I’m naturally interested in how people influence others. This, along with understanding the basis of people’s knowledge, fascinates me. I love “The Apology of Socrates”, by Plato, for that exact reason: it’s Socrates’ attempt to explain to a lay audience why he questions everything. He wants to understand how people know what they know, and throughout his life found that, underneath it all, all logic is circular. We really know nothing, except assumptions built upon assumptions so ancient that we can’t possibly hope to trace their antiquity. My personal goal is to push the frontiers of my knowledge to where the circularity of my assumptions is no longer obvious to me. I’m not nearly there yet.
In a related note, at work, there are people who appear to be naturally charismatic: they can propose a solution to something, and theirs is chosen quickly and unanimously. In many cases, it’s a less-than-ideal solution, when better solutions have been presented.
I found myself wondering what makes the difference between a successful influencer and a non-successful one?
Well, the answer organized itself for me this morning. I have in my lap a training manual for sales professionals that I once studied in an attempt to be a more successful pitchman. In reviewing it this morning, I was struck by how, with a better understanding of how persuasion works, this manual actually reads like a playbook of how to convince someone of something by appealing to their base instincts, rather than their capacity to reason. Its unstated goal is to manipulate emotions to the point that the person is invested in the idea, and then will make commitments based upon that investment. And, once you’ve gotten someone to say something, feel like they owe you for something, and invested in something, you’ve got ’em hook, line, and sinker. They’ll have a very difficult time deciding not to do what you want.
I’ve become better, over the years, at sniffing out fact from fiction on first hearing, but simple knowledge of these techniques doesn’t grant immunity to them. And learning the lessons has been a very, very expensive tuition in the school of hard-sell. Sales appeals go straight to our pre-programmed, impulsive, biologically-driven responses; trying to break out from following the pattern the sales person expects you to follow requires constant mental effort and vigilance. And the funny thing is, I think using these to try to get someone to buy into something is abusive, yet I use them every day at work, home, and online to get people to do the “right” thing.
- Authority: You are more likely to believe someone who claims greater knowledge, regardless of whether or not that knowledge is in the field under discussion. For instance, I’ve been recently hearing commercials on the radio where a psychologist pitches a weight-loss pill. He even jokes about not being an authority — yet I feel more likely to believe him because, well, such an educated, well-spoken person wouldn’t be deceived, would he?
(I also find this happening at home. The unspoken assumption towards my kids is, “I’m your parent, bigger, stronger, and older than you are. I’m right.” How do you get away from using that?) - Commitment: If you can convince someone to agree to something, they will most likely continue to agree to it in order to appear consistent. For example, a common practice of door-to-door cleaner pitchmen is to get you to agree to statements such as “don’t you want a cleaner house?” “don’t you want healthy children?” “don’t you want more time to do what you really like, rather than scrubbing?”. The next question is often “then don’t you want our cleaner to help you do those things?” Human instinct drives us to want to continue to agree.
(I find myself using this at home, too: “Write down your goals.” “Tell me what you plan to do.” “Go tell your brother you’re sorry.” “Are you going to do that again?”. I see this in my own life up until two years ago, repeating mantras from the religion of my youth in order to appear consistent and trustworthy. It’s human instinct to try to preserve our consistency, but it can also lead to some pretty severe psychological problems when misused.) - Liking: If you have a friendly relationship with someone, they are more likely to agree with you. Why do you think salespeople get their clients to go golfing with them?
(I have to wonder if I use this at home, too. Why do I go on “dates” to fun places, be nice, and try to make sure I bring as much pleasure to our family relationships as possible? Is this actually a selfish thing, because instinctually I understand that if they like me, they’ll be more likely to do what I want them to do? I don’t even know if I want to go there 🙂 As with other things, I think it can be abused — the key seems to be how we use this.) - Social Proof: If many other people also agree with you, you’re more likely to believed. This is why you’ll see blurbs on books saying “over one million sold!”, on DVDs saying “The funniest movie in America” (implying that most Americans think it’s funny), or “As seen on TV!” (implying that, if it was on TV, millions of people have heard of it).
(This is also sometimes called “peer pressure”, although that’s a much smaller thing. I use this at mealtimes: “Look, everyone else ate their food, why don’t you?”) - Scarcity: If it’s difficult to get something, or something is rare, it’s more desirable. You run into this in hard-sell automobile pitches all the time. Coercive statements on the sales lot, such as “This special price is for today only!” or “The car you want today will probably be gone tomorrow” are rather brutal examples of this principle in action.
(I wonder if in home life, this is the reason for the “kids are starving in China” argument at mealtimes? Never held much water for me as a kid, though. But if my parents had said “this is the last meal you’re going to eat for the next two days”, I may have been inclined to eat it all up.) - Reciprocation: If I have given you something, or done something for you, you are more likely to want to give me what I want in return. A good example is the cleaner pitchmen that work door-to-door: a vital part of their presentation is to scrub your toilet, stain in your carpet, sink, etc. with their product to “show you how well it works”. The REAL point of this exercise is to put them into a position where you owe them for the “favor” and are more likely to buy. Ditto for the people giving out “free samples” of a product.
Or like when Christy and I went to try to purchase a vehicle in Las Vegas, we walked out of a deal because it wasn’t to our liking, and the manager of the lot ran out to meet us before we climbed in our car and said “wait, we just did all this work for you, contacting the financing company, spending an hour going over paperwork… I thought we had a deal?” You know, in my gut, I still feel bad for that poor sot, yet my head knows that he was just giving us another section of an elaborate hard-sell sales pitch.
(I see Reciprocation in use in my relationship with my wife all the time: I help her with something, she helps me with something in return. It seems to be a very natural, healthy human pattern, and a cornerstone of society, but it’s also abused by salespeople. This seems to be the trend in all these patterns: intentional abuse of common human “shortcut” behaviors to get you to agree to something you don’t want.)
Recognizing these tactics for what they are, particularly when they are wrapped in an inoffensive package, is often very difficult.
What are some of your experiences with coercive sales pitches?