What in the Court's name, are you saying?

Court room - for illustration only

They say that if you want to be a good Court Lawyer (Litigation Lawyer), you have to master the usage of the language. If you master the language, half of your battle is already won. I agree with that piece of advice but I will go further by saying that it is not just mastering the language but it is about delivering your argument effectively in that language– in other words, using the appropriate words, mastering the tone of your voice when placing emphasis, placing importance in your gestures and expressions when conveying your points coupled with good observation of the parties’ body language.

When I first started my law career in Malaysia, almost all of the cases in the lower courts were heard in the Malay language. The first ever hearing I conducted in the Malaysian Courts was in Malay. It didn’t go as well as I wanted. I found there was something missing when submitting my arguments. Even though, I have a reasonable good command of the Malay language but it was more of a “textbook” rather than everyday communication. It didn’t have that smooth flow of conversational words that one would desire. It was missing that “oomph” factor or that fiery oratory effect. After that experience, I made the decision to attend Court as often I could. Attending not as a lawyer but as a member of the public to observe how the experienced senior lawyers conduct their cases in the Malay language. From my observations, I found that most of them have a unique style in presenting their case in the Malay language. I began to model them (“modeling” as in NLP) and started to get back my confidence. When I started attending hearing again, I was able to submit with much more confidence and convincingly. The usage of the words and the flow of the language started sailing in smoothly as I presented my case. I had all of these senior and experienced Malaysian lawyers to thank for showing me the “secret” in delivering an effective argument in the Malay language.

Now in the present situation, I am still a lawyer but this time, I am a lawyer in Australia. One would think that appearing in an Australian Court would be relatively easier in view that English is native and widely spoken here. However, to my surprise, it is quite a challenge to me, especially appearing in the local courts (lower courts). Getting use to the accent and “strine” (Australian slang) makes it quite challenging for me. Whenever I stand up to address the Court, more likely than not the majority of the lawyers present in Court on that day will turn around to see who is this person addressing the bench. I always tell my Malaysian friends that this is because I am the only lawyer in the Court who speaks without an accent. My friend, Simon Ong pointed out to me and said, “It could be the other way around. To the Australian lawyers, you are the only one who speaks with an accent while they did not!” Good point, Simon! So, it looks like it is back to the public gallery for me. Back to observing and taking notes in Court, just like the old days! Hopefully, by then I will be able to say words beyond "G'day Mate!"

How to deal with a person having "Passive Aggressive Behaviour"

What is “Passive Aggressive Behaviour”? “Passive Aggressive Behaviour” has been defined in Wikipedia as “indirect expression of hostility such as sarcasm, hostile jokes, stubbornness or deliberate or repeated failure to accomplish requested tasks of which one is responsible”. In other words, being “passive resistant” to what is expected or required by the person. Instead of being frank, honest or direct, the person will show his or her anger or displeasure by being sarcastic or even cracking improper jokes, usually targeting the person that the Passive Aggressor is annoyed with. An example here would be the “silent  treatment”. From my experience, I can say that I have encountered many times where  my loved ones just refused to talk to me until one of us breaks the ice. Were they demonstrating “Passive Aggressive Behaviour”? Perhaps, but fortunately for me most of the time, they would come to a realisation that it is rather immature for them to act that way and before you know it, they will cool down and end that “icy treatment”.

It was said that the cause of “Passive Aggressive Behaviour” may “stem from a childhood environment, where it was not safe to express frustration or anger”, thus leaving the Passive Aggressor giving hints of his or her displeasure. I must say that we, Asians, tend to demonstrate “Passive Aggressive Behaviour” more than any other groups. The reason could be because we were thought from young to express ourselves indirectly so as not to hurt the other person’s feelings. For example, if we want something, we would not say it directly. Instead we would tell the person a long story and hopefully the person will get the hint as we have been taught by our parents that telling the person directly will be rude and impolite. With that mindset, we also apply the same when we are angry or when someone hurt us emotionally, thus resulting “Passive Aggressive Behaviour”.

