Sales - Sequential Requests

CHaR: Confusion, Humor and Request.

CHaR is an acronym for a very powerful way of getting other people to comply with requests. It stands for Confusion, Humor and Request. Confusion Say something that confuses the other person. To work well, it should make sense on one level, but when thought about more carefully is unexpected, ambiguous or uncertain in some way. For example, you could open a phone call by saying 'I think bears should be pink' or 'Do you know what color socks I am wearing?' Confusion creates tension as the person feels they should understand what is said and yet they are unable to do this. Humor Now say something that is funny, making a joke out of the confusing comment. For example you could say 'If bears were pink then at least you could see them coming', or 'One sock is blue and the other is green - I seem to have put on odd socks today.' Humor is a release. It provides a matching closure to the previously-created, tense confusion. Be careful with this not to make fun of other people, although of course you can poke fun at yourself. Request Now make a request. You are more likely to be successful if this is fairly easy for the person to comply. In selling, typical requests are for information, a referral or for a meeting. It is surprising how often you will gain compliance, as compared with if you had just started with the request. In the confusion and humor stages you wound up the other person and then released their tension. They are now in a relaxed state where they are open to suggestion. They should also like you more and be grateful to you for giving them a bit of fun and for letting them off the hook of trying to make sense of what you said. In sales, this works well when people are expecting you to go in with a hard-sell approach as the anticipation of conflict is replaced by entertainment and fun.

Bond and Bend: Connect then shape.

Description A simple method of persuasion is 'bond and bend', where we bond with the other person then bend them to our will. Bond First, connect with them, creating a bond between you so they trust and like you, as if you were a close friend or relative. To create a bond, you have to get them to trust you. Here are many ways to engender trust. You can also help build the bond by using active ways of building rapport. Bend To 'bend' is to move them in the direction that you want them to go. Once you have bonded them to you, then you can bend them to your will. If they are bonded then, for simple requests, all you need to do is ask. Things that require more effort or changing how they think will often need more subtly. The stronger the bond, the more easy this task will be. Think of it like bending a stick. A slight flex is easy. A significant bend depends on the flexibility of the stick. Try to bend it too far and too sharply and it will break. Also like the way wood can be shaped in making furniture, slow and steady bending can make it go much further than attempting a sharp, sudden bend. Example A parent shows their child lots of love and gives them much attention. They are then able to command the child. When the child does something wrong, they find parental disappointment so upsetting they just apologize and do as they are told. A business leader sells her vision to her team and gets them deeply involved in achieving it. They bond together and share a strong commitment towards success. A sales person smiles and offers a compliment. As the person smiles back, the sales person moves smoothly into the sales pitch. Discussion Bonding works because it is effectively a joining of identities, where a bonded person feels as if their sense of identity is seamlessly connected with the other person. When another person shares their identity with you, doing something for you is like doing something for themselves. Trust is a gateway to persuasion. It is also an essential element within bonding. People will not connect their selves with yours, at least not in any deep way, unless they trust you. Having said this, a light bonding is quite easily created, as many salespeople know. Bending is based on creating a tension between their actual thoughts or actions, and the things that you are suggesting. When they are bonded with you, they will want to be like you and to do things that make you happy. If you show that they are still not like you, they will act to change themselves, including their beliefs. If you ask them to do something, they will do this in order to make you happy. Of course you can bend a person too far, such that the bond between you gets fractured or broken. Just how much you can ask of them depends on the strength of the bond. all relationships between people work in this way, with the desire to help and align with one another. Bending the person to your desire can sound very manipulative, though as the examples illustrate, the intent and consideration of others is a critical element and in reality this method is widely used. Certainly it can be used in questionable ways, such as the way cults use methods such as the love bomb followed by extreme techniques such as identity destruction. A simple variant is called 'pace and lead', and is based on matching non-verbal language (pacing) before modifying one's own language to move them in your direction.

Foot In The Door (FITD): Make small offer then increase.

Description Ask for something small. When they give it to you, then ask for something bigger. And maybe then something bigger again. Example A person in the street asks me directions, which I give. They then ask me to walk a little way with them to make sure they don't get lost. In the end, I take them all the way to their destination. Dad, can I go out for an hour to see Sam? [answer yes]...I just called Sam and he's going to the cinema - can I go with him?...I haven't got money -- could you lend me enough to get in?...Could you give us a lift there?...Could you pick us up after? Discussion FITD works by first getting a small yes and then getting an even better yes. The principle involved is that a small agreement creates a bond between the requester and the requestee. The other person has to justify their agreement to themself. They cannot use the first request as something significant, so they have to convince themself that it is because they are nice and like the requester or that they actually are interested in the item being requested. In a future request, they then feel obliged to act consistently with their internal explanation they have built. The initial request should be: ..small enough so that they are less likely to refuse the request. ..big enough so the target person feels they are being kind when they respond. ..for a good reason that the giver agrees is worthwhile. ..something that the person will do voluntary (not requiring external incentives such as pressure or money). It can help if there is some label given, such as the sticky badges that charities often give out after a donation. It does not matter when there is Freedman and Fraser (1966) asked people to either sign a petition or place a small card in a window in their home or car about keeping California beautiful or supporting safe driving. About two weeks later, the same people were asked by a second person to put a large sign advocating safe driving in their front yard. Many people who agreed to the first request now complied with the second, far more intrusive request. The Freedman and Fraser study showed significant effect. later studies showed that the actual effect was more often far less. The most powerful effect occurs when the person's self-image is aligned with the request. Requests thus need to be kept close to issues that the person is likely to support, such as helping other people. It is also affected by individual need for consistency. Pro-social requests also increase likelihood of success with this method. It is also more likely to succeed when the second request is an extension of the first request (as opposed to being something completely different). Note also that 'foot in the door' is also used as a generic term to describe where early sales are relatively unprofitable (maybe a 'loss leader'), as the key purpose is to enable a relationship to be developed whereby further and more profitable sales may be completed. The Foot-in-the-door technique is a 'sequential request'.

