ‘troublemaker.'.

The Bystander

It may seem harmless on the surface, but office drama can have broader consequences. Drama can escalate to hurt people’s feelings and reputations, demotivate them, isolate them, and even take down a business.So while it might start as a healthy breather, it would be more healthy to laugh with your colleagues rather than at them. In the long run, you may be saving your own career.

The Impact Of Office Drama

Leaders who are caught up in drama or any conflicted situation have four choices:<ul><li>They can muster up the leadership courage to demand better behaviours from themselves and others.</li><li>They can learn to depersonalize the situation and live with the stress.</li><li>They can leave the organization, leave the team, and go somewhere else, which can depend on your involvement.</li><li>Become part of the problem, playing along with the games.</li></ul>

Caught Up In The Drama: The Choice For Leaders

Here’s why we crave workplace gossip—even when it’s best to avoid.


Understand yourself and those around you.

psychology

Psychology

corporateculture

Corporate Culture

This is why you always get sucked into office drama

Plain speakingHow to write wellBy Irina DumitrescuI have had many opportunities to ask myself this question lately. Over the past few months I’ve been taking a class on the basics of feature stories. Our teacher is a seasoned journalist who insists that we learn how to edit our own prose ruthlessly. (If he saw this paragraph, he would cut “seasoned” – a cliché – as well as all the words ending with -ly.)

Why is it so hard to write clearly? 

What strikes me as I watch him work is his low tolerance for jargon. I thought I knew what jargon was: words such as “discourse”, “deconstruct” and “problematize”. These are the cigarette-holders of diction: showy, stretched out, more noxious than they look. My teacher’s bar is much higher. If it’s long and Latinate, it’s got to go.

Tolerance for Jargon

I confess to having a soft spot for ten-dollar words. Anyway, it’s easier to avoid jargon than it is to pare down knotty turns of phrase. I once believed that burdening a sentence with adverbs and circumlocutions was a disease that only afflicted scholars. It turns out that many writers do it, whether or not they work in a university. It is as though we are dancing around – and away from – what we mean to say.

Dancing Around

One might assume that people write difficult prose because they don’t know any better. But it is not enough to learn the principles of clear writing. A writer can memorize Strunk and White’s The Elements of Style and still find herself using “the way in which” instead of “how”. It is not ignorance that makes writing convoluted. It is fear.

Not Ignorance but Fear

One fear is that by writing simply, we will come across as simple – with all that word’s disparaging associations with disability and low class. When a chorus of pundits insists that modern life is complex, simplicity starts to seem old-fashioned. Once we spoke of love; now we might talk about attachment and co-dependency. Fear has transformed into anxiety. The old words seem too plain to serve.

Fear Transformed Into Anxiety

This prejudice is wrong. One of the fascinating things I noticed when I was first learning to read medieval languages was that poets tended to repeat vocabulary. Instead of using varied terms for different aspects of an emotion or an idea, they used the same word over and over again. They did this because the words were often richer in meaning.

Medieval Languages

Take Old English “mod”, the root of our word “mood”. It was used for the mind, the emotions, the spirit, as well as for certain qualities to be found in a person, such as courage, pride or magnificence. Or consider Middle High German “minne”, which is often translated as “courtly love”. “Minne” could also mean friendship, parental love, commemoration and sex. The medieval poet repeated simple words in order to reveal their layered senses. Today’s translator must consider each word in context and decide on the best modern equivalent.

Words in Context

This can mean rendering one medieval word in five different ways on the same page. But I think there is another, deeper fear that keeps so many writers tied to their obscurities: the terror that someone might understand what they are trying to say. Many writers assume a defensive posture when they sit down to their computers. They are afraid of being taken to task for their beliefs, arguments or point of view. So they slip in “perhaps” and “it could be argued”, making their claims too slippery to pin down.

A Defensive Posture

The alternative to the fortress is, to my mind, the garden. “Garden” writing is inviting, colourful and open to crowds. It allows each reader to find their own way through a poem or an essay, crafting their own meaning as they go. Gardens are also vulnerable. They change with time. The guests might pluck the roses or stomp on the flowerbeds. Someone might be allergic to pollen. To write clear, welcoming language is to open yourself up to complaints.

"Garden Writing"

I think of this as “fortress” writing. It is impenetrable. No critic can storm it, but no reader can enjoy it either. Universities train their students to write like this: not to teach, persuade or delight, but to resist attack. The best argument is not necessarily the most innovative or profound, but the one with the fewest holes in it.