So how do we deal with a person who demonstrates “Passive Aggressive Behaviour”? My answer would be to “take the bull by the horns” - in other words do exactly the opposite of what a Passive Aggressor would do. When I did my training in hypnosis and Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) many years ago, I remembered a technique called “Speed Induction”. “Speed Induction” is quick way to get a person into a trance (provided that you have already built strong rapport with the person) where you basically “shock and awe” the person without the person even expecting it. For example, asking the person to place his or her hand on yours’ and then instruct the person to press your hand down as hard as possible. When they least expect it, drop your hand and then say the word loudly in a commanding tone, “SLEEP” and more likely than not the person will go into a trance. So by using that principle, you can apply the same to the Passive Aggressor. Of course, you do not ask the Passive Aggressor to go to sleep but rather you can start by saying the things that the Passive Aggressor has been avoiding. In order words, "shock and awe" the person. For example, if the Passive Aggressor refused to perform a task, it is not because the Passive Aggressor does not want to do it but because the person does not want to be told or ordered around. You see, Passive Aggressors  too have a lot of ego in them. By saying directly to the Passive Aggressor what the person refuses to say may make the Passive Aggressor uncomfortable and sometimes even feeling bashful. However, do not criticise or be rude, reframe if possible. For example, “I will leave it to you to do the job but with your experience and knowledge, I have no doubt that you will be able to determine the best software to run on this computer. If you need any assistance, please let me know”. By looking at the example, you will see that the Passive Aggressor was not criticised but instead the person was praised and at the same time, the person’s task was also defined with the expectation clearly stated by the client or boss. Everyone is happy including the Passive Aggressor. Remember, you may not be able to change a person from demonstrating “Passive Aggressive Behaviour” but you can definitely work with the person by showing empathy and dealing it in an effective and positive way.

Empathy with Action - my experience

In this post I will share with you a real story which happened to me in 2011. It not only involves a person having empathy but it also involves the person taking action based on that empathy. The action taken by the person is something that I will remember fondly for many years to come.

In 2011, my father undergone a major surgery at the Damansara Specialist Hospital in Petaling Jaya. At that time, I was practising law as a sole practitioner and I still vividly remember that when my father was admitted in the hospital, I had a matter fixed for appeal in High Court. Every few minutes during the hearing, I had to take a look at my mobile phone to see if there were any text messages from my wife who was with my father, my mum and my late aunt Ah Mai at that time. As many practicing lawyers in Malaysia would know that getting a postponement from the Court was a huge challenging task even for an urgent situation such as this. As soon as the hearing ended, I rushed out from the Court and raced to the hospital to be with my family. Even though, the opposing Counsel failed in his appeal but he was very gracious when he sent me a text message to wish me all the best and a quick recovery to my dad.

I got my then secretary, Michelle to inform the clients who called the office to inform that I will not be able to respond to them immediately but will get back to them as soon as I can. While in the hospital, I received a call on my mobile phone from an important client of mine who is a “Datuk” (a titled person in Malaysia or some people would equate the “Datukship” to a “knighthood” in the UK). The “Datuk” enquired about an important matter which I was handling for him at that time. I briefed him and he could sense that I wasn’t speaking in my usual tone. He asked if I am ok? I informed him about my father and he quickly informed me not to worry about his matter, that can wait. The “Datuk” asked me to look after my father and before ending the call, the “Datuk” informed which hospital was my father in and when I informed him, the “Datuk” quickly said goodbye and hung-up.

As many of us know, medical fees in private hospitals are very high and one will certainly feel the pinch if one does not have a medical insurance to help cover some of the costs. Let me say here that the “Datuk” was a long term client of mine but we hardly talked about our families, let alone my financial background. When the “Datuk” heard that my father was in a private hospital, I had a surprise when my secretary, Michelle called me the next day to inform that all the bills which were issued to the Datuk’s company, some as recent as a couple of days ago were paid by the “Datuk”. Apparently, he got the driver to drive all the way from his office (about an hour away) to hand deliver the cheque. Some of you say may asked what is the big deal about this since those are the bills that he needed to pay anyway? Well, the big deal here is that like in most big companies’ commercial practices, bill are normally paid at the end of the calendar month or sometimes may dragged up to a few months for payment to be processed. However, when the “Datuk” heard about my father’s condition and that my father was in a private hospital, he felt that I needed the money the cover the expenses for the hospital and medical, therefore, he empathized with me  and took immediate action to make all payments immediately. This may seem like a small matter to some people but to me it takes a bigger man to have  such gesture and that makes him a successful person he is today. Obviously, for privacy reasons, I can’t name the “Datuk” but he is a low profile and successful businessman and I can understand why his businesses are flourishing. 

