A Valentine: Relationships which work - A business?

Go ahead. Talk about it.
User avatar
Doreen Peri
Site Admin
Posts: 14617
Joined: July 10th, 2004, 3:30 pm
Location: Virginia
Contact:

A Valentine: Relationships which work - A business?

Post by Doreen Peri » February 12th, 2006, 2:49 pm

I was listening to an interview on NPR the other day. Apparently the person who was being interviewed had written a book about relationships (the romantic kind) and how to keep the fire alive.

So many books have been written on this topic, probably. I'm not much for self help books and haven't read any of them but I know they are out there.

I just thought this concept was interesting - (sorry, I didn't catch the author's name or name of the book).

The concept is to treat your romantic/love relationship like a business.

You are selling two products - You are one of the products. The relationship itself is the other product. Your partner is the person who you are selling the products to.

If you ran a business, the author said, you would want to make sure your customer could see the value of the products you are selling and buy them over and over. Repeat business is business success.

And so, the author's theory was that you need to find out what your customer's needs are and show them how the product(s) can fulfill their needs.

Responsiveness to the needs of your customer is key to keeping him or her as a customer who believes in the product(s) and keeps coming back to purchase them.

Just as in operating a business, it is important to be aware that your customer's needs may constantly change, so you need to constantly be on top of finding out exactly what their needs are, the author said.

I realize this concept sounds sort of unromantic, but I still found it to have valuable insights.

What do you think? Comments?

Oh and Happy Valentine's Day to all. Wishing you all the romance you can possibly stomach. :shock:
Last edited by Doreen Peri on February 14th, 2006, 2:13 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
K&D
Posts: 707
Joined: August 13th, 2005, 8:59 pm
Location: Baton Rouge
Contact:

Post by K&D » February 12th, 2006, 4:06 pm

I'm taking Marx and Liberation theory and we were talking about this the other day but in a negative way. the idea that in our society people think of themselves in capitalist terms. We're reading Eric Fromm who talked about it a little more then Marx.

but its the idea that we can and have to be marketed like products either for getting a job, keeping a partner or even in the way that we thing of our own life. so i life has to be "worth" living. meaning that if you haven't accomplished such and such goals or if your not successfull then life is not "worth" living. instead of realizing that we are here and that there are ups and downs.

the whole idea of looking at yourself as a product and trying to sell yourself to another person seems like a horrible idea. i mean in a good relationship you have to work but not to the point where it seems like your trying to "sell" yourself to the other person...hell in a fucking awesome relationships you should feel comfortable being yourself, and when your trying to excentuate certain qualities etc your not reallly being yourself.
Blah!

User avatar
Doreen Peri
Site Admin
Posts: 14617
Joined: July 10th, 2004, 3:30 pm
Location: Virginia
Contact:

Post by Doreen Peri » February 12th, 2006, 4:14 pm

Hi K& D - good to see you.

I agree that the concept of "selling" yourself is a term that stems from capitalism and it doesn't really sound appealing in regards to romantic relationships.

But I think it's just the author's way of getting across the fact that relationships work the best when both party's needs are being met and that to make a relationship work the best way it can, you need to focus on the other person's needs and fulfilling them.

That doesn't mean you can't be yourself.

If you can't be yourself, you're definitely in the wrong relationship no matter how well you meet the needs of the other person.

Your own needs are important, though, and if your partner isn't meeting them, maybe your needs need to be spelled out.

I think if both parties in a relationship make their needs known to the other, it's more likely the partners will be able to fulfill each other's needs.... resulting in a more satisfied relationship for both.

User avatar
K&D
Posts: 707
Joined: August 13th, 2005, 8:59 pm
Location: Baton Rouge
Contact:

Post by K&D » February 12th, 2006, 7:25 pm

sounds good...i just don't like the language of us being "products"
Blah!

User avatar
Doreen Peri
Site Admin
Posts: 14617
Joined: July 10th, 2004, 3:30 pm
Location: Virginia
Contact:

Post by Doreen Peri » February 12th, 2006, 7:38 pm

It's just an analogy.

Not like people are really products.

User avatar
Doreen Peri
Site Admin
Posts: 14617
Joined: July 10th, 2004, 3:30 pm
Location: Virginia
Contact:

Post by Doreen Peri » February 12th, 2006, 8:28 pm

I guess it sorta surprised me that the author thought such an analogy would be a good one to make people understand they need to pay attention to the needs of their partner.

That does say something about the capitalistic society we live in, huh? Says to me that this author thinks people would "get it" finally when explained in business terms.

Also says to me that in his opinion, many people treat their clients better than they treat their spouses.

Sad, if that's true.

