ok, this will probably work for the kind of manager/decisionmaker person that you can spot easily:
during your explanation they either
A) sit there, try to make it look like they get what you're saying, and yet make it so clear that they didnt even understand any word beyond 'a' or 'the'. These people mostly don't even say a single word until you're out the door.
B) ask the same identical F%$#ing question 5 times, even in identical wording, so as to make it clear they didnt understand it, and will never do. Can also be recognized by raising the same emotional (like: "i don't like it" or "this sounds fishy") objection at least 5 times
these are the people you dont want to waste your time on. Focus on the other people, and ignore this category politely. Make sure the others understand. If you have bad luck and there are no others... well... you can always try using the parent poster's method:) It sounds interesting, so i'll have a go at it myself -- especially the part about talking about marital infidelity
In the process of getting a teachers degree, you normally (at least here) have some courses where they specifically teach you how to explain things on a level BELOW your own understanding. Well, that's what the point of being a teacher is of course : being able to explain things you understand but the other person doesn't, in a way that they * want to listen * become interested/keep their interest in the subject * build their own interpretation of the matter * hopefully can give a crude but mostly correct explanation about it to someone else * ideal: they can use it to understand other new things AND/OR be creative with it
if you want your non-technical decision-makers to listen to you, i think this is a good step (it has helped me to do this, and it works pretty good)
oh and something else: a good preparation of * what you want to say * what you think they will ask * what YOU will ask * what you DONT want to say _in writing_ (even purely schematically will do) will also take you a big step forward (but ok, i admit that that is also something they teach you in the courses i talked about above)
Slashdot Mirror
ok, this will probably work for the kind of manager/decisionmaker person that you can spot easily: during your explanation they either A) sit there, try to make it look like they get what you're saying, and yet make it so clear that they didnt even understand any word beyond 'a' or 'the'. These people mostly don't even say a single word until you're out the door. B) ask the same identical F%$#ing question 5 times, even in identical wording, so as to make it clear they didnt understand it, and will never do. Can also be recognized by raising the same emotional (like: "i don't like it" or "this sounds fishy") objection at least 5 times these are the people you dont want to waste your time on. Focus on the other people, and ignore this category politely. Make sure the others understand. If you have bad luck and there are no others... well... you can always try using the parent poster's method :) It sounds interesting, so i'll have a go at it myself -- especially the part about talking about marital infidelity
In the process of getting a teachers degree, you normally (at least here) have some courses where they specifically teach you how to explain things on a level BELOW your own understanding. Well, that's what the point of being a teacher is of course : being able to explain things you understand but the other person doesn't, in a way that they
* want to listen
* become interested/keep their interest in the subject
* build their own interpretation of the matter
* hopefully can give a crude but mostly correct explanation about it to someone else
* ideal: they can use it to understand other new things AND/OR be creative with it
if you want your non-technical decision-makers to listen to you, i think this is a good step (it has helped me to do this, and it works pretty good)
oh and something else: a good preparation of
* what you want to say
* what you think they will ask
* what YOU will ask
* what you DONT want to say
_in writing_ (even purely schematically will do) will also take you a big step forward (but ok, i admit that that is also something they teach you in the courses i talked about above)