The "Satay Method" - using simple train of words

I am reminded of a story about how a simple minded person used simple train of words to “con” a “satay” seller. “Satay” is a very popular dish in Malaysia. It is similar to kebab with condiments such as onions and cucumbers served with peanut sauce. I was told that the quality of the peanut sauce is the main contributor in determining whether the “satay” is tasty or otherwise. Even without the “satay”, by just dipping the onions and cucumbers into the sauce would make a satisfying meal. The condiments are usually served without additional charge with the “satay”.

In those days, the best “satay” could be found in the “kampungs” (small villages). There was a guy by the name of Aziz who loves “satay”. Aziz was a simple person who lived in the kampung. One day Aziz was yearning for some good “satay”, so he ventured into the best “satay” stall in the village. The following conversation took place between Aziz and the “satay” seller:-

Aziz:                   How much is a stick of “satay”?
“Satay” seller:    Sixty cents
Aziz:                  How about “Kuah” (peanut sauce)?
“Satay” seller:   Free
Aziz:                 How about the cucumbers?
“Satay” seller:   Free
Aziz:                 Onions?
“Satay” seller:   Free
Aziz:                Well, in that case, I will just have the “Kuah”, cucumbers and onions!

Naturally, the “Satay” seller was caught by his own words when he offered the “kuah” and the condiments free of charge. You can see that it is so easy to go with the flow when a certain pattern or train of words are used. By the time the person realized it, the person was already trapped by his own words or  made a commitment without realizing it. This is a common method used by litigation lawyers when cross examining witnesses. The technique is to confine the questions to a “yes” or “no” answer or to get the witness to reply with a short answer and to throw the questions in a rapid pace without allowing the witness to ponder the questions for too long. The litigation lawyer will initially start with a simple question and when the litigation lawyer sees that the witness is becoming comfortable or over confident, he starts shooting rapid questions and before you know it the witness would probably get caught by his own words on some of the subsequent questions. The witness will then need to wait for his lawyer to re-examine him to correct any “mistakes” that he might have made during the cross-examination. This is a technique that one should be cautions of as it sometimes mess up our line of thoughts and put us in a vulnerable position.  

Stories on Reframing (Part 1)

Some of you have asked me for some stories on “reframing”. Well, I thought I will start off 2013 by relating some true experiences using reframing:-

Story No. 1 - Salesman using “reframing”  to sell his product

My schoolmate, Yip Chee Seng informed me that three months ago, he received a call from a salesman who wanted to sell him a subscription for cable television channels. The salesman informed Yip that if Yip subscribed for 24 months of cable service, he will receive the decoder for free. Yip told the salesman he wasn’t interested as he has already an existing subscription. The salesman tried to persuade him but to no avail. Three months after that phone call, Yip received another call from the salesman.  This time the salesman started out by saying, “Congratulations, Mr Yip! You have won a decoder for FREE!!!” Initially, Yip was excited as he had never won anything before. After a while, reality sank in and somehow the voice sounded familiar. Yip asked the salesman, “Wait a minute, the decoder is free?” The salesman replied, “Absolutely! There is no charge at all”. Yip then asked, “But I need to subscribe for 24 months?” The salesman quietly replied, “Yes”. Yip asked, “How is this different from the offer you gave me 3 months ago?” The salesman went absolutely quiet. The conversation ended there.

What can we learn from the above? Did the salesman reframe correctly? Well, I think he did. Did the salesman get a desired result? Well, the answer is “No”. Yip was put off. Firstly, Yip felt that he had being misled. Yip felt that the salesman wanted to play a fast one on him. Even though the reframing was done correctly but it was not done appropriately. What the salesman should have done was that he should have dropped the first call he made to Yip and started out by saying by “Congratulations, Mr Yip! You have won a decoder for FREE!” You see, by dropping the first phone call and making the second one, Yip would not have been alerted about the salesman’s real intention. By making the first phone call, Yip was already on guard and very much alert on the salesman’s intention. Of course, ultimately, it would be up to Yip to decide if wants to accept the offer or not.

Story No. 2 - Reframing by inserting “positive pressure”

A few years ago, I was involved with a non-profit organisation. The organisation wanted to raise funds by selling dinner tickets. For some reason, the tickets were selling rather slowly. Almost all the volunteers including me were pretty lacking when it came to selling stuff. We were pretty straight forward when we approached our potential “purchasers”. Many of them were too polite to say “no”. They would make excuses such as “let me think about it” or “I need to ask my spouse first”, etc. Then one of our members by the name of Allan came and joined us. Allan was a seasoned salesman. He is a successful businessman selling office equipments and stationaries. I told Allan about our uphill challenge in selling the tickets. Allan said, “No problem. Come with me and you will learn”.

