How We Deal with Information Overload

/2 Comments/by

We’re in the dead of winter in Columbus, Ohio, and that means each morning as I make my way into work, it’s pitch black outside. As I drove to work recently, traffic was heavy and moving slowly so I had time to reflect. As I looked around I was struck by how much there is to see but which goes unnoticed when I’m driving closer to the speed limit.

During the drive I paid particular attention to the buildings and myriad of lights. The lights were easily distinguished from the car lights as were buildings from the trees and many other objects. Having worked for State Auto Insurance for more than 20 years, I’ve conservatively made the same drive about 4,000 times and yet, on this day, I noticed certain things for the first time.
In the midst of all this my mind wandered to persuasion and how the principles of influence work on people. Just like my brain doesn’t need to process certain input – many objects in the distance – when making the drive, neither do our minds process all the information that comes our way each day. Here’s an interesting quote that tells us just how bombarded we are:

“This year, the average consumer will see or hear 1 million marketing messages – that’s almost 3,000 per day. No human being can pay attention to 3,000 messages every day.” Fast Company – Permission Marketing by William C. Taylor

You might be thinking “Wow!” right about now, so I’ll wow you even more. That quote is now 14 years old! Imagine how much more marketing material comes your way though the proliferation of the Internet, Facebook, and smart phones. There’s no way you can process it all and that’s why Martin Lindstrom, author of Buyology, asserts that 85% of what you do every day is processed by your subconscious.
Because we cannot process all the information that comes in through our senses, our brains develop shortcuts to help us manage. The principles of influence tap into this subconscious processing quite often. While there are certainly times when they lead to mistakes and other times where manipulative people use them to take advantage of us, more often than not they lead to good decisions and that’s why we come to rely on them so heavily. Below are
some examples of the principles at work in your decision making.
1. When your neighbor gets his house painted and you think it looks nice you’re probably very willing to use the same painters. Your friendship – liking – lets you rely on their recommendation much more than those of mere acquaintances. After all, friends want to help friends.
2. Someone invites you to a party and you enjoy yourself. Even though you’ve never asked them to a movie or dinner before, you do so next time because you appreciate their hospitality. We tend to “return the favor” because that’s how reciprocity works.
3. You’re not too interested in seeing a new movie but four people in your group of six want to see it, so you go along. Consensus, what everyone else is doing, impacted your decision. You may or may not like the movie but odds are you still enjoyed yourself because you were with your friends and that was better than going to a movie alone.
4. You’re watching your regular news station – could be FOX or CNN – and hear political commentary from a news anchor quoting a prominent politician from the party you support. You’re more likely to believe the report without investigating it further because of the authority of both the news anchor and the politician.
5. Your friend asked you to help him move next Saturday because you once said, “If you ever need anything just call me.” You really wanted to watch the ballgame but you help him instead because if you didn’t you’d feel like you were backing out of your word. That’s consistency at work in you.
6. You love IKEA and hear they’re having a huge sale but it ends on Sunday. You hop in the car and make the drive to the store even though you don’t really need any new furniture. Scarcity is prompting you to do something you wouldn’t have done otherwise.
In most of these examples, critical thinking is largely bypassed. When I give a talk or lead a training session I always have people who insist they don’t fall for any of this. I just smile because I know those are typically the people who respond to persuasion attempts the most and their strong reaction is a way to convince themselves they don’t, because it makes them feel as if they’ve lost some freedom of choice and have been duped. But they also miss the point that most of the time people are not trying to take advantage of them. There’s nothing wrong with going to the movie most people want to see or inviting a couple out to dinner because they first invited you to a party. As I noted earlier, the principles of influence generally guide us into good behavior and that’s why we continue to use them “on automatic pilot” so often.If you’re viewing this by email and want to listen to the audio version click here. If you want to leave a comment click here.

Brian, CMCT
influencepeople 
Helping You
Learn to Hear “Yes”.

Why We Put Up with Hazing

/1 Comment/by

Hazing is defined as the act of forcing someone to perform strenuous, humiliating, or dangerous tasks. It’s especially prevalent with new or potential recruits in the military, college fraternities, and various other clubs. Hazing is typically part of the right of initiation; passages people must endure before becoming a full-fledged members of some groups.

