This summer was a whirlwind! After an
unusually heavy amount of travel in the first half of the year. I was looking
forward to no airports or hotels until I began making the rounds for fall sales
training. All of that changed when I made it known to the head of State Auto’s
claims division that I was available if he needed my help. To be honest, I
thought he might invite me to sit in on a few meetings in our home office and
share my expertise in influence. Instead he asked if I would travel to each of
our claims offices to give an overview of persuasion to all of our claim
reps.
Six cities and two-dozen sessions later I
concluded with a presentation to the senior leaders in our claims division. As
I fielded questions at the end of the talk I was reminded about the need to choose
my words carefully. If anyone should be aware of this it should be the guy who
teaches influence for a living! Having said that, we can all slip at times and
I’m no exception.
During the presentation, I shared about a
particular application of the principle of reciprocity. This principle of
influence alerts us to the reality that people feel obligated to give back to
those who first give to them. The particular application I shared that day had
to do with concessions. That is, when we concede a little by taking a step to
the middle, quite often people feel obligated to take a step towards the middle
in response to our first move.
As I spoke about this I shared a story from Robert
Cialdini, Ph.D., that shows how powerful concessions can be. Dr. Cialdini had
some of his graduate assistants spread out across the campus of Arizona State
University to randomly ask people this question:
“Hi, I’m from the juvenile county detention
center and we’re looking for people who would be willing to chaperon a group of
juvenile delinquents on a day trip to the zoo. Would you be willing to
volunteer?”
As you might imagine, spending a day at the
zoo with juvenile delinquents didn’t sound appealing so not too many people
offered up their time. In fact, only 17% agreed to be chaperons.
At a later time, to test the theory of concessions
the graduate assistants started with a much bigger request then retreated to a
smaller request upon hearing no. It went something like this:
“Hi, I’m from the juvenile county detention
center and we’re looking for people who would be willing to be a big brother or
big sister for some juvenile delinquents. Generally we like people to commit a
few hours every weekend and we ask that people sign up for two years. Would you
be willing to be a big brother or big sister?”
As you might imagine, nobody said yes because
that’s a huge commitment but as soon as that offer was rejected the graduate
assistants retreated to a smaller request, the one they’d asked people days
before:
“If you can’t do that, would you be willing to
be a chaperon on a day trip to the zoo for some kids in need?”
The response in that case was a 50% volunteer
rate. That’s triple the initial request even though it was the same time
commitment – one day at the zoo!
You might not have caught the subtlety in how
I shared that second request but someone from our legal department pointed out
that the second request for the day trip to the zoo wasn’t exactly like the
first request because dealing with “juvenile delinquents” is different than
helping some “kids in need.” It’s probably easier for people to say yes to
“kids in need” versus spending all day with “juvenile delinquents.”
It was a good reminder for me about how
powerful words are! The reality was both requests were identical in the study
but I got lazy when I shared the story that particular day. In the study both
requests were to spend a day at the zoo with some juvenile delinquents so it
was an apples-to-apples comparison.
This post isn’t so much about the power of
reciprocity by way of concessions, as it is to remind us that we need to choose
our words carefully because they matter. Frank Luntz, a conservative pollster,
brilliantly shows this in his book Words that Work. I highly recommend the book because it will open your eyes to
scripting used by political parties. For example:
- Taxes. If you’re against taxing inheritances passed down to family members you’ll talk about the “death tax” but those in favor of taxing inheritances will refer to it as the “estate tax.” Each description conjures up very different images and feelings.
- Immigration. If you’re for opening up immigration you might refer to people already here as “undocumented workers” but those against it call these same people “illegal aliens.” Again, each word choice creates very different mental pictures and feelings.
These are just two examples of how word choice
describing the same thing can make a very big difference in people’s perception
of the issues. Remember, what you say and how you say it can make all the
difference when it comes to hearing “Yes” or “No.”
Brian Ahearn, CMCT®
Chief Influence Officer
Chief Influence Officer
influencePEOPLE
Helping You Learn to Hear “Yes”.
Helping You Learn to Hear “Yes”.


No comments:
Post a Comment