Dump and Chase (DAC): Provoke objections then negotiate on them.

Description Ask for something. When they flatly refuse, ask why (or why not, depending on how the situation is phrased). Then turn the discussion into a negotiation whereby you remove the reasons for them not agreeing with you or otherwise complying with your request. Example When a customer says they do not want buy a product, the sales person asks what is stopping them from buying today, and then proceeds to address their issues. A boy wants to go out with his friends. His mother says 'no'. He asks why not and then gives reasons and evidence that outweigh the mother's reasons. In the end, she gives in. Discussion There are two forms of refusal: a flat refusal where no explanation is given and and 'obstacle' where reasons are given for refusing. People often present obstacles as this is a more polite form and less likely to result in reactive argument. However, this form also gives space for the persuader to continue persuading. Persistence by the persuader allows them to wear down the other person, who also may become convinced that this is an urgent and important matter for the persuader. The person may feel guilty in holding out when conceding is not that important for them, or become sympathetic to their need. This method pulls on the needs to explain, effectively forcing the other person to give reason, which also enables the persuader to continue. 'Dump and chase' is also a strategy in ice hockey whereby a team hits the puck into the attacking zone, then aggressively tries to retrieve it (which is similar to 'kick and rush' in rugby union). This term was used

Foot in the Face Technique (FITF): When to use delayed second request.

Description Ask the person to complete a moderately difficult task. Depending on their response, ask them to complete a second moderately difficult task. If they refuse to do the first task, ask them immediately to do the second task. If they comply with the first task request, ask them to do the second task after a delay. When they have completed this, test their inclination towards obeying you by asking them to complete yet another moderate task at some time in the not-too-distant future, for example after a few days. Example A teacher gives their new class a challenging, but not too hard, task to complete. When the class does this, the teacher congratulates them, then gives them another such task. The tasks are designed to fit into the whole of the first lesson. In the second lesson, the class is now ready to do as they are asked. A car sales person asks a customer to complete a questionnaire about their preferences. She then asks them for an appointment in which she will demonstrate a car. She finds that asking the first question increases the chance of a 'yes' for the second one. Discussion The 'Foot In The Face' method is an extension of two common sequential persuasion techniques. The Foot In The Door method starts with an easy request then uses the consistency principle to get compliance to a more demanding request. In contrast, the Door In The Face method starts with a demanding request and then uses the exchange principle to get compliance with an easier request as the subject 'pays back' their debt of having declined the first request by complying with the easier second one. In three field studies, Dolinski (2011) found that compliance could be gained on a second request which is about the same 'difficulty' for the subject as the first request. He asked 200 people to do one of a daily temperature or air pressure reading, then asked them to do the other task (even if they had refused the first one). About half complied with the first request and even more with the second one. Follow-up studies achieved compliance of between 63% and 68%. This may be explained as an example of the Ben Franklin effect, whereby a person rationalizes that they have done something for you because they like you or some other acceptable reason, and that this reasoning hence extends to being valid for justifying to themselves any further help for you. Then, having completed the second task, they are even more obliged to persuade themselves that they want to help you on an ongoing basis, as they cannot just dismiss the single assistance as a 'one off'. When the person refuses the first request and then complies with the second request, there may be a 'Door in the Face' effect, even though the second task is also moderately difficult. Depending on the situation, the FITF method may also help confirm your position as having authority over the subject. In this way, it can be a good idea for managers to ask new subordinates to complete a task that it not too hard for them and not too easy, and then to complete another such moderate task. This helps to establish the manager-subordinate relationship and will This is not a continuously repeatable process as if you keep asking for compliance you will eventually get refusal as the social capital between you and them becomes too far out of balance (in other words, they feel they have done enough for you and now it is your turn to do something for them).

Pregiving: Create obligation first.

Description Before you ask a person for something, first give them some kind of reward or do them a favor. This does not have to be a physical item. A pregiving message is something that is said to create a sense of obligation in the other person by saying something that makes them feel good. The request may be delayed, as long as the person remembers and responds to your later request. Example Would you like a sweet? Now can I show you the introduction video? Thanks for stopping by. Could you tell me how much you have to spend? You look wonderful. I've just the dress for you. Could you try this on? Discussion Pregiving is intended to trigger the reciprocity norm, creating a sense of obligation through the need to complete an exchange. The giving beforehand makes the person feel they should respond by giving something in return, which is of course what you want to receive. When you give a person something before they act, they may just take the reward and not comply with your request. Yet while some people may do this (typically children and teenagers), the social pressures to reciprocate are so high that few in practice will act this way. For pregiving to work, the target has to believe that the gift is an altruistic act and not related to the later request. Boster et al (1995) found that strangers would be more likely to buy raffle tickets if they had been giving a pregiving message, while friends were equally likely to comply whether pregiving was used or not. Pregiving is best when the request is social and in alignment with values. Boster, Fediuk and Kotowski (2001) tried using pregiving to get a person to perform an anti-social act (not reporting an exam cheat) and found this did not work. Generally be careful when pregiving, especially if the reward you are giving is significant or where there is no opportunity for the other person to be socially punished if they do not respond to your request

Agree and Extend: First find agreement, then push the envelope.

