Tag Archive for: consensus

PEOPLE – It’s Powerful Stuff

/1 Comment/by

I’ve been blogging for more than three and a half years now. I chose the name Influence PEOPLE because we don’t persuade things. No matter how good you or I become at persuading, we can only persuade people, not things. In addition to that idea I specifically chose PEOPLE because it stands for Powerful Everyday Opportunities to Persuade that are Lasting and Ethical. I’m going to revisit PEOPLE over the next several weeks for a couple of reasons. First, I have many more readers now than when I started and I want to make sure all of you understand the PEOPLE part of the name. My second reason is because my nephew, Max, reached out to me asking about ethics.

So the first P in PEOPLE stands for Powerful. I often use the term “the science of influence” because there’s more than 60 years of research from social psychologists and behavioral economist into what causes one person to say “Yes” to another. When I lead a Principles of Persuasion workshop I emphasize the reality that small changes can make big differences because understanding the psychology of persuasion can make a big
difference. Here are some examples.
If you knew there was a factor that was twice as important in the sales process than selling the traditional
benefits of a product, would you want to know what it is so you could tap into it? Well here’s an example – a study was done on Tupperware sales and it was found that the social bond (i.e., friendship) was twice as important in the sale of Tupperware as was the preference for the product. The principle of liking tells us people prefer to say “Yes” to those they know and like. Having people like you and coming to like them can make a big, big difference in sales.
If you owned a restaurant that takes reservations then you know “no shows” cost you lots of money. Would you like to know a simple way to cut the number of no shows by two thirds, a change that
will cost you nothing? A study was done with a Chicago restaurant owner who saw no shows drop from 30% to 10% by changing the way hostesses took reservations. Instead of saying, “Please call if you have to cancel,” they began asking, “Will you please call if you have to cancel?” Because of the principle of consistency – people feel internal and external pressure to live up to their commitments – people either called, allowing the restaurant to take a new reservation, or showed up.
Let’s say you work for a charitable organization. Would you be willing to try something different in order to
double contributions? Sending a free gift such as mailing labels can significantly increase donations because of the power of reciprocity. People feel obligated to give to those who first give to them and those free mailing labels trigger this psychological response. The American Disabled Veterans organization reported donations increasing from 18% to 35% when appeals are accompanied by mailing labels.
Sometimes you need just a few more people to do what you want but you’re not sure how to make it happen. Sharing what everyone else is doing, consensus, is a great way to pull those last few
people along because the principle of consensus tells us people feel compelled to follow the crowd. I saw this once when 45 of 55 people I was training had bought a copy of Dr. Robert Cialdini’s book, Yes: 50 Scientifically Proven Ways to Be Persuasive. At the start of my training session I said, “I want to thank all of you because 45 of 55 of you bought Dr. Cialdini’s new book and that means we can literally be on the same page.” By the time the phone conference training was over and I returned to my desk seven of the 10 who had not bought the book emailed me to ask how much the book cost and who they should send the check to!
I could cite many more studies and real world examples but I think you get the point. Understanding the science of influence is Powerful! What I share isn’t based on someone’s good advice, or what worked for them; it’s rooted in decades of scientific research using controlled studies. I hope this persuades your thinking and that you’re starting to see that understanding how people think and behave and then adjusting your communication, can make a big difference with very little time, effort or money. I hope you’ll join me next week when we look at why persuasion is an Everyday skill.

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

Influencers from Around the World – Treat Your Reputation Like Gold

/0 Comments/by

 

The September Influencers from Around the World post comes all the way from down under, from Australia’s only Cialdini Method Certified Trainer Anthony McLean. Anthony just started a new venture called Social Influence Consulting Group. You can connect with Anthony on Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter.
Brian, CMCT
influencepeople 
Helping You Learn to Hear “Yes”.
Treat Your Reputation Like Gold!

 

 

How are with staying on top of things?  Are you across social media?  Do you hide away from it?  Well this next big change is going to drag you along whether you like it or not!

 

 

Imagine a world where:

 

 

  • You are hired based on your performance in online forums.
  • Where banks review your online reputation as well as your credit rating.
  • Where good references in making payments on time like renting a house can assist in renting a car.