Who can forget National Lampoon’s Animal House and the classic scene where Faber college freshmen pledges to the Delta Tau Chi fraternity were repeatedly spanked with a wooden paddle, each time responding with, “Thank you sir, may I have another!” The portrayal of what the Delta Tau pledges had to go through in the movie was seemingly innocent, albeit humiliating, college fun. Unfortunately life isn’t always like the movies. Last fall Robert Champion, a 26 year-old Florida AM University student, “died within an hour of a hazing incident” according to an autopsy.
Champion was the band drum major and allegedly was repeatedly hit by other band members in a hazing incident. Roland S. Martin addressed this dangerous practice in a CNN article he called “Only students can truly end hazing.”
One question that needs to be asked is why Robert Champion would choose to go through such hazing? Why do fraternity pledges endure “Hell Week”? Why to military recruits and others voluntarily put themselves in harm’s way just to join a group? I think two principles of influence address a good bit of the psychology behind the decisions of people who want to become members of certain groups.
Consensus, also known as social proof, is the principle of influence that alerts us to the reality that people look to the behavior of others when deciding what the right course of action is. We are influenced by what many other people are doing or by the behaviors of people we view as being similar to us. Imagine for a moment you’re a part of a dozen people who are trying to get into some club. When you see those ordinary people who appear to be just like you willingly submitting to some form of hazing it would be extremely hard to be the first, or only person to stand up and say no. Mom and dad would have called what you’re experiencing in that moment “peer pressure.” It’s not unlike teens and smoking. They all know it’s bad for them – in addition to being expensive – and yet many do it because their friends are all doing it.
To make matters more difficult, researchers find that consensus is even stronger when people are not sure what the right course of action is. Never having pledged a fraternity or joined the military you can see why pledges and recruits find it that much tougher to say no.
The next principle at play is scarcity. This principle addresses the psychological reality that people tend to want things more when they think they’re less available or harder to get. Groucho Marx was famous for saying, “I wouldn’t want to belong to any club that would have me as a member.” In other words, if any club openly accepted Groucho then maybe that club wasn’t such a great club after all. The harder it is to get in the more people value membership. That’s a big reason some clubs, fraternities and other organizations make it difficult to join.
However, hazing is only one way to make joining a club difficult and thus gaining the benefits of scarcity. Getting into Harvard or Yale is tough because of the grades required. In order to qualify for the Boston Marathon runners need to run certain times to earn the right to run the race. The Marines are famous for saying they’re “The Few, The Proud, The Marines,” implying not everyone can join. In each case, apart from the need for hazing it’s still very, very difficult to be a part of those groups.
Roland Martin is right, only students can end the hazing and that admonition extends to anyone else in positions of power in exclusive or semi-exclusive groups. Exclusivity can be built in through other means and as pledges and recruits see others going through the new, non-hazing, initiation rites they’ll probably fall in line and see them as acceptable and normal. In time, as class after class goes through the new passages perhaps hazing as we know it today, and the tragedies that sometimes result, will become a thing of the past.If you’re viewing this by email and want to listen to the audio version click here. If you want to leave a comment click here.

Brian, CMCT
influencepeople 
Helping You Learn to Hear “Yes”.

The Influential Steve Jobs

/0 Comments/by

I
recently read Steve Jobs by Walter Isaacson. It was an interesting book about one of the most influential people of the last 100 years. When I say Jobs was influential I don’t mean in the sense of necessarily using the science of influence. I say Jobs was influential because the products he developed are used by so many people around the world and have set the standard for many communication devices today. Indeed, the iPhone and iPad are the standards when it come to phones and tablet technology.

I found an interesting paradox as I was reading the book, because I enjoyed the book but found myself disliking Jobs the more I got into it. At times I caught myself thinking, “I love my iPhone but can’t stand him.” I almost felt guilty that I enjoy so much what he invented because of the path he took to get there and how he negatively impacted so many people along the way.
There were certain descriptions used of Jobs throughout the book that I found to be nonsensical, particularly his “reality distortion field.” The author and many people he quotes talk about Jobs’ vision – be it for a new product, deadline or something he simply believed – as if he had some magical power to distort reality. He was certainly a visionary and he had a strong will coupled with a bully-like approached that helped get things done. For those reading this who played sports, think of your meanest, toughest coach and multiply that person many times over and you begin to get the picture of the approach Jobs used with people. Nonetheless, if you enjoy Apple products or just biographies of people who shaped history then I encourage you to pick up Steve Jobs because it’s a fascinating look at the man who’s had so much impact on the world we live in.
The following paragraph caught my attention and is the basis for this post because it relates to the science of influence and sales:

“When it came time to announce the price of the new machine, Jobs did what he would often do in product demonstrations: reel off the features, describe them as being ‘worth thousands and thousands of dollars,’ and get the audience to imagine how expensive it really should be. Then he announced what he hoped would seem like a low price.”

