Influence - Robert B Cialdini

Science and practice

Time Date 01-Jan-9999 Venue Speaker Seat Available: N/A

Seats Required:

Robert B. Cialdini
Publisher: Glenview, Ill: Scott, Foresman
ISBN: 0673189422


This is a synopsis only. RESULTS.com recommends you buy the original book.


Short Cuts – The Power of Perception

• In today’s busy, information overload society people take mental “short cuts” to save themselves from thinking or doing their own research

• E.g. - people perceive that higher price = higher quality.

• Many times the same goods (ones where people have nothing objective to compare their value to) can be dramatically increased in price and suddenly they will achieve dramatic increase in sales.

• (Chivas Regal Scotch Whiskey struggled as a brand until they raised the price far above its competitors – then sales skyrocketed)

• A discount coupon even if it offers no real savings triggers the same number of people using it – than a coupon that offers significant savings

• People believe that if an expert says so, it must be true and don’t pay attention to the details in question

Instant Influence

• The speed of change and the volume and complexity of information means that we are increasingly unable to process all the relevant information necessary to make sound decisions

• We tend to make decisions based on a small subset of information which we extrapolate to represent the total

• Marketers and governments know this - hence they know that we will unconsciously react to the Laws of Influence and not even realise what is happening or why we are doing what we are doing

• Learn the laws of influence – and be more aware of what is really going on around you in your interactions with people, advertising and the media.

• Ask yourself – What is happening here? What are their motivations? How are they trying to influence me? What are my choices? What do I really want?

“Because”

• The word “because” triggers an unconscious compliance response

• When we ask someone to do something they we will be likely to comply if we provide a reason – any reason

• The reason itself is inconsequential in eliciting the response

• E.g. “Can I please go first, because I am in a hurry” is just as likely to get people to stand aside as having some more plausible long-winded reason

The Law of Reciprocity

• The rule says that we should try to repay in kind what another person gives us

• Human civilisation evolved by people giving goods and services (without fear of loss) so in return they could expect to be repaid with other goods and services.

• A feeling of future obligation to repay was trained into us by socialization.

• People in general do not like to feel indebted to others and will want to return the favour as soon as possible

• There is a universal dislike in all cultures for people who take and do not give in return

• The Hare Krishna organisation’s incredible economic growth is fueled by reciprocity – they give a free “gift” (a book or even a flower) and refuse to take it back. Then they ask for a contribution to their cause

• There is a strong cultural pressure to reciprocate a gift – even an unwanted one (ie Xmas cards)

• After accepting a free “gift” customers are more willing to purchase goods / services they would have otherwise declined

• Successful politicians provide favours to other politicians and store them for when they need to call on a favor in return. The recipients of their favours feel obligated to vote for their legislation later

• Medical researchers funded by drug companies feel obliged to favourably recommend the company’s drugs

• Samplers in supermarkets invoke this rule immediately when you taste the food, and there is a subconscious compulsion to repay them by buying the product

• Free trial periods have the same effect. People feel obligated to pay for and keep the products once they have used them

• Free consultations and seminars use this principle also

• Fundraising dinners have learned it is better to wait until you have had the meal before they ask for donations

• A woman who allows a man to buy her drinks is immediately judged by him as being more sexually available to him

• Another way to invoke reciprocity is to combine the Law of Contrast. Ask someone to do a favour for you (the reverse of doing a favour and expecting one in return). Ask for a big favour that is unlikely to be agreed to. When they decline, then make a concession by asking for a smaller favour (the favour you actually wanted all along) and you influence the other party to reciprocate by making a mutual concession (ie they will likely comply with your request). Unions do this in their wage demands. Children ask for $10, get a refusal, then ask for $5 (which is what you really wanted), and the parents will likely comply

• Another version of this is where the door to door salesperson does not get the sale, but the prospect is then willing to provide them the names of their friends as customer referrals as a concession.

The Law of Commitment and Consistency

• Once we make a choice or take a stand, we encounter internal and external pressure to behave consistently with that commitment

• We justify our decisions in our minds and continue to behave according to our earlier decisions

• In most circumstances it is commendable to say “my word is my bond”, but the drawback is that it binds us to old ways of behaving that may not be relevant anymore

• We use this law as a shortcut to not have to think through issues every time

• Salespeople invoke this law by saying to prospects, “If I could get you the model you want and the price was right, would you be prepared to buy today?”