Description First get their agreement, then assumptively extend that agreement. This can be done over time, within the same conversation, and even within the same sentence. The basic principle is to make a statement to which the other person will readily agree, then to add more items and act as if they also agree to this. A simple way to do this is in the same sentence, to briefly pause after the first statement to let them say yes, then continue with the rider on which you really want agreement. It may help to carry on talking for a while to prevent them from challenging your assumption. Another way, in a longer conversation, you might first get agreement to such as a general request for help before getting into the specifics of exactly what help you want. Over time, you could engage them in something, then steadily extend the activity into areas they might not have originally accepted. Example Do you like the shirt? (Yes) Then you'll love this tie which is designed specifically to go with it. Can we go to town? (Yes) While we're there, let's visit my mother. Discussion Assumptive methods work by acting 'as if' something is true and then making it difficult or embarrassing to contradict this. Agree and Extend strengthens this by priming the person with the easy agreement. When a person has agreed to something, they switch to a state of comfortable closure. An additional request threatens to drag them out of that comfort with a new tension, so they may well quickly and unthinkingly agree again in order to switch back to the closure comfort. There is also a sunk cost effect, where having agreed, the subject feels they have made a significant investment and to subsequently pull out would result in the loss of that commitment. So they stay in and become trapped by ever increasing investment. This is strengthened again by the fear of embarrassment should they be shown as having made a bad decision. Agree and Extend works more easily if the extension is a small step, though if the person is in a good mood or has relaxed after the closure.

Door In The Face (DITF): Cause rejection then make real offer.

Description First make a request of the other person that is excessive and to which they will most naturally refuse. Look disappointed but then make a request that is more reasonable. The other person will then be more likely to accept. Example Will you donate $100 to our cause? [response is no].Oh. Well could you donate $10? Can you help me do all this work?Well can you help me with this bit? Can I stay out until 4am?OK. How about midnight? Discussion DITF works by first getting a no and then getting a yes. When the other person refuses the first request, they may feel guilty about having refused another person and fear rejection as a result. The second request gives them the opportunity to assuage that guilt and mitigate any threat of social rejection. In effect, the person making the request is making an exchange of concession for belonging. The lower request uses the contrast principle, making it seem very small in comparison with the larger initial request and hence relatively trivial and easy to agree with. This method works best when the requests being made have a socially valid element, for example where you are seeking to learn something, teach people or help others. This is so that the other person does not reject the whole request out of hand (it is just that the initial request is 'too much'). The second request should be made soon after the first request, before the effects of guilt and other motivators wears off. Cialdini, Cacioppo, Bassett, and Miller asked students to to volunteer to council juvenile delinquents for two hours a week for two years. After their refusal, they were asked to chaperone juvenile delinquents on a one-day trip to the zoo. 50% agreed to chaperone the trip to the zoo as compared to 17% of participants who only received the zoo request. The Door-in-the-face technique is a 'sequential request' and is also known as 'rejection-then-retreat'.

Heart, Head, Hands: Emotion first, then rationale and action.

Description First make an emotionally-based statement with which the other person will instinctively agree. A good way of getting emotional agreement is to appeal to the person's values, talking about good or bad, right or wrong. Then add supportive arguments that seem logical and rational. In this, be selective about what you say, using things that support your initial statement. Indicate evidence. Talk about cause and effect. Ignore any opposing rationale. Finally issue the call to action, asking them to do something. Example Would you believe it! They are going to close the library! Isn't that terrible? How will our children learn? What about the old people? We are going to protest next week. Can you help? Isn't that great sounding music? It's created through the unique linear acceleration circuitry. Nobody else has it and it makes sense as the best buy. Now are you ready to buy it today? You did what? That's shameful. I know you didn't really mean it and that you were in a hurry. You can recover the situation, but you do need to go and apologize today. Discussion A common way we make decisions is to start with a gut-based, instinctive decision, and then we seek confirmation in evidence and rationale. This method plays directly to this sequence of thinking. This is a affective-cognitive-behavioral approach, starting with emotions to get the person aroused, then providing rational support so the person agrees at both levels before you ask them do something for you. Other sequences may be used, but this is a good way of getting immediate compliance. The final action requested need not be a direct response or even that obvious, although of course linking action to the issue increases the chance of compliance. If the person is sufficiently aroused, then they will easily accept a fallacious argument and so be ready to follow your clear lead, even if the action is not that logical or appropriate.

Low-ball: Make it attractive, then make it real.

Description First make what you want the other person to agree to easy to accept by making it quick, cheap, easy, etc. Maximize their buy-in, in particular by getting both verbal and public commitment to this. Make it clear that they are agreeing to this of their own free will. Then change the agreement to what you really want. The other person may complain, but, if the low-ball is done correctly they should agree to the change. The trick of a successful low-ball is in the balance of making the initial request attractive enough to gain agreement, whilst not making the second request so outrageous that the other person refuses. It nevertheless is surprising how great a difference there can be between these two requests. Example A sales person says that a product 'starts at' a low price. During the sales process they introduce necessary extras. A family books a package holiday. They find that there are surcharges. They pay these without question. Discussion The Low-ball works by first gaining closure and commitment to the idea or item which you want the other person to accept, then using the fact that people will behave consistently with their beliefs to sustain the commitment when you change the agreement. There is also an illusion of irrevocability whereby a person believes that a decision made cannot be reversed, for example when a person agrees to buy a car and considers the handshake as the final transaction (as opposed to handing over the money). Agreeing to a low price creates excitement and not buying after this state is induced may lead to an equally deep depression, which the person may avoid by continuing with the more expensive purchase. When the final price is not that much higher than elsewhere, the person weighs up the inconvenience of going elsewhere with the short-term benefit of holding their purchase very soon. Cialdini, Cacioppo, Bassett, and Miller (1978) asked students to participate in an experiment. The control group was told during the request that it would be at 7am. The low-ball group was only told this later. 24% of the control group agreed to this, whilst 56% of the low-ball group agreed (and 95% of these actually turned up). Gu�guen and Pascual (2000) found it to be important that the person believes that they have made a free and non-coerced agreement to the first request. In particular adding 'but you are free to accept or to refuse' to the first request increased compliance. Burger and Petty (1981) showed that the same person must make both requests. Low-ball is similar to Bait-and-switch. Low-ball is used in a single transaction, for example in the direct conversation between a customer and a sales person. In bait-and-switch, the bait (such as in an advert) is often separate from the direct sales activity during which the switch is made, for example by saying the advertised product is not available (but a higher-priced, similar product is). Also, low-balling is often based more in money, while bait-and-switch typically is about different products. The Low-ball technique is a 'sequential request'.