Whether or not Jobs understood he was using the science of influence, he was, by tapping into the compare and contrast phenomenon. This is used all the time in sales because the price of a product can neither be high or low unless it’s compared to something else. That something is quite often another price. For example, when I first started running I went to a department store and got a pair of running shoes for about $40. They were much better than anything else I’d ever worn so I was happy until I realized I needed a better shoe after logging lots of miles. Imagine my sticker shock when I saw good running shoes at a real running store sold for $65 – $115! Fortunately for me there were some good salespeople who could clearly explain what I was getting for my money.
Sometimes the comparison point isn’t another price; rather it’s describing everything someone will get. A good description makes them realize they’re getting quite a bit and can soften the blow price might deliver. We see this all the time on infomercials when we hear, “But wait, there’s more!” That’s where the infomercial host goes on to describe all the extra ginsu knives we get for the same low price we were considering buying a single knife for.
Another example comes from my area of expertise, insurance. In your auto insurance policy there’s a coverage called “liability” which protects you in the event that you cause bodily harm to another person or damage their property in an auto accident. The most common amount of coverage people carry to protect themselves is $100,000. The bad news is that really doesn’t go very far in today’s litigious society when some cars are worth nearly that much and even a short
hospital stay can easily exceed that amount.
Having more than 25 years in the insurance industry I’d never recommend selling someone less than $300,000 in liability coverage. Of course the natural objection from a customer would be paying three times more for all of the extra coverage. But the good news is it doesn’t cost three times more! A good salesperson would use a similar approach to Steve Jobs and might say, “If you’re like most people you’re expecting to pay three times more for three times more coverage. While that’s a reasonable assumption I have some great news, it will only cost $X more, not even close to three times as much.”
The value of this approach is that it lets a customer see there’s clearly a need for the extra coverage (they hear about lawsuits in the media almost daily), and their satisfaction level will go up when they realize they’re getting triple the coverage for a fraction of what they expected to pay.
No matter whether you’re a salesperson, involved in marketing, work with advertising or just trying to convince your spouse to spend some money on something you want, look for legitimate comparisons that will make your request look like the best, most reasonable choice. You may not have as much success as Jobs did with Apple but science tells us the odds of you hearing “Yes” will go up rather dramatically.
Brian, CMCT
influencepeople 
Helping You Learn to Hear “Yes”.

Influencers from Around the World – How to Present Price Effectively

/4 Comments/by

Marco Germani is our guest writer to start the New Year. Marco has been sharing posts with readers for a couple of years now and has written a book on persuasion in Italian, I Meccanismi della Persuasione. Marco always brings his unique perspective to his posts so I’m sure you’ll enjoy reading his views on How to Present Price Effectively. You can connect with Marco on Facebook,
LinkedIn and Twitter.

Brian, CMCT 
influencepeople 
Helping You Learn to Hear “Yes”.
How to Present Price Effectively
As we all know, in a negotiation price is almost never the only factor that determines the good or bad outcome. There is always at least one other factor along with the price which decisively influences the final outcome; in other words, if the only obstacle to the successful conclusion of the negotiation is price, in most cases the two sides can find agreement. Let’s look at three ways to best present the price of our product or service and maximize our ability to successfully conclude the sale.
1) Never talk about price until you have explained value.
Jeffery Gitomer is renowned for saying that people hate to be sold but they love to buy. Therefore there is a great proliferation of shopping malls in our cities in Italy; places we feel we can freely choose what to buy without the pressure of a seller perhaps using some subtle technique to manipulate us. In addition, each article has a price tag on it so we can immediately attach an economic value to what we see and evaluate immediately whether we prefer to keep that amount of money in our pocket (or bank) or exchange it for the pleasure or utility that the product can produce in our lives.
In the case of a direct sale, which requires the knowledge and skill of a professional vendor, the price has completely different role. The potential customer, as we begin to introduce our product, often has in mind one question, “How much is it?” To unveil the price too early in the presentation is a very common mistake of inexperienced salesmen. The priority, in fact, must always be to communicate and explain the value of the product before communicating its cost. For example, if a customer asks me too soon the price of a product I am presenting, my response is, “Dear customer, the price is the best part of this product and I will cover this subject shortly, but first I want to explain why this product could solve that problem of yours you mentioned earlier, improve your life, etc..”
2) Break-down the price as much as possible
The same price can be communicated in different ways and have a completely different impact on the buyer. If I am presenting a nutrition program based on food supplements, which cost 100 USD per month, it will be my duty, when I go to communicate this price to the prospect, to affirm that the program costs “only 3 USD a day.” In this way the potential customer’s mind is focused on the daily price, comparing it with how much they already spend each day for food, rather than focusing on total spending of 100 USD. I’m not lying or trying to manipulate the prospect, I am just presenting the same information from a different angle, which, after all, is exactly the object of the study of persuasion.
3) Explain the price in relative terms
If I have to sell a training course worth 1,000 USD, I will address the issue of price as follows, “The COST of this course, which is what is necessary to the company that organizes it to cover the costs of educational materials, rent the hall, pay the people who work the event and the speaker, is 1,000 USD, but its VALUE is at least 100 times higher. If we were to charge for the value of this course, we would have a price so high that very few people could afford it.
And, in the case of a book, “The price written on the cover is just what the publisher needs to cover the printing costs, the supply chain to bring it to the library and ensure a minimum profit to the people involved, but its value is also much higher. If the prospects objects, stating 1,000 USD for a training course is too much, I can put the price in relative terms with the following reasoning, “Let’s say you make with your job 1,000 USD per month. You probably earn more than this, but let us make this conservative assumption. If a person you completely trust in these matters, suggested you to invest in a stock, which can give you a sure income, would you be willing to invest each month 10% of what you are earning now? Now, if you are not aware of this, I inform you that investing in yourself can give you, in time, a return infinitely superior to the best stock today on the market. How many training courses and seminar do you attend each year? (If the person did me the objection of the price, the answer is almost always zero). If you decide to invest only 10% of your monthly income on yourself, in less than a year, you put aside the amount you need for this course.”
By adapting these three factors to your product or service, you can greatly increase your chances of closing a sale, provided always that you are proposing a valuable product at a fair and competitive price and assuming your primary goal is always to help people, rather than simply to earn a commission!
Marco