• The strategy is to “start small and build”. Get a small commitment, then people will feel the need to be consistent with their earlier decision when you ask for a bigger commitment later

• The law of consistency is sometimes called the “foot in the door technique”. Get them to say yes to you demonstrating your product to them, and you are more likely to make the sale

• Charities know people who have already donated once, are likely to say yes in the future

• Therefore be careful about agreeing to what seem to be trivial requests. It can make you feel compelled to comply with larger requests that are only remotely connected with the original request

• During the Korean War the Chinese would isolate an American POW and over several hours of (friendly) interrogation get him to admit that the USA was not perfect. From there they would build on his commitment and get them to write & sign a small statement about how capitalism had its faults in return for some cigarettes etc. When the POW returned to the barracks he would hear his essay being read aloud over the prison camp speakers, and his comrades would label him a traitor. He would defend his actions, but from that point on would be forever shunned by his fellows, and eventually become a willing collaborator with the enemy, willing to spy on his comrades

• Beware of signing petitions – it will subconsciously influence your behaviour in the future to be consistent with your earlier position on this subject

• People use this law to label people and then control them. Once you accept someone’s label for who or what you are, you feel obligated to behave according to this label. I.e. “Do you consider yourself to be a generous person? Great then you’ll be willing to help me out with ….etc”

• Give people a reputation to uphold, and you can wield great influence

• Getting customers to fill out the sales contract, prevents them from backing out from paying later

• Writing down goals, increases your commitment to taking action toward their attainment – telling others about your goals heightens the commitment

• Competitions like “Tell us why you like our product in less that 100 words and you’ll win a prize” are powerful influence tools. Once you have entered you will always feel compelled to choose the product

• Groups like Weight Watchers and Alcoholics Anonymous are successful because they get people to publicly announce their intentions – and thus they are more likely to follow through

• The more effort that goes into a making commitment, the greater the ability to influence the person who made it (eg inviting someone to come to your office for a free consultation etc)

• When advertising, you are best to not show prices. Even getting prospects to phone up is a commitment that you can use to your advantage

• The more active, public and effortful you can get people to make the commitment, and the more they make it of their own free will (no coercion) the greater the influence on their behaviour

• Car dealers are notorious for “low balling”. They sell you a “cheap car”, then once you have made a commitment to buy (or even visit the showroom!) you realise that you have to pay extra if you want a stereo, air conditioning etc. (The law of Contrast also comes into play. After you have spent $20,000, an extra $200 doesn’t seem so much)

The Law of Social Proof

• We determine what is correct by finding out what other people think is correct

• We view a behavior as being correct to the degree we see others performing it (especially those we identify with as being similar to us in appearance or background)

• The greater the number who believe in an idea, the more we think they must be correct – that perhaps they know something we don’t

• Canned laughter during sitcoms increases the humorous responses of the audience and their rating of the humor of the TV show – even when they know the laughter is not real

• Bartenders / buskers put some of their own money (gold coins / notes) in their collecting jars giving the impression that everyone is tipping generously & influencing others to do likewise

• Evangelical preachers / magicians / comedians sow their audience with ringers to act in a prescribed manner and thereby influence the rest of the audience to do likewise

• Nightclubs deliberately create queues so that people think it must be popular

• Advertising uses social proof to influence us when it claims “fastest growing” “most popular” “trendiest” “number one” etc

• Advertisers also try to use people who look just like the intended target user for the product – so people who identify with the actors in appearance and background will be influenced to view the product favourably

• Suicides / murders / accidents tend to invoke copycat occurrences – the more publicity they get, the more similar occurrences happen soon afterwards

• When newspapers publicise a young person’s suicide, youth suicide increases – including youth vehicular suicide.

• 4 people looking skyward will get 80% of all passersby to do likewise

• Children shown violent programs will afterwards act in a more harmful way to each other

• In any situation where we are unsure of ourselves we look to others for guidance – hence the common occurrence where an accident victim lying on the footpath in need of help is ignored by passersby

• In an emergency situation social proof can often be completely wrong. Many people have died in fires as a result of the group not reacting to fire alarms.

• The Jonestown cult suicides – the 910 members were isolated from society and took their lead from the group leaders to willingly drink cool aid laced with poison

• Farmers know that if you can get the herd leader animal moving in a certain direction, the rest of the herd will follow

The Law of Friends (Liking) & the Law of Association

• We tend to say yes to the requests of people we know and like

• Network Marketing (MLM) / Tupperware etc use this law to successfully sell product

• Even a mention of a friend’s name can influence a buying decision – hence the power of salespeople getting referrals “Your friend Mr. X suggested I call you as he thought you might be interested in this product”. Turning salespeople away in this case is more difficult – it’s almost like rejecting the friend

• We are genetically programmed to “like” attractive people – and as such we tend to comply with their requests.

• Therefore if we wish to influence people – the more we can enhance our attractiveness the more effective we will be

• The “halo effect” – we automatically believe that good looking people have the traits of talent, kindness, honesty and intelligence. This unconscious reaction makes us assume “good looking = good”

• Good looking people are more likely to get your vote, get hired and get favourably treated by the justice system

• Advertisers frequently feature good looking people promoting their products

• A fashion model / celebrity lends their perceived positive traits to the product they are promoting (the Law of Association) – thus we like it more

• We also tend to like people who are similar to us in appearance, dress, behaviour, political allegiance etc.

• Even little things, like if their name is similar to ours in direct marketing letters we tend to be more likely to respond favorably

• Good salespeople know how to find common interests with their clients and appear more likeable (as well as mirror client’s posture / vocal patterns etc)

• They also “take our side” and “do battle with the boss” to get a good deal for us

• Good cop / bad cop. The suspect sees the good cop as being on his side and is more likely to confess to him (the law of Contrast also applies here)

• Most people are suckers for flattery – we tend to believe praise and increasingly like those who provide it

• Conversely there is an unconscious tendency to dislike the person bringing us unpleasant information “shoot the messenger”.