User avatar
Doreen Peri
Site Admin
Posts: 14617
Joined: July 10th, 2004, 3:30 pm
Location: Virginia
Contact:

Post by Doreen Peri » February 14th, 2006, 2:14 am

The thing is, love IS business.

Big business.

It's the business of knowing how much to give and how much to take and how to know the difference between comfort and discomfort, gratitude and illusion, rejection and anticipation, arrogance and power.

To some people, love is a musical aphrodisiac, bending them to desire another key change, another resolve.

To others, its the buying and selling of the material you are, all fleshed out, bones and heartbleeds, decisions and investments, returns and stock options.

I've played all sides. I've been owner and operator, lessee, rental agent, purchaser.

Pull your chair up to the table and deal. I'm in. Here's my spare change.

To me, it's a gamble, sure, but if I don't bet the whole freakin' pot, I can't win.

Then again, it's good to hire a credible accountant and proofreader.

A corporate attorney wouldn't hurt either.

I love Love.

I asked it to marry me once. It replied.....

"How much do you have to invest in this partnership?"

User avatar
stilltrucking
Posts: 20649
Joined: October 24th, 2004, 12:29 pm
Location: Oz or somepLace like Kansas

Post by stilltrucking » February 14th, 2006, 4:40 am

"I live in that solitude which is painful in youth, but delicious in the years of maturity."

edited
Last edited by stilltrucking on February 15th, 2006, 2:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
sooZen
Posts: 1441
Joined: August 20th, 2004, 10:21 pm
Location: phar lepht in Tejas
Contact:

Post by sooZen » February 14th, 2006, 6:20 am

Well, since I am in the 'bidness' with the one eye love...

I like the idea Doreen!
it is a business
this thing called love

it is my business
and his business
we are in the business
of being together

working it out
working together
making it work

sometimes I would like to kick the bosses ass
sometimes I would like to kiss it

(lately, I've been in the kick ass mode)
Hah!

yeah, that's the business i am in... :lol:

Happy lover's day to all of you in the business of being ONE, Inc.

SooZ
Freedom's just another word...



http://soozen.livejournal.com/

User avatar
abcrystcats
Posts: 619
Joined: August 20th, 2004, 9:37 pm

Post by abcrystcats » February 16th, 2006, 2:16 am

Doreen, this hits upon the one reason that I am probably still alone. I want to be loved for myself. I don't want to be seen as a commodity.

I want someone else to love me for the same reasons I love me: Intelligence, independence, passion, character, humor, strength -- you know, stuff like that, as opposed to LOOKS, INCOME, RELATIVE POWER. I am in a dream world because nobody is going to give me a chance on the things I care about in myself, but I refuse to compromise.

When I look at others, I try to minimize the judgments based on WIIFM (what's in it for me?) factors and center on the person. This approach seems to make no difference. I'm inevitably judged on the most superficial characteristics.

My chief strength is that I've given up. I don't care. Judge me harshly. Fuck me over. I don't care. I'm used to it. I expect the worst.

If I ever get better treatment I'll be totally astonished, bowled over by the evidence of real love, somewhere in the universe.

For now, I love my CATS. I love them, and they love me as far as they are able. That gives my life some value, however small.

User avatar
K&D
Posts: 707
Joined: August 13th, 2005, 8:59 pm
Location: Baton Rouge
Contact:

Post by K&D » February 16th, 2006, 2:19 am

see this Cats, was what i was trying to say....you put it a lot better then me.
Blah!

User avatar
Doreen Peri
Site Admin
Posts: 14617
Joined: July 10th, 2004, 3:30 pm
Location: Virginia
Contact:

Post by Doreen Peri » February 16th, 2006, 3:13 am

Cat & K&d

We all want to be loved for ourselves.

And we should be. Of COURSE! :)

And if someone doesn't love us for who we are exactly AS we are, then they miss out I guess because to me, I'm not going to change for anybody... not one iota.

I'll bend a little, sure. But I'm not going to break.

Nope.

You ladies missed the point, it seems to me. Or maybe I didn't write it down clearly enough.

This author's ideas are certainly not saying that you should NOT being yourself.

Exactly the opposite.

The author's premise is that everybody should be themselves and that's it's a very good idea to accept that.

Just as a business accepts their customers as being exactly who they are and focuses their business on pleasing the customer, giving the customer what the customer needs, so should we, as companions offer our friends and partners the same respect.

You be you. I'll be me.

But if you treat me with the same respect a business owner treats his customers, your focus is to fulfill my needs.

And similarly, if I treat you with the same respect as a business owner, my focus is to fulfill yours.

I love being alone, too.

My solitude is a church.

