82,891
edits
Reciprocity: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
===Investment in a commercial relationship=== | ===Investment in a commercial relationship=== | ||
The first is {{author|Rory Sutherland}}’s observation that ''signalling'' one’s investment in a prospective relationship — by going to trouble and expense to commence that relationship — increases your | The first is {{author|Rory Sutherland}}’s observation that ''signalling'' one’s investment in a prospective relationship — by going to the trouble and irrecoverable personal expense to commence that relationship — increases your prospect’s disposition to engage in a relationship with you. You have shown you obviously care about them and their relationship to waste money making it happen. It is a marker of your commitment and intent to fidelity. It is a display of trust. | ||
So, | So, invite your wedding guests with a thick embossed card, perfumed envelope and glitter, rather than by a WhatsApp message. By doing that you signal that you have gone to great trouble and expense to even invite them, making them feel valued and wanted and, perhaps, someone obliged to at least respond, and even attend. | ||
Perhaps some of our relationship-initiation rituals have this kind of “performative” aspect. Is the act of thrashing out an [[NDA]] some kind of show of commitment? I owe this observation to {{pl|https://gunnercooke.com/people/marc-weisberger/|Marc Weisberger}}. To be sure, sending a hostile 14-page screed to your client’s legal team and having them tear it to shreds is an unusual way of building trust — but is that how our courting ritual began? This has implications for the [[OneNDA]] project: if an [[NDA]] is really little more than a courtship ritual, then by simplifying it and allowing parties to just ''sign'' NDAs without investment and get on with business, are we losing something? Do we turn a careful, patient trust building exercise into | Perhaps some of our relationship-initiation rituals have this kind of “performative” aspect. Is the act of thrashing out an [[NDA]] some kind of show of commitment? I owe this observation to {{pl|https://gunnercooke.com/people/marc-weisberger/|Marc Weisberger}}. To be sure, sending a hostile 14-page screed to your client’s legal team and having them tear it to shreds is an unusual way of building trust — but is that how our courting ritual began? This has implications for the [[OneNDA]] project: if an [[NDA]] is really little more than a courtship ritual, then by simplifying it and allowing parties to just ''sign'' NDAs without investment and get on with business, are we losing something? Do we turn a careful, patient trust-building exercise into an unseembly back-seat fumble? | ||
It seems unintuitive, but perhaps the lesson is this: ''look for more productive ways of indicating commitment''. Make other, ''more meaningful'' sacrifices, that aren’t such a drag. And that then prompts another question: isn’t that what corporate entertainment is designed to do? By rationalising it as a type of low-level corruption — as our modern day abstemious regulators tend to do — and fair enough; in a sense it is just that — does our [[high-modernist]], ultra-rationalist view of business as the logical operation of a complicated but deterministic machine, rather than as an amorphous and complex web of interpersonal relationships, where productivity is a curious function of trust and mutual vulnerability, miss a fairly big trick? | It seems unintuitive, but perhaps the lesson is this: ''look for more productive ways of indicating commitment''. Make other, ''more meaningful'' sacrifices, that aren’t such a drag. And that then prompts another question: isn’t that what corporate entertainment is designed to do? By rationalising it as a type of low-level corruption — as our modern day abstemious regulators tend to do — and fair enough; in a sense it is just that — does our [[high-modernist]], ultra-rationalist view of business as the logical operation of a complicated but deterministic machine, rather than as an amorphous and complex web of interpersonal relationships, where productivity is a curious function of trust and mutual vulnerability, miss a fairly big trick? | ||