You need a positive attitude, a strong work ethic, a creative mind, and the "sticktoitism" to survive and thrive in today's competitive marketplace. In the book, Ralph R. Roberts and a select group of the top sales people and trainers across the country give readers the necessary tools to become top-producers. Here, you'll learn to create solid partnerships with like-minded, talented people; set the right goals and reward yourself properly when you reach them; embrace change in your industry and the world at large to grow your business; create your own USP, a kind of personal resume and mission statement; "seed" your business cards; take a weekly "Hour of Power" to keep in touch with your contacts; and use the latest technology such as the Internet and blogs to grow sales.
Chapter 1: Boosting Sales with Advanced Selling. Chapter 2: Visualizing Yourself as a Power Seller. Yinzadi marked it as to-read Sep 19, Anton Klink marked it as to-read Aug 13, Daniela Guida marked it as to-read Sep 02, Franco marked it as to-read Dec 14, Bryan De marked it as to-read May 18, StrudelNZ marked it as to-read Jul 03, Ivan Ng added it Feb 18, Ali Mohammed added it Mar 25, Mohamed Khater added it Mar 30, Amanda marked it as to-read Apr 16, Mark marked it as to-read May 01, Yannick Borgmann marked it as to-read May 19, Kyle added it Jun 22, Steven added it Jul 15, Charles McManis added it Jan 05, Mohammed Barau marked it as to-read Aug 16, John Greg marked it as to-read Aug 27, Rayjan Koehler marked it as to-read Mar 20, Ali Tbikh added it Aug 06, A marked it as to-read Aug 30, Alaa El marked it as to-read Sep 23, Chelsae marked it as to-read Apr 29, Katy marked it as to-read Jul 14, Ben Kellermann added it Aug 31, Erin Leu marked it as to-read Jul 13, Nandar NayWin marked it as to-read Sep 02, Holger added it May 11, Robert added it Sep 23, People act with the awareness that they will be judged according to what is deemed appropriate feminine or masculine.
These normative conceptions of men and women vary across time, ethnic group, and social situation, but the opportunity to behave as manly men or womanly women is ubiquitous. Thus, gender is an ongoing emergent aspect of social interaction. Although the doing gender approach has benefited the study of gender in extremely important ways, unfortunately, the definition proposed in the orig- inal article and the language inherent in the phrase doing gender have undermined the goal of dismantling gender inequity by, perhaps inadver- tently, perpetuating the idea that the gender system of oppression is hope- lessly impervious to real change and by ignoring the links between social interaction and structural change.
It is time to put the spotlight squarely on the social processes that underlie resistance against conventional gender relations and on how successful change in the power dynamics and inequities between men and women can be accomplished. Namely, we need to shift from talk about doing gender to illuminating how we can undo gender. My argument dovetails with those of other feminist theorists who articulate hopeful visions of change and the possibility of gender equality.
Lorbers notion of degendering and Rismans conception of gender vertigo both speak to the dismantling of gender that will be addressed in this article. Doing Gender changed the focus of study in four important ways. First, it de-emphasized socialization as the basis for gendered difference between men and women Green ; Risman Rather than inter- nalize a set of behaviors and practices or identities that were rewarded and modeled by parents, teachers, and other authority figures, men and women create gender within social relationships throughout their lives.
This formula- tion assumes that gender is dynamic and that what is considered appropriate gendered behavior changes over time Thorne Whereas socialization theories assume that individuals internalize the gendered norms that were salient when they were growing up, the doing gender model assumes that people respond to changing contemporary norms. To change gender rela- tions does not mean to wait for another generation to be socialized differ- ently.
Women today who grew up in the s can lead radically different lives than their mothers. Gender construction points to the possibility of rev- olutionary change within a much shorter time span than implied by social- ization approaches. Just as Doing Gender undermined psychologically oriented socializa- tion theories, it also exposed the weaknesses of deterministic structural.
Structural accounts assume that gender differences arise from the different resources to which men and women have access or the different social locations they occupy. For example, a structural approach might explain womens disproportionate share of housework as a function of their husbands incomes: Men do less housework because their greater incomes give them the power to opt out of it e.
However, studies based on the doing gender approach demonstrate that inequality in the distribution of household labor persists even when women contribute half of the household income Berk and is sometimes exaggerated when women earn more money than men Bittman et al. Even when structural conditions produce gen- der difference and inequality, these are mediated through social interactions that always contain the potential for resistance.