But my relationships thrive when I realize that giving to meet the others needs (and how can you DO that without finding out what they ARE on a continual basis)..... results in heaven.

Hell, life is about all that right?

Sigh... .. Cat... I have no idea how this has anything to do with looks, income or power.

I care about me, too. But I just like this guy's analogy for some reason. I guess 'cause it has to do with give and take balancing with each other.


-----------

stilltrucking.. that's a great quote! who wrote that? i love it! :)

----------

SooZ.... i'll give you da bidness if you give me da bidness! ;) And if you give Cecil a hug for me, I'll give ya a kiss!... (Hell, I'll give ya a kiss anyway...)... Happy Lovers Day to you a couple day's late but every day is a Love Day to me 'cause that's the business I'm in :) ONE, Inc! Great! Who's selling stock? I want in!

User avatar
abcrystcats
Posts: 619
Joined: August 20th, 2004, 9:37 pm

Post by abcrystcats » February 16th, 2006, 6:44 pm

I don't know, Doreen, it all sounds too much like buying and selling to me.

your focus is to fulfill my needs
Really. Dor, I don't think your focus is to fulfill my needs, and I don't think my focus is to fulfill yours.

Treat others as you would like to be treated, yourself. That makes a lot more sense to me.
You are selling two products - You are one of the products. The relationship itself is the other product. Your partner is the person who you are selling the products to.

If you ran a business, the author said, you would want to make sure your customer could see the value of the products you are selling and buy them over and over. Repeat business is business success.

And so, the author's theory was that you need to find out what your customer's needs are and show them how the product(s) can fulfill their needs.

Responsiveness to the needs of your customer is key to keeping him or her as a customer who believes in the product(s) and keeps coming back to purchase them.

Just as in operating a business, it is important to be aware that your customer's needs may constantly change, so you need to constantly be on top of finding out exactly what their needs are, the author said.
1) I am not a product, I am a person.
2) I am not selling anything.
3) It's up to each individual to decide whether or not they would like to be in a relationship, and with whom.
4) I am going to find out what the other person's needs are, certainly, and if I can fulfill those needs, I will certainly make sure they understand that. But it's easy to go overboard with this analogy. Take the example of different sexual drives. If your partner wants a LOT of sex and you only want a little it might be difficult for you to meet that need without compromising your own.

The next thing you said was:
Responsiveness to the needs of your customer is key to keeping him or her as a customer who believes in the product(s) and keeps coming back to purchase them.

it is important to be aware that your customer's needs may constantly change, so you need to constantly be on top of finding out exactly what their needs are, the author said.
I guess it all depends on how badly you want to be in the relationship. If you're willing to bend over backwards to meet every single one of your "customer's" needs, and stay ahead of the game to anticipate new ones too, then you must need to be in the relationship pretty badly.


I was in a relationship like that once. I was constantly anticipating his needs and meeting them. Even though his needs and mine were pretty much on a par, the fact that I was always the one doing the anticipating got pretty exhausting. And in the end, all my hard work and going 150% was for naught. He got bored and left me anyways.

I am not trying to be totally argumentative. If you got something good out of the advice, that's great, but it's an analogy that doesn't strike me in exactly the same way it struck you.

I fall back on the old advice of treating others as you would like to be treated yourself. That means not being rude, or sloppy or making the other person do all the work. It means giving back when someone is giving to you. It means just trying to be helpful and supportive.

It doesn't mean chasing someone else with your tongue hanging out and your ear to the ground waiting for a sign that there's a new need coming up that you should get ready for. (LOL! Sounds anatomically impossible, anyways!!). That's a good way to sell a product, for sure. I'm always trying to think ahead to what the next need of the customer might be. And once I see a need, I will ask the customer questions and try to match my product to him until he tells me to STOP. If I did that with MEN, in any way shape or form, I think it would be something between harassment and solicitation.

And going to another work analogy, if my boss thought, for one minute, that I was TOTALLY devoted to her, completely bought into all her concepts and laying awake at night trying to anticipate her every need, I'd be setting myself up for a cut in pay and probably some serious abuse as well. I keep my job by DOING my work, very well, but also by letting her know that I don't think I should be her go-fer or slave. She would love a slave, a FREE slave, to follow her around and pick up after her messes and the things she doesn't want to do (like completing apps after she's sold a policy). But I'm only going to do so much of that. If I didn't drop the ball occasionally, or remind her of her shortcomings every once in a while, she'd run roughshod over me and I'd get nothing.

There needs to be BALANCE in any relationship, and I personally can't achieve that by looking at my partner in a relationship like I would a customer.

Just my opinion.

