A former coworker and good friend Nancy Edwardsshared an article from Southwest’s Spirit Magazine titled “Chasing Beautiful Questions.” In the article I came across a quote from Steve Quatrano of the Right Question Institute:“A question is like a flashlight that we shine into the darkness, allowing us to move forward into the unknown and uncertain.”I loved the analogy of a question being like a flashlight because it’s so memorable! I also like it because asking good questions is a big part of being an effective persuader. When it comes to the principle of liking – it’s easier for us to say yes to those we know and like – questions are key to finding out what you have in common with another person. What we have in common with someone (similarities) is a proven way to engage the liking principle. Think about people you know who are from your hometown, have the same pet you do, enjoy the same hobbies or root for the same sports team. Studies show it’s easier for them to like you AND it’s easier for you to like them. The end result is it makes it easier for them to say “Yes” to you.You can learn these things a number of ways – ask people who know the person you want to persuade, Google them, check out Facebook, LinkedIn, etc. Or, when you’re with the other person you can shine the light of good questions to try and find out what you have in common so you can use those things to connect.Good questions also come in handy when you want to engage the principle of consistency. This principle of influence explains the reality that people want to be consistent in what they say, do, believe, etc. Typically people don’t resist their own values, attitudes and beliefs. If you know those things and can align your request to show the other person how what you’re asking lines up with those beliefs, values, attitudes, or past behaviors, it will be easier for them to say yes to whatever you’re asking.In much the same way that you discover similarities you can discover these things to engage consistency. Talk to people who know the person you’re tying to persuade, do an online search, and look at Facebook or LinkedIn.One last place questions come in handy is during the sales process, with scarcity. This principle highlights the truth that people respond more to what they might lose than what they might gain. Telling someone what he or she might lose by not going with your suggestion is effective persuasion but there’s a better way. Asking questions that highlight potential loss is a much more effective persuasion strategy. For example, in my industry, insurance, an insurance agent might ask the following of a prospective customer if they discover some deficiency in their insurance program: Agent – If you were to have a catastrophic loss, would you expect the insurance company to completely replace your building?Prospective Client – Of course I would. That’s why I carry insurance.Agent – I thought that would be the case but the reality is you don’t carry enough insurance to fully replace your building. You’d have to pay more than $200,000 out of pocket. Did you know that?Prospective Client – No, I thought I was fully covered!By asking the right questions the agent is shining the light on a dark place, a place the customer had not considered. When the customer voices what he wants that solidifies his desire even more. And this approach drives home the potential loss much more than the agent telling him what he might lose.So whether you want to connect with someone using liking, engage them with consistency or highlight possible loss, good questions are the way to go. They will shine a light to allow you to see things previously hidden and increase your chance for persuasion success.
Brian Ahearn, CMCT® Chief Influence Officer influencePEOPLE Helping You Learn to Hear “Yes”.Cialdini “Influence” Series! Would you like to learn more about influence from the experts? Check out the Cialdini “Influence” Series featuring Cialdini Method Certified Trainers from around the world.
Why Nudges Work?
The inaugural Behavioural Exchange was held in Sydney, Australia earlier this month and it had a great line up of academics, policy makers, business leaders and everyone in between. Unfortunately due to previous commitments I was unable to attend but I have been following the news and articles that have spawned from the exchange, including one written by Ben Newell exploring the question of Why Nudges Work.
For the readers of this blog you are not new to the fact that Governments have been exploring the field of Behavioural Economics and how they can use them to change behaviour in the payment of tax bills, option taking in health care, and the use of energy. For the most part many of the articles I have read about the exchange have quoted the success of Behavioural Insights and how Nudge Units all over the globe are changing behaviour one nudge at a time.
The interesting thing about Newell’s article is he asks the question, why do nudges work? In a connected sort of way I delved into his article because this is the same premise behind my interviews with leaders, to find out not so much about what works but if they know why it works.
In the article Newell referenced Academic and author of Nudge, Richard Thaler and his reminder to the conference that the issue of failing to replicate successes and learning from failed nudges is critical.
Therefore knowing there are 6 Principles of Persuasion is one thing. But in understanding Dr Cialdini’s methodology behind them, knowing there are certain triggers for each principle and things that amplify thir use starts to get you into the why that Newell was discussing. Going deeper still though by understanding Dr Neidert’s Core Motives Model you now know when to use each principle and why it is more likely to work than not. So my friend, as a graduate of the Principles of Persuasion Workshop you are miles ahead of others who are just attempting to replicate what they read or observe. Because you not only know what is happening but why it is happening.
But before we pat ourselves on the back too solidly, let’s return to Dr Thaler’s comment about failure to replicate. It is great to have a persuasive success but how often are you delving into why it worked and even more importantly if you have persuasion failure why it occurred? When I speak to many POP graduates they are always happy to tell me about their successes and not so keen to explore the failures; and it is through asking questions that I have discovered and that many of them don’t know why a particular approach was not successful.
Error based learning is a fantastic tool to evolve and hone our persuasive skill set. To employ it effectively however you mustn’t just put your failure away in a drawer and blame the tools. Instead pull it apart, look at why your approach didn’t have the impact or result you were hoping for and dig into the “why”. It is this process of reviewing your persuasion activities and learning why things work and do not work that will make you an infinitely better persuader.
As Newell points out in his article “ It is worth remembering that much of the pioneering work of Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky – on which Behavioural Insights are based – focused on situations when people’s reasoning did not “work”.”
The key problem I see is all too often once something is seen to work there is a temptation to scrap the testing and measuring that identifies why it works or doesn’t work and in Newell’s words leaders just want to“run with it”. It is crucial, however, for the continued success of the field that these replications are done (despite the clear practical challenges), and that failures to replicate are reported.
Focusing a little more on the “why” and “why not” questions might just provide the kinds of insights necessary to nudge the field forward.
Thanks Ben Newell for writing a great and though provoking article. If you want to check it out have a look below:
Source: Newell, B (2014) Comment: ‘Nudging’ people towards changing behaviour, what works and why?
http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2014/06/05/comment-nudging-people-towards-changing-behaviour-what-works-and-why
The post Why Nudges Work? appeared first on Social Influence Consulting Group.
Facial Expressions & Cooperation
Courtesy of StockVault
According to a recent study from Marshall School of Business and USC faculty, an indifferent leadership attitude at work is not as effective as some bosses think.
It’s important to have control over your emotions in a professional setting. For the most part, we can all agree that temper tantrums hardly call for respect and admiration, but trying to control your emotions as a whole is also not very effective in receiving cooperation and understanding in the work place.
Peter Carnevale, professor of management and organization at USC’s Marshall School of Business suggests, “[one] should be careful about managing his or her emotions because the person across the table is making inferences based on facial expressions. For example, a smile at the wrong time can discourage cooperation.”
Medical Xpress reports on the study entitled “Reading People’s Minds from Emotion Expressions in Interdependent Decision Making,” which was published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
The study illustrates the intricate role emotion plays in business interactions such as what you show on your face is as important as what you say in a negotiation and what you do with your negotiation offers.
Researchers paired individuals with computer-generated images of an opposing negotiator in five related experiments. Each featured a two-person task in which the payoffs for each player depended on the simultaneous choice of both players. If both players invested (i.e.cooperated) both earned money. If neither player invested, neither earned money. And, if one player invested and the other player did not, the non-investor outperformed the investor by taking advantage of the investment without putting in any effort or money. This task represents a classic problem in interdependence and economic decision-making.
In one experiment, the image of the other player either smiled, expressing pleasure after cooperation, or frowned, signaling regret after exploitation. In other cases, it expressed pleasure after exploitation and regret after cooperation.
“If you come to an agreement in a negotiation and you are really happy, it may not be a good idea to show how happy you are because it might lead the other person to think that you did better than they did,“ said Carnevale. “But in other circumstances, showing strong emotion may be the ticket to success.“
The study’s findings were that people cooperated significantly more with a computer counterpart that smiled when cooperating and expressing sorrow after exploiting the participant. In other words, the study results indicate that context can determine the meaning ascribed to a counterpart’s emotional expression and subsequent reactions.
- « Previous Page
- 1
- …
- 302
- 303
- 304
- 305
- 306
- …
- 559
- Next Page »