Selling the Top Of The Line (TOTL): First promote an expensive product. Then show them a cheaper product.

Description First promote an expensive product. Then show them a cheaper product. This can be done without really trying to sell the expensive product. Do it as if you are just a kind of product geek who is proud of what can be done and want to show off great products. Then become the friend who sells them a product that suits them best. You can also try to sell the expensive product if they seem to be interested. Expensive products are sought by the affluent and those who value the social kudos the product gives. If they seem like the latter, add 'what people will say' into your patter. If they reject the expensive product, then it is a simple step to move down to the cheaper product. Example Just look at this wonderful washing machine, it has many different cycles and controls...It is a bit expensive - but this other machine does almost as much and is 30% less. I really want to go to the Seychelles for a fortnight. But I guess that's a bit expensive...Maybe a week in Cannes would be better. Discussion Selling the top of the line' is a common approach that is a variant of the Door In The Face (DITF) method. Acting as a 'product geek' in showing off the more expensive item establishes the sales person as an expert and can help to build trust. Note that serious attempts to sell the expensive product may negate or even invert these effects. The more expensive product creates desire, but cannot be afforded. The second product hooks into the created desire with something that is closer to the buyers budget. The method uses the contrast principle to make the second product appear relatively inexpensive. The exchange principle also applies as the sales person is giving up a higher sale in apparent concern for the customer, who reciprocates the favor by buying the product. Donoho (2003) showed 290 business majors different videos designed to sell CD players. Some were shown a 'top of the line' video, showing first an expensive product followed by a less expensive product. Others were shown products in different orders. The 'top of the line' video resulted in 'purchases' of average 10% greater value.

Test and Request: Check their mood before you ask.

Description First test the mood of the person from whom you want something. Then, if they are in the right mood, make the request. With a careful question, you may even be able to nudge them into the desired emotional state. Your attitude will also be important in this. Do not make your request if they are in the wrong mood. Typically you want them to feel positive towards you, and a simple 'How are you?' may suffice. Of course you should listen empathetically before diving into your request, even if the answer is long. If you do not have the time for an open question, a cheerful leading question may suffice, such as 'Isn't it a lovely day?' You may also need a negative mood, for example if you want to them to get them to join a protest. Example A phone app pops up a question 'How's it working for you - Great or Not great'. Then, when they person taps on 'Great', the app follows up with the request 'Please write a review'. A person collecting signatures for a petition asks people 'What do you think of the local road plans?' Then they only ask for a signature if the person is opposed to the plans. A sales person asks customers what they think about the goods being sold. If they say they like it, the sales person moves towards the close. Discussion Two key principles in persuasion are (a) to work on facts rather than guesses, and (b) to get people into the right frame of mind before asking them for what you want of them. 'Test and Request' covers both of these. One of the simple keys to working with facts is to gather data before acting, using what you have learned to guide your actions. This leads to a far better chance of success than jumping in and going for the killer request when you do not know whether the other person is at all likely to agree with you. If you ask for something from a person who is not ready to comply, you might set up an opposing attitude that makes them dig in against you. With a simple question, you can first test their attitude and then use this data to determine your next mood. What we say can change how people think and feel, so test questions can deliberately lead in the desired direction. In fact as much pre-work as necessary may be used to change their attitude or mood before the main request is made.

Foot In The Mouth Effect: Be nice, then ask.

Description First, seek to make the other person feel good and like you. Ask a question that demonstrates care and interest in them. Listen to their response with due attention and concern. Acknowledge as appropriate the legitimacy of their views. Then make your request. Example How are you today? Are you feeling well? ... Could I ask you for one thing: to sign this petition? Isn't it such as great day? It's great to see you so happy. ... Can I ask you to help with something? Discussion Howard (1990) found that people seeking donations to a charity gained a greater donation when they asked how the subject was feeling and acknowledged the response, rather than just asking for a donation. Having read this study, Meineri and Gueguen (2011) asked people if they were available to answer a questionnaire (and waited for their answer) before diving into the questions, found that this prior request for permission led to a far higher compliance rate. Dolinski et al (2001) noted how dialog (as opposed to monolog) with a stranger was a viable general social influence technique. Effectively, when you start to talk with anyone in a conversational way, rather than talking at them, you connect with them, creating a bond such that you start to share identities. In doing so, you build trust and consequently are more ready to engage in reciprocal exchange. In other words, if you talk and connect with a person, you will gain a greater influence over them.

Pre-thanking: Thank you for...

Description If you want to persuade somebody to do something, first ask them to do it and then, before they have time to respond, thank them for doing it. Example Hi, can you close the door? Thanks -- that's very kind of you. Could you lend me fifty? Thanks, I know it's awkward but I know you're a great friend and I'll pay you back tomorrow. Thank you for moving to the back of the bus. Discussion A thanks is an act of closure, sending a signal for the completion of an agreement. An effusive thanks (but not over-done) can help cement the closure. This makes it difficult for the other person to 're-open' the case and contradict this. Do be careful when doing this -- if you ask for more than the relationship will bear then the relationship will suffer as a result, even if the person complies with the request. It can be useful sometimes to include an apology for having to ask. This increases the obligation to comply as you have now addressed any irritated thoughts by the other person and maybe made them feel a bit guilty for thinking them (as it seems clear you have 'found them out' for having such uncharitable thoughts). A variant on this is to put the thanks before the request. This is not as effective and can be quite irritating. Thank you for not putting your feet on the table. By putting the thanks beforehand, the other person is initially confused and is more likely to feel deceived by the subsequent request. Having said this, this form of the pattern is common in some cultures where it is accepted as normal.

Unit Asking: Ask for a small amount first.

Description In order to get people to act on a large number, get them first to commit to a small number, even one. Before asking for a donation to help many people, get targets to think about a single person or situation. When seeking support for any cause where large numbers are affected, focus first (and perhaps only) on individual cases that support your argument. Example A charity seeking donations shows a picture of single child in distress and asks people to give to help this single, named child. A government seeking to build support for welfare cuts seeks out examples of benefit fraud and makes a big deal about these before presenting their money-saving policy. Discussion Hsee et al (2013) studied a kindergarten site that was seeking donations. All subjects were asked how much they would donate. Some subjects had been asked beforehand a hypothetical question about how much they would donate to one child. These people donated more than those who were only asked after viewing the website. Hsee et al explain this effect by noting how people are initially scope insensitive and subsequently scope consistent. Scope insensitivity or 'scope neglect' is a mental bias where people do not fully appreciate the difference between medium and large numbers. In in particular, it seems we have difficulty in making sense of how big large numbers really are. It as if we think in terms of 'one, few, lots'. In this way, the different between a thousand and a million seems not that different to the difference between a million and a billion. Perhaps this is related to the way we encode written numbers. Teachers typically overcome this with physical example, for example 'how many footballs would fit into a football stadium'. Scope consistency uses the consistency principle in that once we have take some action we seek to act consistently with this in the future rather than face the cognitive dissonance or social disapproval. In the example of donations, this means people will donate more to a large number after they have first decided to donate to a small number (even if this was a 'hypothetical' conversation). Unit Asking helps address the problem of the 'drop in the ocean' effect, where people asked to help large numbers of other people consider such a donation tiny in comparison with the large numbers who need help, and so donate nothing. In a reversal effect, it is better to ask for help from a single person than asking for help from a crowd of people.

Fear-Then-Relief (FTR): Scare them then rescue them.

Description Invoke fear in the other person. Then, when they seek a solution, provide one that leads them in the direction you choose. Fear is invoked by threatening needs. Relief may be gained by doing what you request. Relief may also given 'freely' to create trust and invoke the rules of social exchange. Be careful not to be seen as an aggressor, for example by using external sources to invoke the fear. Also be careful not to invoke so much fear that they flee from you or become aggressive. Example Your performance has been below standard recently and you may be placed on the 'at risk' register. I won't do this now but I do want you to show me what you are capable of. The boss came around when you were out and asked where you were. Don't worry, I gave a good excuse. Could you cover for me? I want to go home early. Discussion This is a direct application of the hurt and rescue principle, creating discomfort and then providing the means of reducing that discomfort. Whilst a relatively crude method, it is still quite common and often effective when done well. This works as the pleasant relief is linked with the second request, which receives the pleasant emotion by association. In the state of blessed relief the person may also be temporarily unthinking as the strong emotion overwhelms any rational consideration. Repeated fear-relief cycles can be emotionally very exhausting and is used in such as interrogation and conversion to break a person down. When a person thinks they are rescued from a fearful situation, they relax and drop their guard, making the next wave even more terrifying as they are less and less able to emotional defend against it. Invoking fear can be hazardous as it may well trigger the Fight-or-Flight reaction. Particularly when the persuader is seen as the primary cause of the discomfort, they may become the target of aggression and compliance will become very unlikely. One way this can be handled is that the persuader pleads innocence or unintentional action, which leader the aggressor into apology and compliance as a way of restoring social harmony.

But You Are Free: Ensure they have a free choice.

Description Make a request or suggestion to the target person. Then tell them they are free to accept or reject the request or suggestion. This leads to increased acceptance and compliance with what you are seeking from them. Let them know they have a free choice, even though it may be obvious that they can choose as they wish. The basic format is to make a suggestion and then say 'but you are free' to make your own choice. Other variants of language you can use to suggest freedom of choice include: It's up to you It's your choice Make your own mind up Whatever you like Of course you are free to choose You can also suggest freedom, but with an assumptive edge that presumes that non-action is not an option, such as: When you are ready Whichever you choose Whatever your people want Example An activist seeking petition signatures gets more on their list by saying people are free to add their names or not. A sales person sells more by saying that customers are free to come back later if they are not ready to buy now. Discussion In the original study, Gu�guen and Pascual (2000) found that when subjects were asked in a street to give money to a cause, only 10.0% complied. However, when the phrase "...but you are free to accept or to refuse" was added, 47.5% now complied. Pascual and Gueguen (2002) found this wording led to more money being donated to a social cause. Gueguen et al (2002) noted the importance of the semantic evocation of freedom. It is not enough to ask, you have to specifically tell people they are free to accept or refuse. Gu�guen and Pascual (2005) asked people to complete a survey. 75.6% of those asked to complete the survey, but not told they were free to accept or refuse, complied. Yet 90.1% complied when they were told they were free to accept or refuse. The review by Carpenter (2012) confirmed its effectiveness and the importance that the target person decides to take the suggested action soon after the suggestion. We have a fundamental need for a sense of control. When we are asked to do something it may well feel that the requesting person is taking control. As a reaction, we are then more likely to refuse, asserting our ability to sustain control. When the person is told they are free to accept or refuse, then they are formally given control and so do not have to wrest it back. This wording also sets up an exchange dynamic whereby they feel obliged to repay the kindness in giving a free option to disadvantage the requesting person by not refusing the request. The word 'free' is a common power word and may have an additional effect as it causes particular attention and excitement. 'Free' appeals not only to the need for control but also to greed. While this does not directly affect things, the unconscious triggering of desire may help to tip the balance further towards compliance. 'But You Are Free' can also be used in combination with the Foot In The Door (FITD) method. Gu�guen et al (2010) found that both methods together were more effective at persuading people to sort household waste (78%) in comparison with FITD alone (60%) or just BYAF (56%).

Disrupt-Then-Reframe (DTR): Break the pattern then rebuild differently.

Description Make a statement that goes off the normal track of how the other person thinks. Then make a rational-sounding statement that makes apparent sense and leads the other person to agree to your request. This is typically done in a single speech, effectively disrupting and reframing your own statements. The principle can also be used in disrupting the other person, breaking into their speech and reinterpret what they are saying to indicate something else. This is best done when they are in the middle of talking and are in a state of 'flow', effectively trotting out a familiar script on the subject. The disruption can even be something nonsensical -- the key is that it breaks a pattern and readies them for something else. Example Davis and Knowles told customers that a package of eight cards sold for $3.00, and subsequently made sales to approximately 40% of customers. When they told customers that "the price of eight cards is 300 pennies, which is a bargain", then sales doubled to 80% of customers. Them: You know I hate it when you...You: Marakanas!...I hate it when we don't get on. So let's try again? Discussion Davis and Knowles based this approach on a study of hypnotist Milton Erikson's methods whereby he would deliberately disrupt thinking and behaving and hence destabilize his patients' habitual patterns and then change that thinking whilst the patient was still unsure what to think next. This method uses the principle of confusion to unfreeze the person and then uses reframing in a hurt and rescue route to closure. In their 'pennies' example, the use of '300 pennies' is a disruption of the normal '3 dollars'. Whilst the person is trying to figure out what this means, the reframe 'which is a bargain' is slipped in as an explanation, which many people accept and hence conclude that it is worth purchasing before they decide that 300 pennies is really $3, which is not worth paying. Rather than use standard persuasive pressure, as in traditional one-off selling, it acts more subtly to create alternative forms of tension that are literally doubly (as in Davis and Knowles' experiment) as effective. The aim is thus to reduce avoidance rather than focus first on increasing attractiveness. The persuader thus becomes a trusted supporter rather than an oppositional enforcer, which supports future persuasion as in relationship selling or collaborative negotiation. Fennis, Das and Pruyn extended this principle to show that this disruption and reframing approach was applicable across a wider range of settings. Specifically, the Disrupt-Then-Reframe technique reduced the extent of objections and counter-argument to a sales script and boosted the impact of questioning and alignment methods. The technique is often abbreviated simply to DTR, and can be used to describe a range of techniques that use the same basic disrupt-reframe principle.

Bait-and-Switch: Great offer that never happens.

Description Offer them something that appears to be very good value. This should be a real bargain, an offer they can't possibly refuse, even if they were not thinking about it. Later, replace the item with something of less value to them (and more profit to you). Example A car sales showroom puts a basic car outside with a very low price-tag. Once the customer is interested, the sales person trades them up to a more expensive model. Would you like to go out to this really expensive restaurant? ... Oh dear, it's booked up. Never mind, we can go to the usual place. Discussion When the person sees the initial item of high value they cognitively close on the idea of acquiring it and hence The early bait thus moves them from a negative position to one of commitment. When the high value item is removed, then they enter a state of anxiety in which they seek to re-enter the comfortable closed state. They thus seek to satisfice, accepting almost any solution that will get them back to that comfortable state. There may also be an element of commitment to the person making the offer. If I offer something to you, you feel some obligation to me. If I then switch the offer, especially if the switching seems reasonable, then you are likely to accept the second offer out of a sense of obligation to me. To do otherwise would expose myself as inconsistent and break bonding between us. Although common in sales, this method was first researched by Joule, Gouilloux, and Weber (1989), who called it the lure procedure. They invited students to watch interesting film clips (and hence got a lot of volunteers), but then switched the task to memorizing lists of numbers. In the control group that was just asked to help by memorizing numbers (no initial film-clip offer), only 15% agreed, as opposed to 47% who had been first offered the film-clip experiment. Bait-and-switch is similar to Low-ball. Low-ball is used in a single transaction, for example in the direct conversation between a customer and a sales person. In bait-and-switch, the bait (such as in an advert) is often separate from the direct sales activity during which the switch is made, for example by saying the advertised product is not available (but a higher-priced, similar product is). Also, low-balling is often based more in money, while bait-and-switch typically is about different products. The bait and switch technique is a 'sequential request'.

Prime and Prompt: Set them up beforehand.