Influencers from Around the World – You’re the Manager – What Would You Do?

/0 Comments/by

Hoh Kim has been contributing to Influence PEOPLE for more than two years. One of only two Cialdini Method Certified Trainers (CMCT) in Asia, Hoh also has a masters in PR/intercultural communication from Marquette University. His website is The Lab h and he also writes a blog called Cool Communications. You can make contact with Hoh on LinkedIn, Facebook and Twitter. 

Brian, CMCT 
influencepeople 
Helping You Learn to Hear “Yes”.

You’re
the Manager – What Would You Do?

Imagine you are the HR manager of a pharmaceutical company. Last week, your company held a two-day off-site workshop, inviting all 221 employees. You had several busy months leading up to the workshop due to being charged with organizing the event; i.e., selecting the venue, accommodations and food, inviting guest speakers and setting the agenda. Now, it’s over and the HR director, your boss, asked you to email a survey to the employees asking for their feedback. This is important because the survey results will be considered for your upcoming performance review. Your boss said something very important, “As this is internal survey, the response rate should be over 60%. With your encouragement, people will respond.”
So you developed a survey with a dozen questions and sent it Tuesday to all 221 employees. The deadline to wrap up the results is next Tuesday at 10 a.m. Friday morning you checked the online survey system to find out how many employees responded. On the first day, Tuesday morning, as soon as the survey was sent 25 employees responded. Not a bad start. By Tuesday afternoon an additional 14 employees responded.
Wednesday morning only five employees responded and from Wednesday through Friday morning, no one else responded! Only 20% have responded and you have to have an additional 40% to meet your boss’s expectation. You have many things to handle and you know you can have only one follow up email to encourage more participation. How could you write the email?
I have observed similar cases at companies and schools where
employee participation is encouraged via email and then followed up the same way. It is easy to find people who sent emails that read like this, “Last week I emailed employees asking you to participate in a survey and only 20% responded. Would you participate so that we can improve our workshop next year?”
What would Dr. Cialdini do in this case? One of the principles of influence at work is social proof (a.k.a. consensus); people follow the majority. But, Dr. Cialdini warns to be careful with negative social proof. Normally, it’s better not to use social proof in negative situations. Think about it for a moment. People follow the majority and your complaint stating “only 20% have responded” lets people who didn’t respond to the survey know that they are in the majority, not the minority. Employees will not be persuaded to respond when most other coworkers are not responding.
So what should you do? Pick some positive responses – fast, concrete, and constructive ones – and use them in your follow-up email. To test this I did a small experiment a few years back when I facilitated in a customized Principles of Persuasion workshop for a small group of top performing employees in a Korean company. Before the workshop I sent an email survey to learn their interests and concerns about the workshop. As soon as the survey was sent, 23% of the participants responded. Not bad. On the second day there was no response. Third day? None. On the fourth day I realized I had to do something so I wrote another email. The new email said, “As soon as the survey went out, there were people who responded to the survey by providing a very detailed and constructive feedback. I appreciate that. If you have not had a chance to participate yet, please do so by clicking on the link. It is a very short survey!” Of course, I didn’t say, “only 23% responded…” What happened? For the next two days, the response rate tripled, going from 23% to 69%. Not bad at all!

So what’s the point? When using social proof to persuade be careful how you use it because you might unknowingly hurt yourself when you think you’re doing the right thing.

Hoh, CMCT

“There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so.”

/4 Comments/by

It was in Hamlet that William Shakespeare penned the famous line, “There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so.” I came across this quote while doing some research for a training class I’ll be leading on attitude but the more I thought about that simple sentence the more I thought about how persuasion differs from manipulation. Some people are uncomfortable with the psychology of persuasion because they think using that knowledge gives them an unfair advantage over others.