In the reputation-driven world of the future, before anyone meets or does business with you, they will not only Google you but assess your online reputation through the many tools available to display this data.
And just as good reviews and referrals will drive people in your direction, negative comments will also impact you like never before.

Your online trustworthiness is your next big business commodity. The thing is, Reputation Marketing is not a thing of the future, it is here, now!
Your Reputation Data is already being expertly mined and collated for all to see.  Those with good reputations, as evidenced by likes, recommendations, endorsements, etc., will in the next six to 12 months see themselves gravitating towards page 1 on Google because they can be trusted and people like to interact with them.  Those with questionable reputations will fall
by the wayside just as it happens in the offline world.

Your digital reputation is fast becoming a guide to your trustworthiness; both in the digital and physical realms.
Wired magazine
reported in its September 2012 issue, “The value of reputation is not a new concept to the online world: think star ratings on Amazon, PowerSellers on eBay or reputation levels on games such as World of Warcraft.  The difference today
is our ability to capture data from across an array of digital services.  With every trade we make, comment we leave, person we ‘friend,’ spammer we flag or badge we earn, we leave a trail of how well we can or can’t be trusted.”
In the Principles of Persuasion Workshop, we know that when we are unsure of what we should do in a certain situation we look to a recognized Authority to guide our behaviour.  Critical to being a credible authority, however is not only our expertise but also our trustworthiness.  Therefore managing and marketing your reputation has just become far more important in persuading others because it will be tracked and easily found in the reputation centric world of the future.
In marketing now, a good online reputation will easily establish your authority, however if it is not managed well and is tarnished by negative comments, reviews, activities or statements, this will be made available for others to see and judge.
Likewise, when have no other ability to assess a person or their request we look to the behaviour of others like us to guide our decisions.  This is known as consensus or social proof.
A new study conducted by Berkley Economists Michael Anderson and Jeremy Magruder (published this month’s Economic Journal)found that across 328 restaurants in the San Francisco Bay Area, if crowd-sourced reviews moved a restaurant from a 3.0 to a 3.5 star rating, this would increase a restaurant’s chance of selling out during prime dining times from 13% to
34%.  Moving from 3.5 to 4.0 stars increased the chance of selling out during prime dining times by another 19 percentage points and these changes occur even though restaurant quality held constant.
The study reaffirmed that crowd-sourced reviews have a bigger impact when there is a lack of alternative information available by which to judge a restaurant’s quality. “If a restaurant has a Michelin star or it appears in the San Francisco Chronicle’s list of Top 100 Restaurants in the Bay Area, the Yelp star becomes irrelevant,” said Magruder.
Therefore Consensus (the opinion of others) is
trumped by Authority (proof you are
credible and trustworthy)!
IMPLICATION FOR YOU!
You need to start managing your reputation.  From reviews to referrals, to customer service, to being mindful of the comments you and/or your staff make.
Get good comments, solicit referrals, and provide mechanisms for others to praise you, but stay on top of the negative feedback.  Counter it.
Apologise where necessary.  But
ignore it at your peril!
“We are only at day one in the whole idea of global reputation,” says Brian Chesky, cofounder and CEO of the peer-to-peer marketplace Airbnb.  “By the end of the decade, a good online reputation could be the most valuable currency in your possession”.
Anthony, CMCT
Sources:
http://www.newscenter.berkeley.edu/2012/09/04/yelp-reviews-boost-restaurant-business/
http://www.wired.co.uk/magazine/archive/2012/09/features/welcome-to-the-new-reputation-economy?page=all
http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/television/australias-next-top-model-judge-charlotte-dawson-takes-aim-at-twitter-trolls/story-e6frfmyi-1226459899947#ixzz25yDbzUp4

Finding Another Gear

/2 Comments/by

I was out for an early morning walk not too long ago and was startled when a big German Shepherd came running straight at me. It was apparent he didn’t want to play so I raised my hands to get ready for the inevitable when suddenly his owner appeared, called his name, and the dog turned back to his house.