User avatar
Doreen Peri
Site Admin
Posts: 14617
Joined: July 10th, 2004, 3:30 pm
Location: Virginia
Contact:

Post by Doreen Peri » February 16th, 2006, 6:54 pm

I haven't read all you posted yet, Laurie... just stopped when I saw you quote the second half of my sentence and then respond to only that second half.

What I said was

"But if you treat me with the same respect a business owner treats his customers, your focus is to fulfill my needs. "

What you replied to was the second half of the statement "your focus is to fulfill my needs."

I was only explaining the analogy.

A business owner's goal is to fulfill the customer's needs.

That's the analogy.

Going back to read the rest now.

User avatar
Doreen Peri
Site Admin
Posts: 14617
Joined: July 10th, 2004, 3:30 pm
Location: Virginia
Contact:

Post by Doreen Peri » February 16th, 2006, 7:08 pm

1) I am not a product, I am a person.
2) I am not selling anything.
3) It's up to each individual to decide whether or not they would like to be in a relationship, and with whom.
4) I am going to find out what the other person's needs are, certainly, and if I can fulfill those needs, I will certainly make sure they understand that. But it's easy to go overboard with this analogy. Take the example of different sexual drives. If your partner wants a LOT of sex and you only want a little it might be difficult for you to meet that need without compromising your own.
Nope you're not a product. Nobody is. It's just an analogy.

If the needs of a partner cannot be fulfilled by the other partner unless the other partner compromises his own needs or values, including sexual needs, then the partners are probably not well matched.
I guess it all depends on how badly you want to be in the relationship. If you're willing to bend over backwards to meet every single one of your "customer's" needs, and stay ahead of the game to anticipate new ones too, then you must need to be in the relationship pretty badly.
I don't think the analogy refers to bending over backwards. I think it's simply saying that it's a good idea to pay attention and to ASK your partner if his or her needs are being met and if not, which needs aren't so you can better try to fulfill them. It's just a matter of paying attention, it seems to me, which is the author's point.
I fall back on the old advice of treating others as you would like to be treated yourself. That means not being rude, or sloppy or making the other person do all the work. It means giving back when someone is giving to you. It means just trying to be helpful and supportive.

It doesn't mean chasing someone else with your tongue hanging out and your ear to the ground waiting for a sign that there's a new need coming up that you should get ready for. (LOL! Sounds anatomically impossible, anyways!!). That's a good way to sell a product, for sure. I'm always trying to think ahead to what the next need of the customer might be. And once I see a need, I will ask the customer questions and try to match my product to him until he tells me to STOP. If I did that with MEN, in any way shape or form, I think it would be something between harassment and solicitation.
I agree that treating others as you would like to be treated yourself is a great idea! Being helpful and supportive, yes!

Again, I don't think the analogy the author uses comes anywhere near to suggesting that someone chase someone else around with his or her tongue hanging out and his or her ear to the ground waiting for a need to fulfill.

To apply this to the analogy.... I hate salespeople like that! I walk out of a store quickly when a salesperson tries to hard sell me, following me around, asking me question after question. I don't like to be pushed.
And going to another work analogy, if my boss thought, for one minute, that I was TOTALLY devoted to her, completely bought into all her concepts and laying awake at night trying to anticipate her every need, I'd be setting myself up for a cut in pay and probably some serious abuse as well. I keep my job by DOING my work, very well, but also by letting her know that I don't think I should be her go-fer or slave. She would love a slave, a FREE slave, to follow her around and pick up after her messes and the things she doesn't want to do (like completing apps after she's sold a policy). But I'm only going to do so much of that. If I didn't drop the ball occasionally, or remind her of her shortcomings every once in a while, she'd run roughshod over me and I'd get nothing.
I don't think the analogy suggests that one partner lay awake at night and try to anticipate the other partner's every need.

I think it stresses communication and to be open to listening to your partner's needs.

And I don't think it says anything about being a slave to another person's needs. It just says that you WANT to GIVE the other person what they need because you LOVE them. To me, that's what the analogy says, anyway.
There needs to be BALANCE in any relationship, and I personally can't achieve that by looking at my partner in a relationship like I would a customer.
I agree. There needs to be balance. I also agree that I can't look at my partner as a customer either.

But I think it's a good idea to be open to listening to my partner's needs and for him to be open to listening to mine.

And I think if we love each other enough, we'll want to try to fulfill each other's needs, as long as we don't compromise our own values.

People definitely should NOT feel forced to be anything other than who they are.

I guess you read the analogy on deeper or more serious levels than I did.

I just read it as a simple concept... something to think about... thinking about learning how to better communicate so partners can better fulfill each other's needs.

That's all.

Thanks for the conversation!

Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest