Leadership, Innovation and Adaptability: Persuasion Video

In this video,

we'll discuss the power of persuasion.

This will include a discussion on

different strategies you can use to be

more persuasive in the way you deliver

arguments and communicate generally,

the use of fear and how others process

and perceive what you're saying.

There's so many times in life where we

want people to do something, but we

aren't in position to simply order them

around,

even when we're in a leadership position

constantly ordering.

Subordinates around can create

resentment and disloyalty.

It's very helpful and often necessary to

get people to do what you want

through persuasion rather than power.

Persuasion has been studied for

thousands of years going back to the

ancient

Greeks and refined in multi-million

dollar ad campaigns.

It's an essential tool of corporations

looking to sell products.

Politicians looking to convince citizens

to vote for them.

Attorneys trying to get jurors to render

verdicts in their favor.

Parents trying to get their kids to eat

well. And in countless other situations,

it's very helpful for leaders to develop

skills that enable them to establish

useful partnerships with others

and maintain positive relationships with

employees.

Robert Cialdini, a psychologist and one

of the leading experts in the world on

persuasion,

recommends a number of approaches for

getting others to do what you want.

The first strategy is reciprocity,

followed by commitment and consistency,

social proof likability, and finally

authority.

First, reciprocity can be a highly useful

strategy.

If you do a small unsolicited favor for

someone, they'll be more likely to do

what you want.

For many years, Hari Krishnas and Eastern

religious sect

would raise money by approaching

strangers in a public place to give them

a gift, like a book or a flower.

If a person initially refused, they would

insist it was a gift.

Only after the gift was accepted would

they ask for a financial donation which

they often received.

People felt like they owed something to

the Krishnas and they resolved this debt

with money. Second, if you can get an

initial commitment from people,

they'll often behave in ways that are

highly consistent with that commitment.

Thus, commitment and consistency are

helpful persuasion strategies.

Small behaviors get followed by more

committed behaviors.

People are much more likely to vote for

candidates on election day

if you can get them to put a sign in

their yard supporting that candidate,

get people to make an initial commitment,

and they will often behave

in very consistent ways. Psychologist

Thomas Moriarty

did a compelling study on this related

to bystander intervention, where he

staged thefts on a public beach

and measured whether bystanders would

get involved in his experiment.

A person who was lying in a blanket near

others and listening to the radio

got up and went for a stroll on the

beach. Minutes later,

another person came by and stole the

radio. In 20 trials,

only four people who were lying next to

the blanket and radio got involved and

stopped the thief. However,

in another condition the person

listening to the radio

asked the person next to them to watch

my things before walking away.

In that case, in 19 out of 20 times,

people intervened with a thief

confronting him and chasing him down the

beach. People are more likely to do what

you want

if you make a small request first.

Third, we look to others for social proof.

That means that if you want someone to

do something,

put peer pressure on them show them what

the norm is.

That is what other people are doing, what

other businesses are doing,

and what other communities are doing.

People want to belong

and they often have considerable

difficulty violating social norms. Fourth,

it matters a lot who asks us to do

things.

For example, we're much more persuaded by

people we like.

There are two big components of

likability: physical appeal

and similarity. Typically, we like people

who are attractive.

It's a cliche. It's superficial, but it's

true.

Sex sells. That's true in advertising and

it's also true in interpersonal

interactions.

We tend to be more persuaded by

good-looking people.

Of course, not everyone is blessed with

six-pack abs, luscious hair and a

stunning face.

However, all's not lost because we also

tend to like people who are similar to

us.

Our friends and romantic partners are

often people we share key interests or

values with.

In commercials on tv, if an actor isn't

attractive, they're often trying to

portray someone who is hopefully

similar to you on some level. Cialdini

also focuses on the importance of

authority.

Certainly being in a position of

authority can make others have to do

what you want,

but it can also make them want to do

what you want.

People have a tendency to be deferential

to those in power, even if the power

isn't directly over them.

Similarly, we tend to be highly

influenced by credibility factors.

Credibility is made up of two factors:

trustworthiness and expertise.

Let's start with trustworthiness. If a

person seems trustworthy because of

their personality or because of their

role like a priest.

well they're often more persuasive. In

addition,

we tend to trust experts and individuals

who seem more like

experts, thus making them more persuasive.

Having formalized credentials such as a

PhD can be helpful on this front.

Also bringing in others who have

credentials to support your position

can be very effective.

Interestingly, the way you communicate

and deliver messages can make you seem

like more of an expert and make you more

credible.

And persuasive people who talk faster

are judged to be more knowledgeable

about a topic than people

who deliver the same message but talk

slower.

In terms of delivering a message, one

consideration is whether you should only

give your position or whether you should

start by explaining both sides of the

matter,

and then explain why your side is better.

That's known as delivering a one-sided

versus a two-sided appeal.

In a one-sided appeal, you give all the

benefits of your side,

and you don't acknowledge any

alternative positions.

In a two-sided appeal, you acknowledge

both sides of the issue,

but then you explain why your side is

better. So which should you go with?

In general, a two-sided appeal works best

if the person or group you're talking to

is either mixed in their opinion,

or is likely to oppose what you're

trying to persuade them to do.

When you use the two-sided appeal, you'll

appear less biased.

One-sided appeals work best only when

the person or people you're trying to

convince are already inclined to agree

with you,

or if there's overwhelming support, you

can offer for your position.

Sometimes, a two-sided approach is known

as using an inoculation strategy

inoculation works just like a shot where

you give people a weak dose of a virus,

so they're protected when they get hit

with a full-blown case of it.

From a persuasion standpoint, you give a

weak dose of what the alternative

position

that is. You give weak arguments for why

the opposite position is true

by hearing what your opponent will say.

In a weak form, people develop counter

arguments to resist the message,

and are more inclined to reject it and

accept what you're saying.

Another consideration within persuasion

is fear.

It's common for people to use fear

within their persuasive attempts

that is. They'll talk about all the bad

things that will happen to you,

if you don't do what they want you to do.

Is fear effective

or does it turn people off? A better

question is does it get them to tune out.

The answer to that is: it can.

When fear is used, it's important to not

be too extreme.

A campaign against drunk drivers can

effectively show mangled vehicles that

have been in a DUI accident,

but showing mangled victims could be too

much for most people,

causing them to disengage quickly. An

attorney can show a bloody knife that

was used as a murder weapon,

but large gruesome color photographs of

the victim after they had been brutally

stabbed

might be too much. You want to arouse

some fear,

but not too much. An emergency manager

wants to motivate people to take action.

If they don't evacuate before a

hurricane,

but it's likely ineffective to show

photos of people who

drowned in tidal surges or their bodies.

After trees fell

and crushed them. In addition, you need to

give people direction for fear-based

messages to be successful.

Telling someone a hurricane is coming or

you could be injured, killed, or cut off

from rescuers

isn't a good message. People need to know

how to act.

They need to know when and how to

evacuate where shelters are,

or the supplies they should stock up on.

An example of this

is one of the early public service

campaigns designed to reduce the spread

of AIDS.

Early messaging was simple. It was AIDS

kills.

It was simple and it was ineffective. The

rate of transmission wasn't slowed into

the messages and formed the public to

wear

condoms to reduce the spread of the

virus. If you want to persuade people

with fear,

tell them what to do with their fear.

Fear is aroused. People may pay close

attention to the message because they're

worried about something harmful

happening to them.

However, not all attempts at persuasion

will be things that people are heavily

involved in or care about.

So if someone isn't heavily invested in

what you're trying to persuade them of.

Does that mean that you won't be able to

convince them? Not necessarily.

You just need to think about the

approach that you use researchers.

Richard Petty and John Cassiopo,

along with Shelly Chaikin, have

identified two routes to persuasion.

These are called the peripheral and

central route when people are not

invested in an issue,

or when they are. But they're tired,

distracted, overworked or they can't

focus on what you're saying for whatever

reason.

They aren't able to think about the

strength of your arguments. So

strong arguments won't always win out,

but they'll look for other information

to help them decide if they should

accept a persuasive message.

As a result, they'll look for what are

called heuristic cues.

That's a fancy way of saying mental

shortcuts. Our beliefs about people, like

stereotypes, can be heuristic cues.

For example, thinking certain types of

people are more or less trustworthy,

because of who they are,

or looking at things like credentials,

educational background,

even their appearance. Remember,

attractiveness and similarity matter.

Are you good looking? Do you look the way

people expect an expert to look?

These cues which are sometimes fairly

superficial,

can be very powerful for an uninvolved

or distracted person.

So when people are using the peripheral

route to evaluate what you're saying.

Because they aren't heavily focused on

the message. They'll be convinced by

well-educated experts

and attractive or similar people. And

consequently discount the message from

people who aren't experts or who don't

have these appealing qualities.

On the other hand, when people are

directly affected by an issue,

like if it's something that may cost

them a lot of money or they're very

interested in something

and can focus on what you're saying. Then,

they'll set aside heuristic cues and

instead

focus on message strength. but you'll

need strong arguments to convince them

because they're not going to be

influenced by weak messages or go along

with someone just because they're good

looking/

Those factors are secondary for people

processing in a central route.

Because the central route of persuasion

is based on solid arguments.

People tend to be convinced of the

message for a long time, even permanently.

On the other hand, peripheral rap

persuasion tends to be more fleeting.

You can persuade someone for a short

period of time, but

it won't be difficult to change their

mind on the issue.

Ultimately, persuasion is a very useful

skill to have.

If you're persuasive, you can get others

to do what you want without using power,

which a lot of time you won't even have.

Persuasion can allow you or your

organization to be someone or something

that others like and want to follow or

connect to,

which is very valuable to leaders,

corporations and everyday people.

In summary, there are a number of

strategies to make your messaging and

communication more persuasive.

Remember the approaches Cialdini

described: reciprocity,

commitment, and consistency, social proof,

likability, and authority.

It's also important to consider

credibility factors, such as

trustworthiness and expertise,

as well as how you communicate your

position with one-sided or two-sided

appeals.

Leaders can use fear as a persuasion

strategy, but it's important to use

appropriate levels of fear and provide a

sense of direction in fear-based

messages.

Finally, keep in mind that in some

situations individuals will be more

persuaded by heuristic cues, such as

credentials. educational background.

attractiveness. and similarities.

rather than the content and reasons

you're giving to explain your argument

and position. Using persuasion to

carefully craft your arguments and your

communication overall

will be an invaluable tool for you as a

leader as well as

in other areas of your life.