The incident got my heart rate going and reminded me of a similar situation when I was in college. During the summer I worked at a golf course which was about 10 miles from my home. I didn’t have regular access to a car so I rode my bike to work most days. Riding home was a little dangerous because quite often I was riding around 10 or 11 at night on some very busy roads and a few that were not well lit.
Because riding at night wasn’t safe I tried to get home as quickly as possible. I made a game of it, setting a goal to always ride home faster than the night before. I tell you that so you’ll know I was pushing myself hard the whole time I rode. In fact, like most people who push themselves, I didn’t think I could go any faster every time I rode home. My perspective changed one night when I heard a large dog barking and it sounded really close! I was amazed at how much more I could push myself and at how fast I could ride when I summoned all my energy. It was as if all of a sudden I found a new gear!
So what does this have to do with influence? As I thought about the bike riding incident so long ago it made me think about teaching people influence. I believe most people work hard most of the time. They probably convince themselves they can’t work any harder or longer, much like I convinced myself I couldn’t ride any faster.
While I found I could ride faster, unfortunately my extra effort couldn’t be sustained for long because of muscle fatigue. The same thing applies at work. Although we can always work harder in any given moment, or longer some days, we can’t do so indefinitely or else burnout sets in.
Not to worry because I have good news for you! You don’t always have to work harder or longer to get better results. When you tap into scientifically proven ways to communicate you will get better results by weaving persuasion into what you’re already doing. That’s right; you don’t have to come up with a new sales process, new marketing campaign or any other new endeavor to take advantage of the science of influence. Just look at what you’re currently doing with your communication and see where you can apply the science of influence. I’ll give you a few personal examples.
Voicemail – I incorporate a branding message at the beginning of my message and use consensus in the middle when I say “I’m probably on the phone helping another customer.” The last thing you want is for people to hear, “I’m probably in a meeting or away from my desk.”
Email – My autosignature has my title and designations which is an application of the principle of authority. I also use my picture when I’m dealing with new people because a photo creates familiarity which taps into the liking principle.
Marketing – We regularly send marketing material to prospective insurance agencies in hopes of signing them up with State Auto. When we started alerting those prospects about our agency appointment goal, and where we were relative to that goal – an application of scarcity – we saw a noticeable uptick in agents responding to our marketing emails. Those extra communications become our opportunity to sell the merits of our company.
Each of those examples are probably the kinds of things you’re currently doing in your business. However, if you’re like me before I learned about persuasion, then you’re probably missing out on some golden opportunities that are right in front of you.
There’s a time and place for working harder and longer hours because success comes through hard work and a little luck at times. On the flip side there are also times when we need to slow down and work less because we can’t maintain the hectic pace all the time. Whether you’re in the phase of longer hours and harder work or a slower time, if you ethically employ the scientifically proven principles of influence you will get significantly better results immediately; finding another gear so to speak. I’m confident of this because science and personal experience back me up on it.
Brian, CMCT
influencepeople 
Helping You Learn to Hear “Yes”.

Maximizer or Satisficer: Does it Make a Difference?

/0 Comments/by

Remember when mom, dad, or maybe grandpa would espouse their philosophy about people, starting with something like this, “Ya know, there are two kinds of people in this world…” and then they’d give you their broad take on the human race? I’m here to add another grouping of two to the human race: maximizers and satisficers.