"Fortress Writing"

And yet there is nothing as powerful as plain language, as this well-known Middle English religious lyric shows:Nou goth sonne vnder wod,Me reweth, Marie, thi faire rode.Nou goth sonne vnder tre,Me reweth, Marie, thy sone and the.The first line describes the sun’s rays slipping behind the woods. But the poem’s early Christian audience would have known that “wod” and “tre” could also refer to the Cross. Perhaps we are not looking at a forest, but at the sun reddening behind Calvary, highlighting the crosses as it descends.

Plain Language

The speaker pities Mary’s beautiful blushing face, or “rode”, as well as the Rood, lovely in its promise of salvation despite being an instrument of torture. Above all, the repetition of “sonne” – a sun, a son and soon – would have recalled the sunrise, or resurrection, to come. This quatrain was not written to impress or deflect, but to invite its readers to meditate with language both humble and rich.Irina Dumitrescu teaches medieval literature at the University of Bonn

Meditate with Language

Why is it so hard to write clearly? I have had many opportunities to ask myself this question lately. Over the past few months I’ve been taking a class on

personaldevelopment

Personal Development

writing

Reading & Writing

problemsolving

Problem Solving

How to write well | Irina Dumitrescu

We blush when we’ve admitted the uncomfortable possibility of having offended, inconvenienced, or misled someone. This discomfort is a sign of our disdain for personal arrogance; we hold ourselves—sometimes seemingly against our will—to the standards of honesty & humility.

The Blush- When & Why 

We recognize our ability to annoy & harm others in the absence of self-awareness. The underlying questions behind a blush, such as “Does the person with whom I’m infatuated feel the same?” kindly consider the independence of others, & the profound reality of uncertainty.

The Good Of Blushing 

Perhaps the person who never blushes is worse-off: so certain of everything as to think and act arrogantly, with entitlement & a disregard for self-awareness— particularly of one’s own power to affect others through words and actions.

The Non-Blusher 

You shouldn’t feel so fearful & unforgiving of yourself that your every word & action is up to your own critical scrutiny. Self-awareness pairs well with confidence— sociability with humbleness, & kindness with self-respect.

Striking A Balance 

The uncomfortable blood pressure spike & reddening of the face is perhaps not such a misfortune, after all. 

Read our article - In Praise of Blushing. The School Of Life has a huge collection of interesting articles, read now.

loveandrelationships

Love & Relationships

In Praise of Blushing - The School Of Life

<ul><li class="ql-align-justify">People tend to care about something making sense more than they care about something being right.</li><li class="ql-align-justify">It’s why we’re bad at forecasting and easily persuaded and why the economy is driven by stories.</li><li class="ql-align-justify">It’s not your fault. The world is complicated and everyone’s trying to fit what’s going on into the context of their own life experiences.</li></ul>Two factors cause the gap between perception and reality.

Making Sense Is Better Persuasion Than Being Right

The most important events – things that are counterintuitive, disruptive, and swayed by emotion more than calculation – tend to share a few traits that make gathering a good sample of data hard:<ul><li>They’re rare.  </li><li>The data is hard to collect.</li><li>More data intuitively feels better.</li></ul>This is a big problem and there is no solution to it other than giving <a href="http://www.collaborativefund.com/blog/surprise/">yourself room for error</a> in not only in your actions but your beliefs.

Factor 1: The Most Important Events Are the Hardest to Sample

History makes clear that the winner isn’t the person who discovers an idea, but the one who sells it most persuasively.Stories are more powerful than statistics because the most believable thing in the world is whatever takes the least amount of effort to contextualize your own life experiences.People go astray when forgetting that storytelling is like exponential fuel, so a great idea told poorly can be a fraction as powerful as a mediocre idea told persuasively.