Description Prime First prime the other person, implanting suggestions, information and other memories. This can include biases, emphasis and other ways to make particular elements more important. Priming can be used to prepare people for specific thoughts or actions. It can also act as a more general nudge that encourages the target person to think in a particular way (or at least not in an undesirable way). Priming can be subtle and unconscious, such as with the use of linguistic patterning. It can also be deliberate and conscious, such as in training exercises. It can be short and take only a moment, such as in mentioning one word, or it can repeated a number of times to embed a prompted response into memory. Prompt When the person is primed, next use a persuasive method that will result in the primed information being recalled by a careful prompt that stimulates recall of the information or triggers the defined action. Prompting can be via various sensory stimuli, from a single word to a particular image or even a sequence of events. It can even be a physical action, such as a touch or collision. Example A sales person puts up images of racing leopards in the showroom in order to prime customers with thoughts of speed. She then sells fast cars, using speed- and excitement-based language. A football team trains hard so that any action by the opposing side acts as a prompt to automatically trigger the primed response. A parent talks over breakfast about a news story where a child was abducted. Later, they ask the child to take care going to school, which the child does with greater attention than if they had not heard the abduction story. Discussion Priming works by providing them with information that is easily brought to mind. The prompt that brings the information to mind can be an implanted and specific trigger or can be an associated term that will naturally bring back the primed information. Prime-and-prompt can be a bit like firing a gun, where priming cocks and prompting pulls the trigger. It can also be less precise, a bit like steering a ship where turning tiller pushes the ship in the desired direction, though the accuracy of this may not be very great. In many cases, prime-and-prompt acts like a nudge and can work well as a part of a coordinated overall approach, rather than the only method being used. In this form it can be subtle and unseen. In its most extreme form, prime-and-prompt enacts the sleeper effect, where a person is primed to enact a specific action sequence on a given signal. This has been used in a number of action movies and is the basis for the original 'Manchurian Candidate' theme.

Pace and Lead: Match them before leading them. (bonding)

Description Start by pacing the person, connecting and bonding with them in order to gain rapport. This can be done with methods such as: Mirroring: Direct copying of their actions. Matching: Indirect copying of actions. Paraphrasing: Rephrasing in your own words. Parroting: Simple repetition of what they say. Agreeing: Showing you think similarly. Similarity: Showing how you are alike in some way. Truth: Stating what is unarguably true now. Then, when they feel you are aligned with them, lead them to where you want them to go. This can be physical, but is often simply a verbal and mental process, where they listen your words and eventually change their minds. Example You're right. We should move to the country. Now how far out of town is practical? I think we need to be within 20 minutes drive. Like you, I feel surprised by this. Let's look at it together. It seems we've not spent time here before. It's a good idea if we do it more regularly. What are you doing on Tuesday? Thanks for asking me here tonight and I'm sure you've a lot of questions. I've been in the same situation, so believe me, I'm with you. So let's sit down and look at the situation. Discussion The idea of pacing before leading is that if you try to persuade without them feeling alignment with you, you will likely cause resistance or objection. While pacing is not necessarily enough to ensure persuasion, without it the chance of success may be reduced. While pacing may be achieved by copying the target person in some way, this should be done carefully as it is easy for this approach to seem obvious and hence create even more resistance. Sometimes just finding agreement is a good way of pacing the person. One of the traps here is to try to lead them before they feel aligned with you. Pacing may require a significant effort before they feel they can trust you sufficiently to follow you. Even if they like you, they may still be cautious about you taking the lead. Preferences around this may vary with the person and with how big a change you want them to make. Once they feel connected to you, and that their sense of identity is expanded to include you, subsequent words from you are almost as if they are talking to themselves. For this to work, the connection needs to be maintained throughout. Breaking of this connection can happen by factors such as external interruption or suggestions that are too alien for the subject to accept. If you want to lead a person somewhere, it is a good idea to know where they are now. This can be a part of pacing, where you put yourself at their side. Only then can you move towards your desired future. Note that in moving them, a single leap may not be feasible and a number of smaller steps in the right direction may be more successful. 'Future pacing' is the practice of showing alignment into the future. It uses a similar principle and can be an extension from 'present pacing' as described here. The principle of pacing and leading has be popularized through the general field of Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP), which derived it from Eriksonian hypnosis techniques.

Dialog Involvement: Engage them and only then persuade.

Description Start the conversation with a casual conversation. Then move on to the persuasion when they are attentive, listening and seem ready to take seriously what you have to say. Do not hurry this. The goal is to engage them, so wait until they are engaged. Also do not talk for too long in case they become bored or argumentative. Example A parent wants to discuss homework with their child. They start by asking how the child's day is going. Then they move on to talking about school. Only then do they ask about homework and stress the importance of doing well. A marketer uses this method in an advert, starting with the headline 'How's life?' and continuing 'Could be better, huh?' before launching into the benefits of using their exercise equipment. Discussion Sales people often use this, starting out with small talk that is intended to create or build the social bond between them and their customers. Only when they see positive, connected body language will they then move on to selling. This method may be combined with Test and Request, using the 'test' phase as a form of dialog, conversationally exploring their mood and nudging them in the right direction.

Hook and Sinker: Easy agreement then commitment requirement.

Description Start with a statement that is easy to accept and/or difficult to reject. Then add a second, related statement that contains the key message. Example Littering is disgusting. So are those who do it. Do you like good food? Stop here for great food. Discussion The first statement is the 'hook', which can be a simple assertion or a question. Like the worm on the angler's line, its sole purpose is to get the other person interested, agreeing and making an initial closure. The second statement is the 'sinker', which drops the other person into the mire of having to agree. If they disagree, then they will have acted inconsistently, which leads to cognitive dissonance and a fear of social rejection.

Pitch and Putt: Give your pitch then nudge them the last few inches.