In the book “Welcome to Your Brain,” the
authors describe maximizers as people who “spend a lot of time worrying about differences, no matter how small. In a consumer society with choices everywhere, maximizers suffer from an inability to recognize when an alternative is good enough. Indeed, from an economic perspective, spending the additional time on maximization doesn’t make sense since your time itself has some monetary value.”
On the opposite end of the spectrum we have satisficers who are described as individuals who “look until they find something good enough, then stop. Satisficers are decisive, don’t look back, and have little regret, even about mistakes.”
So what does this have to persuasion? Plenty, because in an information overloaded society in which some experts estimate the average person sees more than 3,000 marketing messages a day we cannot possibly process all the information that comes to us through our five senses. And put on top of that the fact that so
much can change in a single day, sometimes it’s all we can do to not just cover our ears, close our eyes and start screaming.
For example; I can’t process all the features of all the smart phones and balance them with all the pricing options while weighing all the new features and options I hear might come out in the next few months. TMI – too much information! Therefore, if I’m like most people I will “satisfice.” Satisficing refers to “the act of choosing an alternative that is just sufficient to satisfy a goal.” I do it, I bet you do it and so do most other people.
Dr. Cialdini’s six principles of influence act as mental short cuts, decision triggers if you will, in an information overloaded society because they help us quickly process information in a way that allows us to make a quicker decisions that we’re satisfied with. Here are some quick examples related to buying a smart phone.
Liking – A good friend of yours owns the phone you’re considering and has nothing but good things to say. He encourages you to buy the same phone and you trust his opinion because you have the same tastes in a lot of things.
Reciprocity – When you were comparing phones and asking questions the store clerk spent a lot of time with you. You’d feel kind of bad not buying from him after he did all that for you.
Authority – You read Consumer Reports and it rated one phone you’re considering highest in three of four categories. The magazine is the most reputable, unbiased source you know.
Consensus – Everyone has the brand you’re looking at and people are raving about it. They can’t all be wrong.
Consistency – When you told the salesperson the general features you were looking for she pointed you to a phone that had almost every single one. How can you not buy it after you
said that’s what you wanted in a phone?
Scarcity – You’re shown a phone and told a newer model is coming out in a few months. Now you worry because you might not be able to get this one at the low price because everyone else will buy them up while it’s still a great deal.
As noted earlier, most people engage in satisficing but that still leaves the maximizers so how do we deal with them? Maximizers by nature are probably more analytical so my advice would be to concentrate on these principles of influence:
Authority – Let them know what the experts are saying and show them hard data because this appeals to their strength – logic.
Consistency – Get them to tell you in detail what they want. The more detail the better because if you can show them how your offering matches up then it’s only logical for the deep thinker to go with your request.
Scarcity – No one likes to lose so show them their lost dollars, time, and opportunity by not going with your recommendation relatively soon. Remind them that new features and upgrades will always come out but they’re losing the opportunity to enjoy your product in the meantime.
So whether your mom, dad, or grandpa were right about their two tier classification systems, science tells us there’s at least one other category, maximizers and satisficers. It would do you well to not only understand which category you fall into but which category those you’re trying to persuade fall into because it will make the persuasion process much easier.
Brian, CMCT 
influencepeople 
Helping You Learn to Hear
“Yes”.

Influencers from Around the World – A Nightmare on Persuasion Street

/0 Comments/by

This month our Influencers from Around the World guest post comes from across the pond from my old Irish friend Sean Patrick. Sean owns a sales training company, Sales Training Evaluation, and writes a blog, Professional Persuader. Sean is a big fan of Dr. Cialdini and attended the Principles of Persuasion workshop I led when he visited the States in October 2010. Always thought-provoking, Sean’s post this week is no different.
Brian, CMCT 
influencepeople 
Helping You
Learn to Hear “Yes”.

A Nightmare on Persuasion Street
Persuasion is one of my life long loves.  It is constant learning and working out practically what makes people say “Yes.”  There are many types of persuasion principles and methods and one of those is coercion. When I refer to coercion, I mean two things; unethical use of persuasive techniques and emotional tampering.
The world is a changing place and has changed dramatically over the past three to four years, in particular. People realize we have moved into a new reality in which economic uncertainty is here to stay. As a result many bury themselves into fantasy land with the help of the internet and television soap operas.
Television has become one of the most potent forms of persuasion abuse in recent times. Politicians remind us constantly that we are all ok, that we’re being looked after, and that the sons and daughters of our countries are doing the right things by sacrificing themselves to affront a common enemy. As this all goes on we remain ignorant of the true facts even as our pension funds, life savings and home values erode to nothingness.
What I have just described is known as the “Lucifer Effect.”  What makes people accept brutality and evil as normal? The Lucifer Effect raises this question and also delves into the psyche of perpetrators of abuse or coercion. Throughout history we have been conditioned to accept one rule of thumb as being our normal even if other people in different countries vehemently oppose our ideals. Yet we gladly accept that what is normal should not be questioned in case we are ridiculed or have our loyalties questioned.
Human character is a dynamic thing, it transforms on the basis of different chronologies. What makes normal, law abiding, educated and healthy people become raving stewards of hate? When we look back in time at the inquisitions of the Catholic Church, The Third Reich, Rwanda, the abuses of the U.S. military in Abu Ghraib, Iraq and similar episodes in Afghanistan, what we see are normal law abiding citizens becoming perpetrators of sadistic evil.
This is where social proof in the influence process comes in. Robert Cialdini’s principles of persuasion are subliminal and powerful! In all of history’s foibles you can spot the persuasive mechanisms at work. Even today in North Korea, the power of the crowd plays an important role in keeping the population at large from uprising against a despotic regime.
It isn’t just politics where the abuse of influence is at work, we can see it every day in the mainstream news media, the press, soap operas, Hollywood films, advertising, and even religion. Once you’ve become accustomed to seeing the six principles it becomes more and more apparent how each principle is embedded in the context in which it is given.
Finally, where we see dehumanization at work we need to ask questions about what is really going on, and we can do this by seeing exactly how much effort is being put into the persuasive mechanism and how much others really want us to buy into it. Usually, such efforts are preceded by what I call the “Carrot and Stick” approach. This is the highly coercive act of offering a solution to a perceived problem by provoking a public reaction.