Factor 2: We Underestimate how Much More Powerful Stories Are than Statistics

People tend to care about something making sense more than they care about something being right. It’s why we’re bad at forecasting and easily persuaded and why the economy is driven by stories. It’s not your fault. The world is complicated and everyone’s trying to fit what’s going on into the context of their own life experiences. Two big things cause the gap between perception and reality. 1. The most important events are the hardest to sample, so extrapolating their lessons can be misleading. There have been two world wars in the last century. But no one would say, “the average world war lasts five years,” or “the average world war kills 60 million people.” No forecaster would say we’re overdue for a world war based on historic trends. A sample size of two can’t tell us what to expect next. The point may be obvious with world wars. But use a slightly more common case and people start drawing all kinds of false conclusions. Studying things with inadequate samples causes more delusion than intentional deceit. That’s because the ease of explaining things based on what’s readily in front of you meets the intellectual cover of using statistics. The most important events – things that are counterintuitive, disruptive, and swayed by emotion more than calculation – tend to share a few traits that make gathering a good sample of data hard: They’re rare. Ask an economist how many recessions they wish they had to study and they’ll say “ten thousand.” But there have only been 11 recessions since we started systematically collecting good data in the 1940s. That is nothing. If we had as much recession data as we wanted we’d likely realize that half of what we think we know about recessions is wrong. The data is hard to collect. Big surveys are expensive to produce. Gathering a classroom of grad students is cheap and easy. So which do you think happens more? And even when you survey people they often either don’t know the answer but give you one anyways (How much red meat did you eat last year?), or they know the answer but won’t tell the truth (Will you vote for this controversial politician?). This is partly why most studies can’t be replicated. More data intuitively feels better but things change over time, so more data can add in past trends that tell you nothing about what to expect in the future. If something is rare, the tendency is to go way back in history to gather as many examples as you can. But the further back you go, the more likely you are to study a world that operated in a different paradigm. We can study the financial crisis of 1873, but the modern banking system lives in a totally different universe than it did then. Daniel Kahneman is one of the best social scientists of our time. Yet he once admitted: Like most research psychologists, I had routinely chosen samples that were too small and had often obtained results that made no sense. I taught statistics and knew how to compute the sample size that would reduce the risk of failure to an acceptable level. But I had never chosen a sample size by computation. Like my colleagues, I had trusted tradition and my intuition in planning my experiments and had never thought seriously about the issue. That is terrifying. Two things happen when we don’t have good samples for important events. One is that we fool ourselves and are surprised when the world works differently than our data suggested it would. The second is that we can easily fool others, because if you look hard enough you can find a flawed set of data that shows whatever you want it to show. This is a big problem and there is no solution to it other than giving yourself room for error in not only in your actions but your beliefs. 2. We underestimate how much more powerful stories are than statistics. A friend once complained that everything Nassim Taleb has written is a rewording of a Philosophy 101. I don’t know if that’s true, but I’m not bothered if it is because Taleb has done a better job explaining concepts than any Philosophy 101 author before him. And history makes clear that the winner isn’t the person who discovers an idea, but the one who sells it most persuasively. Stories are more powerful than statistics because the most believable thing in the world is whatever takes the least amount of effort to contextualize your own life experiences. People go astray when forgetting that storytelling is like exponential fuel, so a great idea told poorly can be a fraction as powerful as an OK idea told persuasively. The CEO who understands everything about their field except the most important thing – rallying employees behind a mission and vision. The financial advisor who aced the CFA exam but can’t maintain clients’ faith during a downturn. The doctor who knows the cure but can’t get patients to stick to a plan. Even contrarians eventually need to be persuasive. James Grant said: “Successful investing is about having people agree with you … later.” A flaw that frustrates many people is not realizing that virtually every job is a sales job, especially as you move up the ladder: Most careers turn into sales jobs when you get senior enough.— Sam Altman (@sama) December 20, 2017 More on this topic: The Full Reset The Theory of Maybes It’s Hard to Predict How You’ll Respond to Risk

productivity

Productivity

philosophy

Philosophy

computerscience

Computer Science

Making Sense vs. Being Right

“To get to the next level of greatness depends on the quality of our culture, which depends on the quality of our relationships, which depends on the quality of our conversations. Everything happens through conversations!”

Trust is a key factor in helping people connect with each other through conversation. We often make snap decisions and assessments about the person we are talking with and this involves identifying whether we think we can trust them.This can happen within 0.07 seconds, and this decision can heavily influence the nature of the conversation. If we trust the person we feel safe and so able to share our views more candidly. Where distrust is involved, we can shut down and operate based on our assumptions.

The Assumptions We Make About Other People

<ul><li>Transactional: people are exchanging information, updates, and facts that help us confirm if we are on the same page. There is not a lot of trust and people are focused on what they need to get from each other to confirm and validate their own perspectives.</li><li>Positional: here individuals are advocating for what they want and are seeking to ascertain whether they can influence the other individual to share their perspective. </li><li>Transformational: individuals conversing at this level seek to share their views and learn more about the perspectives of the others they are talking to.</li></ul>

The Conversational Dashboard: 3 Levels of Conversation

"Conversations are ‘rituals’ we embed into our culture and our relationships, and which give us a way to successfully structure our engagements with others… each ritual has a place and each enhances or impedes communication and engagement… Conversational rituals are what we do when we talk."