It’s true that understanding how people’s minds work and knowing more effective ways to get someone to say “Yes” gives you an advantage. However, I don’t see that being any different than good looking people having a leg up when it comes to modeling, math whizzes doing better in fields like accounting, or people with great voices having a better chance at a singing career.
In each case those people possess something most others do not but we don’t consider it an unfair advantage. To be sure, if a good looking person uses their looks to take advantage of you or if the math genius knowingly confuses you with numbers to get the best deal then we’d say those people were not acting in a fair manner.
Richard
Shell and Mario Moussa, authors of The Art of WOO, have a wonderful quote that goes to the heart of the matter so to speak. They wrote, “An earnest and sincere lover buys flowers and candy for the object of his affections. So does the cad who succeeds to take advantage of another’s heart. But when the cad succeeds, we don’t blame the flowers and candy. We rightly question his character.”
Flowers and candy are neither good nor bad because, as Shakespeare rightly pointed out, we are the ones who ascribe meaning to them. Flowers can be wonderful when a man gives them to a woman when he asks her to marry him. They can also signify profound sadness when displayed at a funeral. Candy might not be so good if
you’re on a diet but it’s usually received with great joy by little kids on Halloween.
So
what does this have to do with understanding the psychology of persuasion? The six principles of influence as defined by Dr. Cialdini are neither good nor bad. They simply describe how people respond to one another and each can be used in positive ways or each can be used to take advantage of another person. Let’s take a brief look at each principle to see how this can happen.
Reciprocity tells us people feel obligated to return the favor when someone first does something for them. This is a great principle to know if you helped a friend move and need help down the road because your friend will be very likely to want to return the favor and help you. Of course there are always people who give you things or do things for you just so you’ll feel obligated to help them in some way.
Liking is the natural inclination to enjoy working with or being around people we like. Finding ways to like other people and get them to like you makes life much easier. Don’t you enjoy working with people you like? Sure you do. And I bet you want to like your neighbors and hope they like you. Deceitful people will tap into this principle by flattering you just to get you to do what they want.
Consensus is the tendency for us to go along with the crowd. Much of the time this is the right thing to do because “there’s safety in numbers” and “everybody can’t be wrong.” A dishonest person might try to sway you by telling you how “everyone” is doing something because they understand you’ll feel a psychological pull to go along with the crowd.
Authority is all about our reliance on people we view as experts. When you don’t have time to do a lot of research it’s a big time saver to defer to an expert. For example, most people don’t want to do their own taxes so they hire an accountant. On the flip side, there are people who prey upon this by creating a false impression of authority just so you’ll trust them.
Consistency is all about people doing what they say they’ll do or doing what you’ve done in the past. That’s very good because we can rely on people to continue in a consistent manner when we engage them. Of course, the manipulator seeing that can dupe the unsuspecting person by referring to something they said just to take advantage of this principle.
Scarcity comes into play when people’s actions are impacted by the thought of something becoming less available. Quite often this is good because we don’t miss out on opportunities that might go away. However,
this can be used against us when untrustworthy types create a false sense of urgency to get us to act in the moment rather than giving us time to consider all options.
As you can see, each of the six principles has an upside. In fact, I’d say the upsides are huge because they typically help us make good decisions faster. After all, if they didn’t lead to good decisions most of the time we’d quickly figure that out and stop responding to the cues. But just as flowers and candy aren’t
always good, the principles can be used in manipulative ways by some people who are only looking to get their way no matter the cost to the other, unsuspecting person. Just like the honest and sincere lover and the cad, it comes down to the motive of the person wielding the principles. I trust that you as a reader have come to see my focus is on the ethical use so win-win situations are created. Even if you don’t see yourself as the influencing type, understanding the principles will also help you protect yourself from the cad.

Brian, CMCT
influencepeople 
Helping You Learn to Hear “Yes”.

Unwanted Gifts and Help

/1 Comment/by

Gifts are usually a good thing, especially on your birthday, Christmas, an anniversary or some other special occasion. Of course, they’re also very nice when they come totally unexpected.