Hitler’s genocidal policy began through the introduction of a re-education of school children. Educational propaganda is nothing new and is intentionally designed to form dehumanization towards the common enemy.  This necessarily doesn’t need to be targeted towards people; it can be attitudes towards finance, work, immigration, foreign policies, centralization of government etc. A manipulation of public attitudes is definitely affected by this principle.
I’ve become more intrigued about this principle that was coined by Philip Zimbardo and to this end the fascination of watching the trial of Anders Breivik in Norway keeps reminding me that there is a greater degree of understanding needed when normal people become evil.

If you’re viewing this by email and want to leave a comment click here. 

Sean

Why 1 in 3 Americans Might be Cheating on their Taxes

/2 Comments/by

This is the second time in recent months I’ve found myself riding the coattails of Dan Ariely, author of Predictably Irrational, The Upside of Irrationality and most recently, The Honest Truth about Dishonesty.

With the approach of April 17, the last day to file taxes  in the United States, Ariely wrote a blog post on Taxes and Cheating. There’s an old saying from Ben Franklin, “There are only two certainties in life, death and taxes,” and apparently people would like to “cheat” both.
Cheating on taxes was in the headlines several years ago because Tim Geithner, Treasury Secretary for the United States, was questioned by Congress for failing to pay about $40,000 in taxes while he worked for the International Monetary Fund. On the surface it’s easy to conclude if people see someone cheating on their taxes they’re more likely to do so as well but is that supported by hard evidence? This question prompted Ariely and colleagues to conduct a little experiment to see if more people would cheat when they saw others cheating.
I’ll leave to you to read Ariely’s blog post on the subject if you want details on the experiment but for our purposes I’ll simply note the results – people cheated more when they saw others cheat. And, there was more likelihood of cheating when the cheaters were similar in some way (i.e., went to the same college) to those who observed them cheating.
If you’ve read my blog for any length of time, Ariely’s conclusion should not surprise you because it’s simply an application of Robert Cialdini’s principle of consensus, otherwise known as social proof or peer pressure. This principle of influence tells us we are influenced by the actions of others. The more people that are involved, the more we are influenced or the more similar we see those others to ourselves, the more we are influenced by their behavior.
For example, kids will be influenced to smoke when they see other people smoke, such as their parents. However, when teens have two or three friends who smoke, the odds that they’ll take up the bad habit are astronomically higher than the example set by parents. Why? Because they take their cues on how to act far more from their peers because they want to fit into that social group. Thus we get the term “peer pressure.”
Here’s another experiment to convince you. Trick-or-treaters in Seattle were observed on Halloween. When a single child came up to the door, he or she was told to only take one piece of candy; then the parent walked away. The child now has a dilemma; he knows what to do but also knows he could get away with taking more than one piece and no one will be the wiser. Only 7.5% broke the parent’s rule and took more than one piece of candy. Not bad.
It gets interesting when the kids came to the door in groups. With the same set of instructions, more than 20% of kids took extra candy! Why did the number almost triple? Simple; when that small percentage of kids who would take extra even if alone were observed by their friends, the friends decided they too should get more candy. This is a classic example of peer pressure that parents are always warning kids about.
It’s no coincidence that I posted this the day before Americans are supposed to have their taxes filed and paid this year. In 2001 it was estimated 30%-40% of Americans cheated on their taxes shortchanging the government about $345 billion and more recent estimates are still in that range! With record deficits we need every penny to pay down our debt but how can the government expect the average citizen to be honest if the person running the U.S. Treasury is either dishonest or too inept to understand the tax code? You and I can’t solve that one but at least we can be more cognizant of consensus in both how to ethically use it, and avoid its potential negative impact on us.
P.S.
This wasn’t as taxing to write as you might think.
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”.

Counteracting Liars, Cheaters and Thieves

/0 Comments/by
 Did you know Britons are becoming less honest according to a recent study? This was brought to my attention in a blog post from Dan Ariely, author of Predictably Irrational and The Upside of Irrationality. This particular post caught my eye because he referred to people looking to their peers for behavioral cues when he wrote:
Researchers observed that while women were slightly more honest than men, the most appreciable differences were found among different age groups. Young people were significantly more tolerant of dishonest behavior than older people—for instance, only around 30% of people under age 25 thought lying on a job application was never justifiable as opposed to 55% of people over 65. Neither income level nor education affected levels of honesty.
The problem is that over time, if no one counteracts the spread of dishonesty, it is likely to continue. Because we generally look to our peers for cues on what kinds of behaviors are acceptable, if lying on job applications seems to be par for the course, it will increase in frequency. So does this mean that England will be governed by degenerates in a few decades? I guess we’ll see.
Something that will influence the direction of the county will be how the survey information is conveyed. Ariely’s reference to peers looking to others for cues on how to behave is the principle of consensus at work in rather dramatic fashion. It’s unfortunate but true that people will behave as they see others behaving. If kids see or learn about other kids cheating, many more will cheat because they believe they too can get away with it.
There was an interesting study done in the Seattle area with kids during Halloween. When trick-or-treaters came up to the door they were told to only take one piece of candy then the parent turned and walked away. When children were by themselves only 7.5% took more than one piece. However, when they were in groups, more than 20%, nearly triple, took more than they were supposed to. It was a classic case of kids looking to their peers then doing what they did. Billy might not have taken extra candy when he was alone but when he saw little Johnny take two or three pieces he decided to also.
Another application of consensus we’re all familiar with takes place on the highway. Have you ever come up to a sign that alerts you to the fact that there is construction ahead and lanes are merging? Most of the time drivers play nice and fall in line as soon as they can but every now and then someone gets impatient, pulls out of line and zooms to the front before darting into the last available opening. When that happens it always seems to give permission to other drivers to follow suit and in the end everyone waits in traffic even longer because of the impatient few.
Back to the study. Merely reporting how Britons are becoming less honest and showing rising numbers is likely to make the problem worse as more people consider actions they would not have otherwise — just like the kids in the Halloween study.
So how can concerned people possibly counteract this? If I were charged with reporting the findings, but not wanting to cause the problem to get worse, I might write something like this:
Neither income level nor education affected levels of honesty. Researchers observed that while women were slightly more honest than men, the appreciable differences are between younger and older Britons. Young people seem to be more tolerant of dishonest behavior than older people – for instance, only about 30% of people under age 25 thought lying on a job application was never justifiable. However, more than half (55%) of people over age 65 said lying on a job application was never justifiable.
One could conclude if no one counteracts the spread of dishonesty it is likely to continue and spread over time as the young become older and account for a great potion of the country’s population. But let’s pause for a moment
and reflect on older people’s view on the subject. Perhaps nearly twice as many older Britons view the same behavior as intolerable because they have more life experience and appreciate how society works better when people play by the rules. Maybe those young people who feel the need to grab what they want at any cost will come to the same conclusion their older, wiser fellow countrymen have come to. Only time will tell.
So here’s my persuasion advice: next time you have negative news to share about how a group or groups of people are behaving (lying, cheating, stealing, etc.) give pause to consider the following:
  • Will my presentation help or hurt in terms of encouraging the behavior?
  • How can I present the information in an accurate manner and enhance the social good at the same time?