<ul><li>Our conversations can be structured in ways that support the development of shared trust and enable success. These conversations are the ones in which individuals respect and care about the other person’s perspective; they lead to co-creating conversations where both people Individuals are creating a shared sense of reality rather than trying to persuade the other person to see and agree with their point of view.</li><li>Ineffective conversations occur when individuals try to get their message across and talk past the other person—resulting in shared monologues as opposed to dialogue. </li></ul>

Effective And Ineffective Conversations

They happen when we are seeing the situation from our own individual perspective rather than seeking to understand the other person’s point of view. For example:<ul><li>Assuming others see, feel and think about the situation exactly as we do; this prevents us from trying to understand it from their perspective.</li><li>Failing to realize that fear, trust, and distrust change how we see and interpret reality.</li><li>Being unable to see something from someone else’s point of view if we are fearful or upset about a situation.</li><li>Assuming we remember what others say, we actually remember what we think about what others say.</li></ul>

Conversational Blind Spots 

"Change brings with it uncertainty, and uncertainty triggers fear. As leaders learn to reduce fear and increase trust within their organizations, they lay the foundation for higher-level conversations, where opportunities for greater innovation, collaboration, and success are revealed."

When you trust people, you’re more likely to listen to them. When you don’t trust someone, your brain shuts down and it’s harder for you to pay attention. The amygdala (the emotional center of the brain) is activated when someone doesn’t have faith in another person; the prefrontal cortex (the rational part of the brain) is activated when one does have faith in another person.A healthy conversation involves a lack of harm and punishment because you trust each other enough to express different points of view on the subject matter at hand.

Trust and Distrust in Conversations

According to scientists, a person’s brain shuts down rational thinking when they’re faced with a perceived threat. This is called an “amygdala hijack.” When this happens, you should be aware that your brain has shut off rational thinking and try some alternative reactions. In order to become more stress-free, we must identify the things that cause us stress. We can learn how to interrupt our patterns of stress by becoming aware of them and shifting our mindset from distrust and fear toward trust.

Amygdala Hijack

Good conversation starters for any social situation

Conversation Starters

The key to success in life and business is to become a master at Conversational Intelligence. It's not about how smart you are, but how open you are to learn new and effective powerful conversational rituals that prime the brain for trust, partnership, and mutual success. Conversational Intelligence translates the wealth of new insights coming out of neuroscience from across the globe, and brings the science down to earth so people can understand and apply it in their everyday lives. Author Judith Glaser presents a framework for knowing what kind of conversations trigger the lower, more primitive brain; and what activates higher-level intelligences such as trust, integrity, empathy, and good judgment. Conversational Intelligence makes complex scientific material simple to understand and apply through a wealth of easy to use tools, examples, conversational rituals, and practices for all levels of an organization.

books

Books

leadershipandmanagement

Leadership & Management

Judith E. Glaser

Conversational Intelligence

Past research tells us a lot about how we respond to a stranger's unethical behavior, but very little about how we respond when the perpetrator is someone we care deeply about.When someone close to us behaves unethically, we face a conflict between upholding our moral values and maintaining our relationship.

Morals Or Relationships? The Conflict That Inspired The Study

When confronted with unethical actions, participants reacted more leniently to close others, reporting less anger and disgust toward them, rating them as less unethical, and reporting less of a desire to punish or criticize them compared to strangers. Interestingly, participants also reported only a minimal impact on their relationship with those close others.

We Bend Our Morals So As To Not Break Our Relationships

However, at the same time, participants also exhibited harsher responses towards themselves, such as greater embarrassment, shame, and guilt and sometimes even lower ratings of their own morality when close others compared to strangers transgressed.

But By Bending Our Morals We Make Ourselves Feel Bent

The most interesting finding of the study is the deep ambivalence we find when people respond to close others' unethical actions. There is a surprising irony in people's responses, that by protecting close others, the self seems to bear some of the burden of their misbehavior. We seem to maintain our relationships with unethical close others by reacting leniently, but our moral values still lead us to still feel embarrassed, ashamed, and guilty about their actions.

A Burden (We Feel) We Want To Share And Carry, But Really Can’t

People place great value on their close relationships. People are committed to their loved ones, have investments in their relationships, and rely on their close others to fulfill fundamental needs.However, people also care deeply about being moral. Most individuals internalize the desire to be a good person and avoid contact, let alone connection, to another unethical person.