From the time we’re little, we’re taught to reciprocate when we receive a gift. Gifts are typically met with a verbal “Thank you!” or you might remember your mom or dad making you write thank cards. Reciprocating when given a gift isn’t limited to American culture either. Social scientists agree that people in all cultures are raised in the way of reciprocation.
Gifts differ from rewards in that when giving a gift there’s no guarantee the other party will respond in some way. With rewards an “if – then” system is put in place. For example; if you exceed your goals then I’ll reward you with a $100 bonus. There’s not much risk on my part because your failure to exceed your goals means I don’t have to give you $100.
Sometimes we get unwanted gifts, things we’d never buy or ask for, and yet we feel reciprocity tugging at us to return the favor in some way. Savvy practitioners of influence understand this and use it to their benefit by giving you something you may not want knowing you’ll give them something in return. Hari Krishnas were famous for this trick when they’d give unsuspecting people a flower and those same people then felt compelled to reciprocate with a small donation.
All of this is top of mind for me because of a recent business trip to Nashville. A group of us went to BB King’s Restaurant and Blues Club for dinner and some music. When I went to the men’s room there was a man there sitting on a stool near the sinks. As soon as someone went to wash their hands he was handing them a towel and taking a lint brush to their back.
Personally I find the whole set up offensive for several reasons. First, I don’t want some stranger touching me, especially in the men’s room. No matter where it is it’s an invasion of space.
Second, I don’t like tipping people when they’ve not done something worthy of it. To me it’s like ordering something at a counter and just because someone hands you your order they expect a tip. That’s entirely different than a server who hustles for you over dinner or lunch. When someone does something for me that I can do for myself with little or no effort, like handing me a towel, I don’t feel that’s worthy of a tip.
Not only was reciprocity at work in the men’s room, so was consensus because everyone could clearly see money in the man’s tip jar. That starts a battle inside about whether or not to tip because others have already done so. Here’s a hint; the tip jar was probably “salted” meaning the person put some money in to start with, in order to give the impression that others have been tipping and so should you.
One other thing to point out, all of this becomes more difficult when you’re the only one in the restroom. It’s like making eye contact with someone who asks you a question; you can’t pretend they’re not there in an effort to not engage.
Back to reciprocity; we feel the urge to reciprocate because whether or not we asked, the man in the restroom did something for us. I’ll tell you I didn’t tip because the whole set up actually angers me a bit. And yet after describing all of this to you I must admit, it was still difficult! Not only was it difficult for me, it was for others. In fact, when I brought this up later in the night one person in our group said he decided to wait till he got back to the hotel rather than go to the restroom at BB King’s! That illustrates just how powerful the urge to reciprocate can be.
As I share this I recall a similar incident many years ago at a different location. When one fellow in our party came back from the men’s room and told us there was someone in there handing out towels another person emphatically stated how much he dislikes that and that he never tips people who do that. And yet he did that night because someone in our group saw him do it. Again, despite his protests we see how strong the pull or reciprocity can be on any of us!
So how do you combat this psychological phenomenon when you feel the tug of war going on inside of you? I tell you it’s not easy and trying to do so will elicit a lot of thoughts and feelings. You need to ask yourself a few questions:
a. Did I want what the other person gave me?
b. Would I normally tip this person if I didn’t feel compelled to?
c. Does this feel like a ploy to get something or was it a genuine gift?
If you answered no to any of the questions then you need to remind yourself of that and make a choice not to give in to the power of reciprocity. The principles of influence usually guide us into good behavior but not 100% of the time. As I noted before, savvy people understand these principles and will seek to use them against you at times so be watchful and be vigilant if you ever think the principles are being used in an unethical manner.

Brian, CMCT
influencepeople 
Helping You Learn to Hear “Yes”.

Why the “We are the 99%” Movement?

/0 Comments/by

Earlier this year a movement began in the United States known as “We are the 99%.” If you live in America it’s hard to believe you would not have heard about it because of the considerable media coverage the Occupy Wall Street protesters have received in major cities across the country. It’s a good bet most of my foreign readers have heard about it too because of the world-wide economic depression we find ourselves in, and of some similar protests internationally.

Why such dissatisfaction in the land of opportunity, the country where almost everyone wants to live? Certainly the financial crisis that led to the economic downturn in 2008 helped start the movement as many unemployed and underemployed Americans looked at what they perceive to be injustice caused by Wall Street and other large financial institutions.
I believe one psychological reason for the movement is rooted in a phenomenon Robert Cialdini, PhD., likes to call “compare and contrast.” This phenomenon tells us we experience things as being more different than they actually are depending on how they are presented.
According to the Congressional Budget Office, between 1979 and 2007 Americans known as “the middle class,” approximately 60% of wage earners, saw their income increase by 40%. Most people would say that’s not bad, until they compare it to the top 1% of American wage earners who saw their income increase an average of 275% during the same period. To make matters worse, when you group the bottom 90% together that group actually saw their incomes go down by $900. While the reasons for these gaps are many, the bottom line is this; it’s human nature to compare and contrast and the widening gap is a cause of discontent.
Is a person good looking? You can only make that determination by comparing that person to other people. Do you make a lot of money? Again, that’s a relative term and can only be answered by comparing your income to someone else’s. Many people are happy with their salary…until they find out they make significantly less than some coworkers. When it comes to compare and contrast, we all do it to one extent or another.
We live in a time of unprecedented wealth and even people who don’t earn much live far better than their relatives from decades ago. Indeed, it’s rare when Americans don’t have cable television, a computer in their home and a cell phone – hardly necessities of life. Yet there’s a tremendous amount of dissatisfaction because of the perceived income gaps and that they only seem to be growing larger as time goes by.
How did we get here? One statistic I share in my Principles of Persuasion workshop has to do with CEO pay. In 1980 a typical CEO made about 42 times more than the average American worker. By 1990 that figure had grown to 109 times. In 1993, the Fed mandated full disclosure of CEO compensation in an effort to help curb this trend but unfortunately their plan backfired big time. I bet you didn’t know this; by 2005 the difference between the typical CEO and average American worker’s pay had ballooned to 525 times! You read that right. In all fairness, in more recent years the gap has shrunk to a mere 269 times.