• Therefore association with good things makes us more likeable, association with bad things makes us less likeable

• “We will be known by the company we keep”

• Sports fans see the team they are supporting as representing “them”. If the team wins “they” feel superior by association

• People desire to live in prestigious neighbourhoods, attend the best schools, eat at the best restaurants, associate with the “in crowd” – to invoke the law of association

• The desire to bask in the reflected glory of others (the Law of Association) taken to the extreme does suggest low self esteem and external motivation however (groupies / rabid sports fans / stage mothers)

• Having team goals in a company leads to greater cooperation and liking for each other – than individual competition

The Law of Authority

• We unconsciously obey symbols of authority without question

• We are trained as children that obedience to authority is “right” and disobedience is “wrong”

• People have an extreme willingness to go to almost any lengths to obey the command of authority (hence the Nazis convincing the German’s to persecute the Jews etc)

• Nurses obey Doctor’s prescriptions – without thinking or questioning

• Advertisers use people posing as Doctors or Scientists to promote their product – the white coat uniform adds to the influencing effect

• Uniforms, titles, qualifications and other symbols of authority (ie the well tailored business suit and highly polished shoes) have the same unquestioning influence effect

• Physical size also conveys authority (as it does in the animal kingdom) – hence high heels, shoulder pads, and the fact that tall people are more likely than short people to rise to positions of leadership

• Fine clothes, jewelry, cars and possessions convey authority.

• Authority is easily faked - ask yourself, “Is this person really an expert or is it just superficial appearance? What is the evidence of their authority? How truthful can we expect them to be in the circumstances?”

• Clever influencers will argue against their own interests to assure us of their sincerity – this helps “prove” their honesty to us. Invariably of course the drawbacks will be outweighed by the advantages. “We’re more expensive – but we’re worth it” “Listerine – the taste you hate twice a day”

• Clever waiters will say – “The dish you chose is not as good tonight at usual. Might I suggest instead…..” (This invokes several laws – liking / trust / reciprocity / authority)

• Letters of recommendation obtain the most favourable results when one minor negative comment about the candidate is included – rather than wholly positive comments only

The Law of Scarcity

• Opportunities seem more valuable to us when they are less available

• Rarity increases the value of an item (jewels / art / stamps)

• People are more motivated by the fear of losing something than they are of gaining something

• A ringing phone is more compelling than the conversation we are having – what are we missing if we do not take the call?

• Marketing that implies what we will lose if we don’t act - is more compelling to purchasers than outlining what we will gain

• “We have only one left in stock / Offer expires this Friday / Hurry while stocks last / for a limited time / Buy now, or pay full price when the next shipment arrives / I am booked out – but if I move things around I may be able to fit you in on Friday” etc

• Whenever our free choice is limited, or we are prevented from accessing something - we react by wanting it more (censorship / prohibition)

• This tendency starts at age 2 (“The terrible twos”) – where we start to resist being told what we can and can’t have, and rebel against constraints on our freedom. Children constantly test the limits of their freedoms (a wise parent provides consistent boundaries). The teenage years are another especially rebellious time – although we tend to react against restrictions to our freedoms all our lives

• Adult tools of influence like persuasion and preference are more effective tools with teenagers than prohibitions and controls

• Taking something away that was previously given intensifies desire for its return

• Mikhail Gorbachev gave the Russian people increased freedoms (the policies of glasnost and perestroika). The KGB staged a coup placing Gorbachev under arrest and pledged to reinstate the old suppressive order. The people revolted at the prospect of losing their newfound freedom and took to the streets to secure Gorbachev’s release.

• The lesson applies to families also – the parent who grants privileges and freedoms, and enforces rules erratically invites rebellion from the children when they try to reinstate the rules

• Censorship makes people want the information even more. In fact they become even more sympathetic to the information even though they have yet to see it!

• For fringe groups the clever influencing tactic is to get your views officially censored, then publicise the censorship

• Judges ruling evidence as inadmissible is the same as censorship – the jurors unconsciously place more weight on this evidence

• Information does not have to be censored for us to value it more; it need only be scarce

• We want things more when we are in competition for it “While stocks last!” “I have another person interested in making an offer” (also “feeding frenzies” at January department store sales / buyers getting emotional & competitive and over paying at auctions)

• When a new admirer appears on the scene, relationship partners become especially possessive

• Auctioneers fabricate dummy bidders to invoke scarcity

• Our typical unconscious reaction to scarcity & competition hinders our ability to think rationally as to an item’s real worth and we tend to overpay

• If you are a seller – give all your prospective buyers the same appointment time to view your product to invoke scarcity and competition amongst them

Comment:

LEAVE A COMMENT

Leave a comment

Name (optional)

Email Address (optional)

Please fill in the text in the image in the box below

Comment (optional)