Description Use your pitch to get them most of the way to the target. Then 'putt', nudging them the last few inches. In other words, do not try to persuade them in one go. Instead, do it in two stage. With a presentation you may gain their interest, but getting to closure often requires more custom care and attention to detail. Example A sales person does her presentation to a big customer. She then discusses detail, handling objections before the final close. A child tells their parents all about how well they are doing in school before asking if they can go out to a late night party. Discussion Yes, it is a corny pun, but this helps make it memorable. And it is worth remembering, to continue the golfing metaphor, that holes in one are rare, and a good strategy is to get it near the hole first, then gently tap it in. The idea of the golfing pitch works too, perhaps as a 'drive', where a powerful start can get you most of the way. The difficulty of accurate putting also makes sense as the last few inches can the most difficult part.

That's not all (TNA): Add a string of benefits.

Description When offering or conceding something to somebody, rather than give it to them as a final item, give it in incremental pieces. Do not allow them to respond to each piece you give them -- keep on offering more. Thus, for example, you can: Offer a discount in several stages. Add extra 'gifts' to a product offering. Start with a high price and reduce it. Tell them all the things you are going to do, one at a time. The increments can be in different amounts, but each should surprise and delight the person. It can also help if the final increment is particularly desirable. Example Ladies and gentlemen, I'm not only going to reduce this by 10%, not even by 20% and not even by 40%. Today, ladies and gentlemen, the price is reduced for you by a whopping 50%! I'm not going to give you this cookie cutter. No. That's not all I'm going to give you. For the same price, I'm going to throw in a fine steel spatula. A bargain I hear you say? But I'm going to make it even better, with this splendid temperature probe, absolutely free. Now, who wants this wonderful offer now? Mr Jones, you've been treated badly and I'm going to make sure you're ok today. First, I'm going to call the service team. Then I'm going to talk to the manager and then I'll get him to call you today. Is this ok for you? Discussion This technique is reminiscent of the highball tactic in that it starts with high and comes down. The only difference is that the 'that's not all' method does not do this in negotiated concessions. It can, however, seem like a negotiation. Burger (1986) found that this technique works partly because a customer sees the salesperson as entering into a type of negotiation by offering an additional product. With each increment, the customer feels an increasing obligation to purchase the product in return for the salesperson's 'concessions'. In Burger's experiment, he sold a cupcake with two cookies together for 75 cents (this was the control) or stated the price of cupcake was 75 cents and then added two cookies 'for free' (TNA). Successful sales in the control were 40%, whilst in the TNA case they were 73%. In a second experiment, Burger showed it going the other way, either selling the cupcakes straight for 75 cents (the control) or starting at one dollar and then immediately discounting to 75 cents (the TNA case). Successful sales in the control were 44% whilst in the TNA case were again 73%. The method depends largely on an automatic social response and hence works better when the customer does not have time to think hard about what is going on.

Pre-excusing: Excuse yourself before you begin.

Description When we talk with others, and particularly when we make assertions, we risk being corrected, contradicted or otherwise challenged. If such a thing happened we would easily become embarrassed, so we hedge our bets by setting up excuses even before we make our main statements. Here are typical qualifiers we use in order to pre-excuse ourselves: With any luck... Hopefully... Maybe... It seems likely... I think... I hear that... As far as I know... I suspect... From the available evidence... It sounds like... This may not work, but... Let's try... I've been ill, but... This pre-excusing now lets us backtrack or remain right, even if our statements are shown to be wrong. Example Person 1: From what I have been told, it looks like the company is in for a rough time.Person 2: Nonsense, we're more than ready.Person 1: Good to hear that. I was beginning to wonder. Person 1: Fingers crossed, we will get there on time.Person 2: You'll be lucky. The traffic is always bad on a Friday.Person 1: Is it really? Maybe we should take another route. Discussion Pre-excusing creates a safety net as it prepares for failure, as when things go wrong it lets us say things like 'I thought so' or 'I warned you'. We also pre-excuse to ourselves. There is a question as to whether pre-excusing leads to a person not trying as hard as they might otherwise as they feel a reduced sense of risk and consequently are less motivated to work extra hard on succeeding. Pre-excusing also lets us be bold in our statements as any challenge can be deflected away from our selves, for example onto faulty sources or misfortune. With care, you can use the phrasing to allow you to reframe answers to show you are still right.

Pre-apology: Sorry, but...

Method Apologize before asking for something or giving information that might otherwise cause the person to be upset or indignant. The basic structure of pre-apology is 'I'm sorry ... but ...'. You first apologize, then make your request or otherwise tell them something that is not necessarily what they want to hear. Example I'm sorry to trouble you, but can you help me move this? I'm sorry to have to tell you this, but your son has been causing a problem. I do apologize, but I'm going to have to return these. Discussion As well as reparation for doing something wrong, an apology is an acknowledgement of distress or trouble caused to other people. It also shows active care and empathy, which they may suspect is lacking when your words make them unhappy. When you show that you know they are feeling upset, then this draws the sting so they do not have to tell you that they are unhappy about what you said. They may still do so, but the pre-apology takes the power and surprise out of their rebuke. It is important that the pre-apology sounds genuine. If it is said in a throwaway style then it will likely add to anger rather than remove it. The tone of the overall conversation and the character of the person will also be taken into account. People are good at detecting deception and falseness which, if identified, can reverse the benefits of faking. 'But' can mean 'ignore what was just said' although can work well in this setting. If in doubt, you can just leave it out and substitute a brief pause.

the question close

The question close: where a salesperson asks a simple question to prompt the buyer to say yes, such as, "In your opinion, will this solution solve your problem?"

The take away close

The take away close: where a salesperson removes a key feature or offering to show what a reduced price would look like, causing the buyer to refocus on that feature and its value. For example, "Without the analytics dashboard, you would lose our data engine but that drops the price to $10,000."