Doing Gender alerted us to the taken-for-granted expressions of dif- ference that appear natural but are not. These differences must be continu- ally reconstructed to maintain the appearance of naturalness. It emphasized the myriad ways in which gender is produced across cultures and subcul- tures. We now talk about masculinities and femininities as projects to be accomplished in varying ways depending on the social context e.
Gender is produced differently among white blue-collar laborers, unemployed African Americans, white software developers, and Black physicians. Finally, the doing gender approach implies that if gender is constructed, then it can be deconstructed. Gendered institutions can be changed, and the social interactions that support them can be undone. This revolution- ary potential of human agency is the most important contribution of this approach Andersen Yet ironically, West and Zimmermans article has typically been used to show how gender relations are main- tained and even to argue that the more things change, the more they stay the same.
Doing gender has become a theory of conformity and gender conventionality, albeit of multiple forms of conventionality. Faced with the criticism that doing gender is a theory of gender confor- mity Weber ; Winant , West and Fenstermaker b reiter- ated the potential for change within this approach. Nonetheless, their definition of doing gender and their assumption of the universality and ubiquity of doing gender are incompatible with a theory of change.
First, they define doing gender as to engage in behavior at the risk of gender. That is, to do gender is to act with the possibility that one will be judged according to normative stan- dardsapplied to ones sex categoryto be accountable to that sex category. West and Zimmerman indicate that doing gender applies whether one conforms to gendered norms or resists them because, based on their definition, in either case one is acting at risk of being judged according to those norms. By emphasizing the definitional equivalence of compliance and resistance, the theory renders resistance invisible, particularly because West and Zimmermans emphasis on evaluation by gendered norms makes it easy to see why men and women would comply and difficult to explain why they would resist.
Moreover, since people are still doing gender when they transgress according to this view, it is difficult to imagine how the the- ory could ultimately lead us to understand how gender inequality could be dismantled. In one of their articles, West and Fenstermaker a, 53 do acknowl- edge that individual failure to live up to normative conceptions of wom- anly or manly behavior in a given situation may weaken the link between that particular normative conduct and the sex category. Nonetheless, they argue that although a particular behavior might lose its relevance to a sex category, accountability is invariant and hence doing gender is unavoid- able West and Fenstermaker a, They also assert the invariance of the belief in essential differences between men and women: What is constant is the notion that men and women have different natures as derived from incumbency in one or the other sex category Fenstermaker, West, and Zimmerman , Although they acknowledge that particular differences may vary from cul- ture to culture or within a society over time, they imply that the omnipres- ence of gender as a created system of difference will always bolster a system of inequality.
West and colleagues appear to preclude the possibility that gen- der could be eliminated or that some forms of gender might be compatible with equality between men and women West and Fenstermaker a. Finally, even their language, which uses the word doing, evokes the notion of creating difference rather than erasing it. In fact, one of their key points is that gender is an accomplishment that is created and re-created in social interaction.
That emphasis puts the spotlight on the development of differences that legitimate discrimination and inequality based on sex cat- egory. The enormous contribution of their theory was to draw attention to the missing piece in the story of gender inequality: the importance of the interactional level. But the flaws in how the theory brought social interac- tion to the forefront have undermined its potential as a theory of resistance. To assess how the theory is currently being used empirically, I surveyed the articles published in that cited the original West and Zimmerman article.
The majority of these articles describe how gender differ- ences are constructed and preserved in different domains. For example, Stobbe explores the justifications that auto body workers give for why women are employed in such small numbers in their industry. The men emphasized the unsuitability of dirty work for women and womens unavail- ability for training because of family responsibilities.
The mens discourses create differences between women and themselves, machismo men, pre- sumably available and suitable for the dirty work of fixing cars. Although the study of autoworkers focused on men in a conventionally masculine occupation, most of the studies in that cite West and Zimmerman examine women and men in unconventional gender sit- uations, occupations, or pursuits that could potentially disrupt gender rela- tions.
- Intelligence, Security and Policing Post-9/11: The UK’s Response to the ‘War on Terror’.
- Advanced Selling for Dummies by Ralph R. Roberts, Paperback | Barnes & Noble®;
- Did you get it?.
- Advanced Selling.
- Selected Writings: Word and Language;
- How Does an Investor Make Money Short Selling?.
For example, in the domestic sphere, Hallerd shows that Swedish men who earned a lower rate of income than their wives avoided economic dependence on them by increasing the number of hours they worked outside the home. If husbands did earn less overall than their wives, they decreased the amount of housework they did.