Allan made an appointment to see a mutual friend of ours. This mutual friend of ours was a thrifty guy and in my heart, I was saying to Allan, “Good luck in dealing with him, buddy”. Allan and I went to see this friend of ours. Allan started out by telling this friend about the reason for the charity dinner and the purpose of the organisation. Well, no big deal there. I have done exactly the same thing. Then Allan asked our friend whether he would be interested in purchasing the tickets. As expected, our mutual friend replied, “I need to check with my wife first whether we have plans for that evening. I also need to check my diary and blah, blah, blah”. I looked at Allan’s body language and facial expression. Not once did Allan showed any disappointment or was he disheartened. I could see Allan was rather emphatic with our mutual friend. Allan was nodding his head in agreement with our friend indicating he agreed and understood our friend’s predicament. Allan did not interrupt our friend when he gave his reasons about not purchasing the tickets. After our mutual had finished his speech, Allan simply said, “There are only 2 tickets left. I thought you would like to have it before I sell it to other people”. Suddenly, our mutual friend reached for his wallet and bought the tickets immediately. Instead of asking our mutual friend whether he wants to purchase the tickets, Allan reframed his statement and intention by limiting our mutual friend’s options. When you have so few options, it is quite easy to decide, isn’t it?

It is interesting how a human being acts and reacts. When a person is put under pressure, suddenly the person is able to make quick decision. A lot of times, we tend to take things for granted. We think that the person or the thing will always be there when we need it. A perfect example was something that happened to me recently. I was procrastinating about packing my personal items for relocation to Sydney. I had a lot of things on my mind such as what to pack and which items I should store in KL. That was just that - merely thinking and thinking but no physical action on my part as I am just merely procrastinating. To me, it felt like I still have got a lot of time in my hands. When we finally appointed an International Movers to ship our things to Sydney, it dawned on me that the actual duration was pretty restricted. The Movers gave us just one week to get everything identified and packed. It would have been easy if it was just one place but we had three places to pack and move! When it came to making decision on what to take and what to discard, suddenly I found courage and became decisive. I disposed a lot of stuff which under normal circumstances, I would not have thrown away. I read that humans tend to make rational decisions when under pressure. Perhaps, Allan could have read that when he used his reframing and positive pressure on our mutual friend!

"Thinking out of the box" and the technique of restricting choices

In the earlier post, we talked about gauging a person’s level of self confidence. Here is another story about self confidence, “thinking out of the box” and restricting choices.

When I was in primary school (Sekolah Rendah La Salle Klang), I remembered there was a substitute teacher who came to the class and asked a rather strange question. She would randomly point to a student and asked “Are you a clever student or a stupid student?” I must say that those were the days where people were not so vocal about being political correct or concerned about students having rights. Most of the students answered “Stupid” and those included some of the cleverer ones. I think the students answered “Stupid” because they didn’t want to be seen boastful or being made fun of by their classmates. However, we had a few cocky troublemakers who confidently answered “Clever” which made the whole class roared in laughter. Then, the substitute teacher pointed to a quiet student sitting at one corner. The student quietly stood up and replied, “I am neither stupid nor clever. I am just average” The class went silent for a moment. After that as you can imagined, everyone started answering “I am average” when called upon to give an answer by the teacher.

You see, the quiet student was “thinking out of the box”. He did not fall for the teacher’s restricted choices - ie: either “you are clever or stupid”. The student rose above that and gave his own answer. Neither his teacher or his classmates expected that. The teacher’s technique is a common technique by NLPers. Basically, it is like a manipulative tool that constructively influence a person’s decision making. The theory is that most people prefer to follow rather than to lead. Just imagine if you ask your spouse, “What do you feel like having for lunch?”. Your spouse would most likely answer, “I don’t know. Why don’t you decide” or “I will eat whatever you eat” or the universal answer “Anything will do”. You see, this is not really an answer isn’t it? What the NLPers will do in such circumstances is that they will restrict that answer into what they want by asking, “Do you want to go for Western cuisine or Japanese?” Now the choices have been restricted, it is either Western food or Japanese food. When given such choices, most likely the person will chose one of the two and you don’t need to split hair to make a decision just for lunch!