KARL KRONER KG Unternehmensberatung

  REASONING POWER

Good consulting means asking, listening, arguing and communicating knowledge. Strict objectivity, analytical precision and consistent implementation make quality of a consultation.

  This demanding business requires a high level of
     concentration, a lot of work and high mobility.
  Consulting is first and foremost communication
     and the power of argumentation is the key to success.
  The A and O of a good argumentation is active
     listening. But before active listening can take place,
     good questions must be asked.
  Questions, active listening, communication and
     argumentation are processes that can be practiced.

Practice your art of questioning with the following questions:

•  who (has done something)
•  what (has he done)
•  where (did he do it)
•  when (did he do it)
•  how (did he do it)
•  why (did he do it)
•  from where (is the information)

These questions make your conversation partner think. Listen actively to your conversation partner with great sensitivity and empathy ... - and he will open up.

Your dialogue partner will expect a solution from you. Formulate the solution and show your conversation partner the ways to solve the problems you have raised (your conversation partner has provided the arguments for your solution; you only have to summarize the arguments with your knowledge in a structured way); and you have found a solution and made a friend.

Asking questions, active listening, communicating, structuring and summarizing arguments, and presenting the results and solutions are the most important components of the consulting process.


Argumentation

An argument is a statement or a chain of conclusions (conclusion), which is used to substantiate a statement or a thesis.

The logical correct conclusion of a statement out of other statements or arguments is called a proof. In the course of time fixed latin idioms for argumentation forms have developed.

In science argument is understood as a set of connected statements (premises and thesis) too, where the thesis is derived from the premises by conclusion.

Arguments can be critical and/or constructive. They serve to convince people of the correctness or falsity of a thesis and are therefore an essential tool in the field of science, criticism, discussion and dialogue.

Arguments must be steady in principle. T. Edward Damer has summarized a practical guideline for the examination of deceptive arguments in his work according to 5 categories (A Practical Guide to Fallacy-Free Arguments):

Structure Principle

  Petitio Principii (Circular proof)
  Fallacies of inconsistency
  Fallacies of deductive inference

Relevance Principle

  Fallacies of irrelevant premise
  Fallacies of irrelevant appeal

 Principle of acceptability

  Unwarranted assumption fallacies

Principle of sufficiency

  Fallacies of missing evidence
  Causal fallacies

Principle of refutation

  Fallacies of counterevidence
  Ad-hominem- misconclusions
  Fallacies of diversion

 

Communication

The contents of the argumentation and communication are to be oriented to the circle of the listeners:

  Expert-Layman Communication

The expert layman communication is the interaction between experts (consultants) and laymen. In concrete terms, the aim is to convey expert knowledge to laypersons in such a way that they are able to absorb and apply it in a meaningful way.

The terms used by an expert (consultant) should be adapted to the layman's understanding. The layman should at least be given the basic principles of the relevant field.

  Expert-Management Communication

Expert-manager communication is the interaction between experts and operational managers. Specifically, it is about taking up the problem of operational management and offering a solution that primarily provides an answer to the following questions: where? as? when?

  Expert-Leader Communication

Expert leader communication is the interaction between experts and strategic or normative management. Specifically, it is about taking up the problem of strategic or normative management and offering and evaluating alternative solutions that provide answers to the following questions: who? what? why?

  Expert-Jurist Communication

Interpretation is one of the most important tools of a jurist.

The goal of interpretation was once to determine the will of the legislator (so-called subjective theory). According to the opinion prevailing today it has however the determination of sense and purpose of the law to the goal and thus the determination of the will of a law (so-called objective theory).

The change from subjective to objective theory is justified in particular by the problems of subjective theory. Not only is the will of the legislator or the author often unclear, but laws or documents of the client may contain more than the legislator or the author initially thought.

Furthermore, the client's standards or guidelines change over time. It is possible that something was not considered at the time of the enactment, but this can be interpreted into it today. However, even objective theory is not infallible; after all, there is no will of the law or of a document, only the will of the author and that of the interpreter.