How could this have happened? After all, some of the thinking behind the full disclosure of compensation was to let everyone see how much CEOs and other top executives were earning so stockholders could put the brakes on the incredible income growth. It failed because of consensus.

Consensus, sometimes referred to as social proof, is the principle of influence that tells us we look to the actions of others when making decisions and this is heightened when we’re not completely sure what to do. Prior to the federal mandate about compensation disclosure it was an educated guess as to what the market was paying other CEOs in a given industry. Once it because public knowledge it wasn’t unlike what we see with star athletes in sports. Salaries for those athletes have skyrocketed because once an athlete knows what other top performers make their sports agent begins to negotiate an even bigger deal for the athlete. It’s a keep up with the Jones’ mentality and so it’s been with CEO compensation.
Perhaps we’ve now reached the point the Feds thought we would back in the early 1990s when they implemented the full disclosure rule. The Fed thought people would say “enough is enough” back then but it seems to have taken a worldwide economic depression to wake up the voice of the majority of Americans. Where it goes is yet to be seen because there will be a tug of war between the average American comparing their income to the top earners and the power of consensus as companies vie for the best CEO talent they can find.

Brian, CMCT
influencepeople 
Helping You Learn to Hear “Yes”.

Do We Need Term Limits for a Better America?

/6 Comments/by

In November many Americans went to the polls to vote on various issues. In less than a year we’ll go back to vote in the Presidential election so the rhetoric will heat up with each passing month until November 2012. Knowing this I thought it would be a good time to look at a political issue – term limits – through the lens of influence.

Precedence was set with American presidents when George
Washington declined to run for a third term and based on his actions no president ran for a third term in office until Franklin Roosevelt did so in 1944. The unusual circumstance of a world war in two major theatres was a big reason for FDR’s decision. However, not long afterwards the American people passed the 22 Amendment which limited a United States president to a maximum of two terms in office.
For some reason Americans have not done the same thing when it comes to term limits for congressman and senators. While some states enacted laws to limit the terms of their particular representatives in Washington in an effort to move away from “career politicians” the U.S. Supreme court overturned those laws saying states could not limit the term of national offices.
I’m not going to argue if term limits are good or bad. Like just about anything in life there are positives and negatives to each side of the argument. What is concerning is whether or not the best people get elected and whether or not we’re getting fresh political ideas simply because of how voters make decisions.
I remember my pastor saying, “People will remain the same until the pain of being the same is greater than the perceived pain of change.” That’s akin to, “If it ain’t broke don’t fix it.” Americans saw voter revolts in 1994 when republicans swept into power in the house and senate and again in 2010 because of our economic woes. Both times there was so much dissatisfaction with the status quo that people kicked out many incumbents. My question is, why do we have to wait for things to get so bad before we act? “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it,” sounds good until you consider Steve Jobs and his iPhone. We didn’t need the iPhone because nothing was broken but we’re better off for it. Perhaps we could have the same fresh ideas and change in Washington if we routinely had new people in office.
Politicians are famous for saying things like, “We have term limits because voters can always vote someone out of office if they want to,” and, “Why do we need to restrict voter freedom?” Of course both arguments could be used against term limits for the president and yet as a country we thought it was good to limit the terms for the highest office in the land. I suspect career politicians are thinking first and foremost about self-preservation, not the good of the country.
But I digress and you’re wondering how influence ties into this. It will come as no surprise to readers when I state the obvious; nearly every sitting politician wins re-election the vast majority of the time. In fact, it’s staggering how often they win. Take a look at the charts below showing reelection rates for U.S. congressman and senators from the Center for Responsive Politics.

 