Ultimately what needs to be shared is how people who are
doing things right, honestly and ethically, are behaving. The more people hear about and read about that socially beneficial behavior the more likely they are to conform to the good and not the bad so in the end we’re all better off.
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”.

Influencers from Around the World – The Communicative Feature of Your Favorite Teacher

/0 Comments/by

This month’s Influencers from Around the World post comes from Yago de Marta. Yago has been a guest blogger at Influence PEOPLE for several years now. He hails from Spain where he works with clients helping them speak more fluently and persuasively. To learn more about Yago visit YagoDeMarta.com or connect with him on Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter. 

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

The Communicative Feature of Your Favorite Teacher

We all remember a teacher who made us love a subject in grade school, high school, or perhaps college. We all remember the teacher who helped us love literature, history, mathematics, or some other subject for which we had no passion to start.
That teacher seemed to get better performance from all of their students. He didn’t come to our home to study with us but nonetheless, he inspired us, and helped us find interest for a particular subject. In short, that teacher influenced us.
Even in the case of many poor students, most also had a
great teacher somewhere along the way. These students had no interest in school or anything related to school; they didn’t enjoy studying, but they found “something” in that one teacher that motivated them to sit down, take notes and study.
As it is a “universal” example of influence, 13 years ago I began to ask this question in my training clinics: What feature did your teachers have that made you love a subject in high school or college?
Pause to think about that for just a minute. Remember back
to your favorite teacher. See him talking to you, notice how he moved and what he did. Remember how that made you feel, how you began your relationship with that subject. Well, you’ve done it! I bet one of the features that came to mind is listed below:

A. He was explanatory

B. He made you participate

C. He knew his subject

D. He cared for you (the class)

E. He loved what he shared (the subject)

For the record, I bet most who read this article chose
option E and perhaps one of the other answers.
The point is we all know that one teacher influenced us in an ethical and positive way. We also know that the five characteristics noted above were decisive in our experience. But how are they related to the Principles of Influence?

He was explanatory – On the one hand, to be explanatory
implies a difference from the traditional teacher who was merely descriptive. So “to explain” implies effort, which implies an interest in the person – the student – to make sure he or she understands what is being shared during class. When the student understands that gives meaning to the class and that’s a comforting feeling. Thus, we find Liking. Striving to explain something involves approaching the figure of the student, and that is translated into a form of mutual identification.
Likewise, when the student feels he understands
something, some of the barriers he had about not study are demolished. In short, he is now open to learn more. This is an example of Commitment and Consistency which the teacher can draw on to further the learning.
Finally, when the teacher strives to explain the subject,
strives to approach the students, this creates an obligation to respond which taps into Reciprocity. So the more explanatory is the teacher, the better results are obtained.
He made you participate in the class – The student feels
important when he feels he is part of what’s going on. This feeling is comforting only if the teacher knows to balance the fears or nerves the student may have. However, in general terms the student will always feel positive when involved with peers. The student perceives the other’s participation and Consensus – going along with the crowd – makes him want to participate as well. This process increases the degree of student involvement with the subject so he feels more “compelled” to study after class. While making the class more horizontal, the teacher is placed on the same level as the student, a form of identification, and liking is increased.
He knows a lot – This is obviously Authority. We see that
element is very important because the above items, with the great presence of Liking, need to be balanced. In this sense, the students value the use of anecdotes and examples unknown. On the other side “to know much” is a point of reference for students. It becomes a reference image that can be pursued to improve, and it becomes an element of inspiration.
He loved what he talked about – As I noted earlier, this is the most important point of all. This is what makes all the other points possible. To love your subject means you have passion and that passion is contagious, motivating people to listen. It also makes learning more fun. It is the perfect combination of liking and authority. As others get involved because of that passion which makes it easier for those on the fringes – consensus – to join in and feel a part of what’s taking place.
We all know the influence a teacher can have because we have all felt that force. The key is that we should make people feel those same things as we meet them in our everyday life. And that can influence them to change and improve.

Yago

If you’re viewing this by email and want to leave a comment click here.

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”.