Both of these strategies defy rational economic models and show how men create gender consistent with mascu- line norms that prescribe breadwinning and exemption from housework. Likewise, rural women driven into the labor market because of the tenuous economic position of the family farm derived less power from their eco- nomic contributions than they might have because they colluded in repre- senting their market work as evidence of being good farm wives who, through hard work and self-sacrifice, put the survival of the farm first.
Despite the importance of their economic contributions, they maintained subordinate positions in their families as helpmates to their farmer husbands Heather et al. Several studies of women in masculine occupations showed how they carefully negotiated a uniquely feminine way of implementing their pro- fessional roles, thereby accomplishing gender and professional credibility simultaneously.
For example, Sndergaard examines how young Danish academic women created a different kind of relationship with older male colleagues than did young men. Among other strategies, they joked. Older women in academia walked a careful line, allowing men to carry forward their ideas and engaging in talk about home and family nec- essary to establish themselves as feminine women, but only during breaks in the academic discussion so as to maintain their professional stature.
Likewise, a survey of Methodist clergywomen highlighted that in carrying out their responsibilities, they responded to the congregations expectation for them to be especially compassionate and loving by emphasizing the nurturing and caring i. In Australia, Pini b documents how the few women who became agricultural leaders carved out gendered roles for themselves that entailed both concealing femininity by wearing dark suits and enacting some aspects of conventional masculinity e. To be taken seriously as lead- ers, Pini argues, the female agricultural leaders had to create themselves as a third sex, which bodes ill for gender equity.
The notion of a third sex still underlines the difference between men and women. Sport represents another traditionally male domain that women now enter and must negotiate.
Advanced Selling Courses and Sales Training | Miller Heiman Group
George analyzes the behavior of elite female soccer play- ers to uncover intricate and nuanced ways women do gender George , in this context. The women had to manage building up their bodies to ensure the strength needed for soccer while at the same time avoiding the development of too much muscle. Subtle and not-so-subtle messages from coaches, parents, teammates, and men communicated that they should look feminine. Male soccer players, in contrast, could work out with impunity because soccer training only enhances their masculinity.
Thus, although soc- cer playing may seem the same for men and women, they do gender by adopt- ing different approaches to the development and display of their bodies. Golf is constructed as a male sport by using womens shorter driving distances to confirm that women slow down play, without consideration of whether straighter drives can be as effective as longer ones, and by a culture that is distinctly women unfriendly. McGinnis, McQuillan, and Chapple describe how women golfers continue to play a male sport by accommodating and limiting their play to women-friendly situa- tions, women partners, and courses with fewer long holes.
Index of /public/files/books/Advanced Selling for DUMmIES
They cite West and Zimmerman to underline that individual strategies cannot challenge a system of discrimination. The research interview itself also provides an occasion for doing gender. The interviewer, who frames and controls the conversation, holds a more pow- erful position in the conversation than the interviewee.
When the interviewer is a woman and the interviewee is a man, their positions in the interview could challenge conventional gender relations. Female researchers have reported that their male interviewees resist that challenge by asserting their masculinity during the interview. For example, in a qualitative study of violent male offenders, the men acted alternatively chivalrous or controlling toward the interviewer and sometimes made verbal reference to gender by calling the interviewer honey or sweetheart, behaviors all designed to create and communicate heterosexual masculinity Presser Likewise, Pini a reports that the cane growers she interviewed in Australia used the interviews to assert their masculinity by addressing her by her first name, talking conde- scendingly to her about cane growing, and engaging in sexual innuendo.
Interestingly, a male interviewer who talked with the wives of sports figures had to create what he called muted masculinity to successfully get the women to talk with him, eschewing heterosexual displays and engaging in more characteristically feminine empathic listening behav- ior Ortiz Although the male interviewers behavior avoided stereo- typically masculine behavior, and could be viewed as an instance of reducing gender differences, instead, the researcher described it as creat- ing a different kind of masculinity. Researchers who invoke West and Zimmerman do write about gender resistance, but it is often to recount its futility.
For example, Sargent describes the dilemma of male early childhood educators who wanted to nurture children in the ways characteristic of mothers but were constrained to behave more stereotypically. Unless they adapted more dis- tant and masculine ways of being with children, men who nurtured were under suspicion of being pedophiles. Moreover, male teachers, who might have preferred not to be disciplinarians, were often given the most difficult children, thrusting them into the role of disciplinarian and thereby creating the self-fulfilling prophecy that men discipline. Likewise, an ethnographic study of Danish adolescents details the con- sequences to a Danish girl who tried to defy the normative constraints of being female and white by befriending Turkish boys.
This problematic behavior got her treated as a slut. The authors argued that girls who trans- gress gender norms are sanctioned with the suspicion of either promiscu- ity or asexuality Stauns In , the few scholars who asserted the possibility of gender resis- tance and also cited West and Zimmerman , cited them, not to. Dworkin and OSullivan do invoke everyday interactions as a source of resis- tance to prevailing sexual scripts. However, even they cite West and Zimmerman, not to explain that resistance, but to describe conventional masculine behavior during their interviews. Only one of the articles I reviewed examined the transformative potential of West and Zimmermans social constructionist approach.
Shaw argues that leisure is a site for challenging gender ideologies that underwrite and justify power differences between men and women. When women refuse to conform to gender norms, take time for recreation despite family responsibilities, and engage in male pursuits such as golf, they undermine the stereotypical perceptions that buoy up an ideology of inequality.
Nevertheless, despite this exception, to do gender in the over- whelming majority of the studies conducted in is to act according to gendered norms. While not accepting or justifying the existence of any gender inequal- ity, researchers need to focus more on the variations in gender inequality that exist across societies, over time, and even within a society Chafetz , ; Fox The research derived from West and colleagues approach often implies that gender inequality is invariant and that the degree of inequality is irrelevant. However, it is critical to acknowledge and examine that variability so that we can understand the conditions under which change for the better occurs.
Women who work as professors, agricultural leaders, and clergy may have to be mindful of how to negotiate gendered terrain, but at least they are on the hike. Female interviewers may have to contend with male inter- viewees attempts to reassert male power, but in the end, the interviewer writes the article that defines the interaction between them.
- Iraq War and Democratic Politics (Adelphi Papers).
- Applied Epidemiology Using R;
- Browse more videos?
Female ath- letes may worry about how sports workouts can make them look unfemi- nine, but title IX indisputably gave them revolutionary access to sports. It seems disingenuous for those of us who have succeeded in the acad- emy to fail to acknowledge that our lives, while not free of gender dis- crimination, are a hell of a lot better than our mothers lives were. That being said, those of us who are privileged enough to be full professors can look around and see that we are mostly white and come from middle-class backgrounds.
Depending on which women we consider, around the world or in the United States, some womens lives are worse today than 50 years ago. Arguably, for example, the globalization that rips women from developing countries away from their children to do domes- tic labor in richer countries may be diminishing their lives Hochschild The point of this thought experiment is to show that we do know implicitly that gender inequality varies across time and place. Certainly, we have to continue to investigate and dismantle structures that underwrite the glaring economic injustices that face most women in the world.
The doing gender approach, with its focus on everyday interaction, how- ever, works well to illuminate the gender inequality that persists in the face of the crude examples of structural change that I have invoked. And I do not mean to suggest that we should ignore the persistence of that inequal- ity. As I mentioned earlier, one of the major contributions of the approach is to examine the limits of structural change.
What I believe researchers often ignore is how focus on the interactional level can also illuminate the possibility of change. The study of the interactional level could expand beyond simply documenting the persistence of inequality to examine 1 when and how social interactions become less gendered, not just differ- ently gendered; 2 the conditions under which gender is irrelevant in social interactions; 3 whether all gendered interactions reinforce inequality; 4 how the structural institutional and interactional levels might work together to produce change; and 5 interaction as the site of change.
One of the important contributions of West and Zimmerman was to high- light the importance of the interactional level for understanding the persis- tence of unequal gender relations. My plea is that we shift our inquiry about ongoing social interactions to focus on change. Although I do not have the answers, I believe we should change the questions. Reducing Gender Difference Structural approaches argue that gendered behavior and the perception of gender difference grow out of the different social locations occupied by men and women Gerstel and Sarkisian Women act like women because the positions they occupy require feminine behavior.
Men act like men because the social positions they occupy require competence, leadership, physical strength, and autonomy. Presumably, then, change that results in more gender similarity in social location should reduce gender difference and the perception of difference. However, many of the doing gender studies. So, whereas previously, gender was created by excluding men or women, after the admission of the excluded group, gender is created by differential treatment, behavior, and the interpre- tation of the behavior of the men and women.
