Our Client’s Situation
My client was preparing for the trial when he called Human Interactions Solutions for assistance. He was troubled. He was arguing his case before a judge to whom he had loss many more cases than he had won. Immediately, Human Interaction Solutions went to work to provide valuable insights and strategies to help our client win the case.
Our Research and Insights
Through our research and predictive analytics, Human Interaction Solutions discovered key characteristics about our client, the opposing counsel, and the presiding judge. These insights guided our recommended approach and strategy for our client..
We interviewed our client extensively about his many experiences with the preceding judge. The judge was viewed as a strict, no nonsense, controlling personality who wanted clear and logical presentations in his court.
Using public information, we gathered a large amount of additional information about the judge’s decision-making history and style, education, family history, work and career path, communication preferences, preferred kinds arguments, the emotional, personality and psychological factors all of which likely affected his decisions and impacted his ruling.
Using predictive analytics and our psychological expertise, we concluded the judge’s psychological, personality, behavioral tendencies and his history of rulings made him an active participant in his court. He had a strong analytical mind and wanted statements backed by the law, facts and figures.
Our analysis also found a very significant psychological factor. The judge disliked and likely reacted viscerally to emotional arguments and displays of emotion. Emotional arguments could easily alienate him and negatively affect his rulings.
Bill, our client, was greatly respected with strong reputation for winning many of his cases over his long career. He is a strong minded, logical thinker with a wealth of knowledge about the law and the bankruptcy process. His quick wit, humor and emotional nature were well known and verified by our research.
We concluded that Bill’s emotional style was the most significant factor in his lack of success before the preceding judge. Bill was unaware that he was triggering negative psychological barriers causing the judge to frequently rule against Bill’s cases.
We discovered opposing counsel had a reputation of being a tenacious attorney. He was smart, forceful and a powerful presenter. His psychological makeup fits the profile of risk-taker – and someone who is self-convinced that certain factors are important for a decision, but likely some of those factors are not as important as he believes or claims.
Strategy & Outcome
We tailored an action strategy that turned our research insights and conclusions into an advantage for our client, in summary:
Present and emphasize unemotional, rational and factual arguments to match the judge’s preferred logical communication style.
Deeply study opposing attorney’s arguments and listen intensely for logical sounding but inconsistent fact patterns to uncover exaggerations and weaknesses in his argument. We hypothesized this approach could cause opposing counsel to become overly emotional.
Remain calm and continue logical arguments while under pressure especially when opposing counsel became emotionally charged.
As a result, our client won the case.