Why Do We Become The Rope In This Tug-Of-War?

If our loved ones behave in a way that violates our moral values, what do we do? One option to maintain our moral values is to distance ourselves from close others who transgress by exiting the relationship, but given our reliance on those we care about, this is extremely costly. It is far less costly, and preferable, to avoid seeing a close other negatively even in the face of their bad behavior. Leniency allows us to maintain our relationships.

Why Are We Lenient To Those Close To Us?

When judging a close others' bad behavior, we tend to view the act itself as less unethical.For instance, people judge the unethical act of putting a bar bill on someone else's hotel tab as less unethical if it's committed by a romantic partner or friend compared to if it was committed by a stranger. By viewing the act itself as less bad, we're in turn able to perceive our close others less negatively, maintaining our relationship.

We Judge The Deed According To The Doer And Then Both Separately

The study also finds some evidence that people tend to attribute close others' bad behavior more to situational factors (e.g., "He was so drunk that he was not thinking clearly") rather than internal, trait-based factors (e.g., "He is vindictive and petty") compared to a stranger's bad behavior where we find the opposite. Attributing bad behavior to the situation again allows us to view our close others in a more positive light.

“It Was The Situation, Not The Person”

Despite responding more leniently towards close others who transgress, people felt worse about themselves when people they love misbehave by feeling embarrassed, ashamed, and guilty. This finding is anticipated by the research on moral contagion.The study finds evidence that having a connection to the perpetrator, through a close bond, may enhance the sense that a close other's bad behavior somehow reflects upon you.

Contracting Immorality And Looking It

For example, if a person finds out their romantic partner spread an untrue rumor about one of their coworkers, they tend to feel guilty and ashamed of the behavior, even though they didn't do anything wrong themselves. This is likely due to the shared sense of identity we have with those we care about and therefore we feel partially at fault when they behave badly.

“I Am Part Of You, Therefore I Am Involved In Your Actions”

We are grappling with a dilemma that so many people have faced these past few weeks: How do you reconcile your love for someone with the revelation that they have behaved badly?The ambivalence we feel when confronted with close others' bad behavior is difficult to reconcile. When faced with a loved ones' unethical behavior, it's important to reflect on our moral values and whether the act itself fits within those values.

Α Question To Ask Ourselves: Does This Act Fit (With) Me?

A new study investigates why we might be too easy on our loved ones' (and too harsh on ourselves) when they indulge in unethical behavior. Psychologist Rachel Forbes, the author of the paper, discusses how we behave when the ones we love misbehave.


Psychologist Rachel Forbes discusses how we behave when the ones we love misbehave.


Do We Let Our Loved Ones Off The Hook Too Easily?


Many Gen X grew up in divorced single-parent homes.So they were forced to be self-reliant and unsupervised early on. They want independence to get it done their way.

Motivate Gen X with two phrases, “Do it your way” and “Don’t sweat the rules”

Gen X grew up with email - but before SMS or apps.Their teachers stressed correct writing, too.Poor grammar drives Gen X nuts.

Send your Gen X colleagues well-written emails

They will love you.Gen X wants to know who is responsible at all times.They grew up when institutions weren’t to be trusted.

Acknowledge Gen X's emails quickly.

Not seniority, effort, or hours worked.You’ll often hear Gen X say, “If someone gets the job done in half the time, that’s fine.”

Focus with Gen X on mission and results.

Gen X grew up with workaholic Boomer parents.Seeing that, Gen X thinks work is part of life but not why they live.

Allow Gen X a balanced life

Not as part of a tribe (Millennials) or institution (Boomers).Institutions from Gov’t to marriage showed they couldn't be trusted during Gen X's youth.

Bond with Gen X as individuals

Give them data.Gen X says “Tell me how it is!” and cuts out the fluff.For generations like Millennials, this is hard.Millennials want the “shit sandwich” for feedback.

Be direct with Gen X

Gen X feels forgotten.Only 20% of the population.They’re also the people in your org with their heads down, getting stuff done.But, take them for granted and they can bolt.

Just acknowledge Gen X exists

Boomers/Millennials grew up in ages of abundance.Gen X is the first generation to NOT do as well financially as their parents or kids did.

Expect Gen X to be pessimistic

Expect them to be friendly but not “friends” at work.Unlike recent generations who bring their personal life to work.