I do not dispute that this phenomenon occurs, but two empirical ques- tions should be raised. First, even if difference is maintained, is it reduced? How does the entry of women and men into nontraditional jobs and occupations affect the perception of difference between men and women? Although structuralists may underestimate the persistence of dif- ference, social constructionists may be exaggerating it. For example, exposure to women in leadership positions may decrease the difference in how competent and assertive men and women are perceived to be, despite the feminine performance of the leadership role.
Second, we need to look over time. American parents perceptions of their newborn babies, for example, have changed during the past few decades. In the mids, when parents were asked to rate their newborns on a wide variety of traits, girls were rated softer, finer featured, littler, and more inattentive than boys Rubin, Provenzano, and Luria Fathers were especially likely to stereotype their tiny babies, and, in addition, rated daughters weaker and more delicate than sons.
Twenty years later, parental gender stereo- types of newborns still existed on some traits, but there were fewer, and differences between mothers and fathers propensity to stereotype had disappeared Karraker, Vogel, and Lake When gender barriers for particular positions begin to crumble, a back- lash may promote the re-creation of gender differences. However, that backlash might diminish if the distribution of men and women in those positions became more equal.
Also, perhaps differences that have no material foundation diminish over time. For example, consider women who earn as much as their husbands do. Some studies show that different meanings are ascribed to wives and hus- bands earnings. Husbands are conceived of as breadwinners; wives are not. However, we need to monitor whether that difference in interpretation and labeling persists over time in the face of material similarity, either within a couple whose earnings are the same, or at the societal level, when an increas- ing number of husbands and wives earn similar incomes.
Take your sales training to the next level.
As a desperate and fragile attempt to maintain a gendered difference where none exists, differ- ential labeling of the same behavior might be doomed to failure. Only longi- tudinal studies can answer this question. In fact, one longitudinal study did. Gender Irrelevance The argument that people are always and everywhere accountable to gendered norms presupposes that perceptions of other people are always gendered. Gender, according to this claim, is a master status that overrides any other role or status.
Regardless of whether one is interacting with a doctor, a lawyer, or a car mechanic, the perception of that person and therefore interaction with him or her is filtered through the lens of gender. We pay attention and process that the doctor is female, the lawyer is male, and so is the car mechanic. Ridgeways theory of status expectations, which describes the processes by which female disadvantage is continu- ally reproduced, rests on the assumption that sex is a master status. When sex category is activated, the stereotypes associated with it are also auto- matically activated.
Thus, in a wide variety of situations, men are auto- matically viewed as more competent, giving them advantages that can easily lead to self-fulfilling prophecies Ridgeway and Correll To their credit, Ridgeway and Correll cite studies of cognitive psy- chologists to support their claims that sex category is ubiquitously and auto- matically processed in social interactions. However, although some studies do make that claim Stangor et al. Cognitive psychologists methods assess whether exposure to a par- ticular category, with or without awareness of the perceiver, automatically accesses categorical stereotypes.
Although these studies show that stereo- types can be and often are activated automatically, a number of factors can reduce automatic access to stereotypes, including cognitive busyness Gilbert and Hixon 2, self-interested motives, exposure to counter- stereotypical images and thoughts, and intentional attempts to avoid preju- dice Blair and Banaji ; Macrae and Bodenhausen Focus of attention can influence whether gender is processed automatically in the con- text of multiple possibilities for categorization.
For example, when a Chinese woman is observed putting on makeup, gender but not Chinese identity is accessed automatically, whereas Chinese identity but not gender is accessed when she is observed using chopsticks Blair Ridgeway and Correll acknowledge that gender, although always lurking in the background, varies in salience across different situations. However, my point is that under some conditions, it may be so irrelevant that it is not even accessed. Does Difference Always Mean Inequality?
West and Zimmerman as well as others e. Lorber , xx has recently gone further and urges feminists to challenge the ubiquitous division of people into two unequally valued cat- egories that undergirds the continual reappearance of gender inequality. Her project is the elimination of the binary gendered categories of men and women, which, she believes, cannot help but contribute to inequality.
She also makes the important point that including the multiple categories that intersect with gender e. Other theorists argue that difference per se is not the problem with the gender system; the problem is power Collins ; Connell Men have more say, and they get more money, more attention, more interesting work, more status, and more leisure. Masculine pursuits are given greater value. But can gendered differences exist without supporting these power differences? Certainly, at an individual couple level, they can. For exam- ple, in research on equally shared parenting, couples created equality with varying degrees of gendered behavior.
Related Advanced Selling for Dummies
Copyright 2019 - All Right Reserved