Are incumbents winning so often because they’re the best candidates? Hardly. It’s simply a function of familiarity. People go to the polls and tend to vote for the person they’re most familiar with and the farther you go down in terms of elected offices the worse it is because quite often people vote for the incumbent simply because they know nothing about the other person running. When you’ve seen or heard about your congressman for the past four years or your senator for the last six years that’s a lot of familiarity for a challenger to overcome.
On this subject, in his book Influence Science and Practice, Dr. Cialdini wrote, “Often we don’t realize that our attitude toward something has been influenced by the number of times we have been exposed to it in the past.” And it’s not just how often we hear a name it’s how much we see the face. Sitting politicians are routinely seen in the news and that helps unless their face is connected to a scandal. I can tell you from firsthand experience that I get much better response to my emails when I include my picture at the bottom of the email because familiarity helps.
While there many other things that come into play during an election we can’t underestimate the importance of simply being more familiar with one candidate vs. another. It’s the way we’re wired.
To be sure we – the typical American voter – are partly to blame because we’re notoriously disengaged when it comes to knowing the candidates, their positions, and understanding the issues. If anyone didn’t need term limits it would be presidents because I’d venture to guess we know presidential candidates better and understand the presidential issues more because of how much they’re in the media vs. lower offices and more localized issues.
In a sense terms limits save us from ourselves and how our decision making might be working against us. My boss likes to say, “If you always do what you’ve always done, you’ll always get what you’ve always got.” In other words, how can we expect anything different from Washington when we keep electing the same people for the most part? Yes, we can make a concerted effort to become more informed voters but with less than 60% of people of voting age voting in every presidential election since 1968 do we really think that will happen? I certainly don’t. Sometimes we need laws to protect ourselves from ourselves and I’d say term limits would be one such law.
Brian, CMCT
influencepeople 
Helping You Learn to Hear “Yes”.

One Piece of Paper: The Simple Approach to Powerful, Personal Leadership

/0 Comments/by

I recently finished an excellent book and wanted to share it with all of you. If you do what the author asks, I believe it will have a profound impact on your ability to lead yourself and others.

Mike Figliuolo, a friend, owner of thoughtLEADERS, and occasional guest blogger for Influence PEOPLE, just came out with his first book, One Piece of Paper: The Simple Approach to Powerful, Personal Leadership. Mike’s basic idea is that every leader would benefit from critically thinking about his or her leadership philosophy and then committing it to paper.
I write a blog on the science of influence so you might be wondering how this ties into my weekly format. A light bulb went on inside my head when I read, “Leadership is inspiring and influencing people to act in ways they ordinarily would not.” This viewpoint ties in nicely with Aristotle’s definition, “Persuasion is the art of getting people to do something they wouldn’t ordinarily do if you didn’t ask.”
Mike writes, “But one thing all leaders have in common is the need to understand, articulate, and continuously improve their leadership philosophy and do so in a simple, straightforward way.” With that in mind he asks readers to critically evaluate four areas:
  • Leading yourself
  • Leading the thinking
  • Leading your people
  • Leading a balanced life

It’s not enough to read and think about each so Mike asks readers to put pen to paper and write their own leadership maxims. He tells readers, “Maxims are simple, clear statements that serve as reminders for how you want to behave and lead and how you want your team members to behave.”

And why is this exercise so important? I agree with Mike when he writes, “As you apply your maxims on a regular basis, your behaviors will become more predictable for your team members, colleagues, friends, and family. That predictability and consistency are the foundation of trust for all your relationships. You can achieve consistency through the maxims approach first, because you have written your maxims down as rules you’d like to live by and second, because you have shared those maxims with others. That sharing strengthens your accountability for living up to those standards.”
Writing leadership maxims will increase your ability to be an effective leader and persuader because it will help enhance your personal authority. This is true because when it comes to influencing others your authority relies primarily on two things: expertise and trustworthiness.
If you’re in leadership already then I’ll make the assumption that you’ve been paying your dues and have some relative expertise. Unfortunately that’s not always enough to succeed because much of your success still depends on getting other people to buy into your ideas and that’s where trustworthiness comes in. As you write, share and live your maxims your team comes to rely on you to lead them in the way you’ve laid out. Without worrying about “the boss,” your people are more free to focus on the tasks they need to because there are no surprises coming from you.
Nearly 20 years ago I did a similar exercise after reading Steven Covey’s classic book, The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. One of Covey’s admonitions was that readers take time to write a personal mission statement. If you want to learn more about that exercise and see my personal mission statement, click here. Suffice it to say, I’ve told countless people that exercise was one of the most impacting things I’ve ever done because I refer to my personal mission statement daily. Through sheer repetition it’s impacted my conscious and subconscious mind.
I really think the same benefit awaits you with Mike’s work in One Piece of Paper because he encourages readers to review their maxims continually and revise as necessary. If you’re a young person aspiring to move into leadership or someone who’s just made that move, imagine yourself defining your leadership style and using that with the teams you’ll lead over your lifetime.
How would you feel if your boss handed you one piece of paper and said, “Let’s talk about this because this defines how I lead and what I expect. I think it’s important for you to know this so there are no surprises and we’re on the same page”? I’m willing to bet you’d feel pretty good. On the flip side, if you are an employer looking to hire a new leader I’m guessing you’d be very impressed if someone handed you one piece of paper that defined their leadership approach.
Businesses take time to develop vision and mission statements but individuals rarely give that much consideration to themselves. My encouragement to you from the standpoint of becoming a person of influence is simply this – get a copy of Mike’s book, read it, write your maxims, share them with others and review them often. Do so and you’ll be glad you did and those you lead will respond by giving you their best as often as possible.
Brian, CMCT
influencepeople 
Helping You Learn to Hear “Yes”.