Expect Gen X to want work-life separation

<ul><li>Say "Do it your way"</li><li>Use well-written emails</li><li>Say "I got it!"</li><li>Focus on the mission w/ them</li><li>Allow life balance</li><li>Bond as people</li><li>Be direct</li><li>Acknowledge they exist</li><li>Expect pessimism</li><li>Expect work-life separation</li></ul>

TL;DR: Win by doing these things with Gen X:

Michael's hit the bloody mark on this one: 9/10, nailed almost everything for me (even though I'm a Millennial, but barely). Definitely a huge help when dealing with Gen X'ers, even though this won't hit the sweet spot all the time (especially for those closer in age to either Boomers (born 1946-64) or Millennials (born 1981-96).

10 mind hacks to use with Gen X

Dale Carnegie's book has sold over thirty million copies, and nearly a century later it still sells more than a quarter-million copies each year.He encourages people to listen, be interested in others, speak to them from their point of view, sincerely flatter others, seek similarity, avoid conflict, and many other things that seem obvious, but that we all routinely forget to do.However, his methods can be manipulative and lead to shallow friendships.

Friendship: How to Win Friends and Influence People

We don't want awful people to exploit our weaknesses, but the irony is that our weaknesses are where trust comes fromHow do you signal you're trustworthy? By trusting someone else.<ul><li>Vulnerability tells people they're part of an exclusive club.</li><li>Not only is vulnerability effective, but it's also not quite as dangerous as you think.</li><li>Psychology has documented the "beautiful mess effect"-that we consistently overestimate how negatively our errors will be perceived.</li><li>The occasional screw-up is a positive.</li></ul>

The Answer: Being Vulnerable

As long as you feel emotionally safe and you're getting a positive reception, share more.<ul><li>Not being vulnerable kills friendships.</li><li>Not opening up prolongs minor illnesses, increases the likelihood of a first heart attack, and doubles the chance it being lethal.</li></ul>

If It Feels Uncomfortable And Scary, Say It

Make the time, vulnerably share your thoughts, and raise the stakes.<ul><li>If all goes well, they do the same.</li><li>With trust established, we can ignore costs to a greater degree, as can they.</li><li>If they are a true friend, it will feel natural to help them when they are in need.</li></ul>

The Bottom Line

Friendship took a real beating during the pandemic. So how to we get closer to our friends and make new ones? Here's what science says...

This Is How To Make Emotionally Intelligent Friendships: 2 Secrets From Research - Barking Up The Wrong Tree

I’ve designed websites for 9 years now and made around $800,000 in my career as a website designer.In this article, I’m sharing my 5 top tips that will help you create amazing website designs.Let’s dive in!

My Top 5 Tips For Designing A Website

When picking your colour palette I recommend using just 3 colours. One colour for your background. One colour for your typography. And one colour for your accents. By accents, I mean things like buttons. A grand total of three colours!You can use variations of your 3 colours. For example, when I use black I do use some greys. But rarely do I ever introduce more than 3 completely different colours into the design.If you can’t pick your own colours, Great! Just use black, white and a single brand colour for your highlights.

1. Use just 3 colours

When choosing fonts for your website design I recommend using just one classic typeface.Your font family must include a number of different weights. For example Heavy, Bold, Medium and Light. To achieve variation and hierarchy in your designs you can change up the size and weight of your font.Super important! You must pick a high-quality font. It must read well in long copy. For example your blog posts. I recommend using classic fonts like Helvetica.If you must use a brand font. Use it just for the main headers. Then use your single chosen font for the rest of your website designs. Done!

2. Use just one font

The average website design is going to be viewed on dozens of different devices.Your design must be able to flex and stack and still look good. This means using a modular design.By modular design, I mean every element you create should be self-contained.Whenever you’re laying out your page elements, always be working with independent, separate modules. How your design is going to flex vertically and horizontally. And how it’s going to stack on top of each other...Check out my linked article to continue reading and see tips 4 and 5.

3. Make everything modular

To this day I still employ all of these frameworks when I’m designing a website.
Give them a shot. Especially if you’re just starting out.

When picking your colour palette I recommend using just 3 colours. One colour for your background. One colour for your typography. And one colour for your accents. By accents, I mean things like…

marketingandsales

Marketing & Sales

business

Business

product

Product & Design

My top 5 tips for designing a website

Find 100+ Facts About Communication  - Curated from inspiring sources like Books, Podcasts & Articles - Genuine Insights from like-minded Users like You!