The Art of Persuasion. A Negotiating Skills Perspective.

Published: Dec 02 , 2011
Author: Alan Smith

On a flight from Glasgow on a cold November night I came across an article in the in-flight magazine about how to make more effective use of persuasion to get what we want out of life, business and family relationships.

Warming advice indeed. The basic premise is that it is much more powerful to surround our persuasion with strong rationale in order to get people to do what we want them to do.

The article was based on research performed by Harvard psychologists in the 1970s which sought to answer the basic question on what would be the best way to persuade someone to allow us to queue-jump?

The studies revealed some interesting insight. Just pushing in was understandably disastrous. Asking the person in front of you for permission was much more successful. In 60% of situations a simple request was effective. Adding a rationale to the request was yet more successful, in fact it was 50% more effective than a request alone.

Moreover in this study it did not seem to matter what the rationale was.

Ellen Langer, the psychologist responsible for the study, made the somewhat startling revelation that the reason behind the rationale was almost irrelevant in improving the efficacy of simply adding a reason. It appeared that the brain of the person being asked to give up their place switched off once the 'because' was heard.

Simple and pragmatic advice for the negotiator. Adding a rationale to the reason why we may need something during a negotiation may indeed generate improved success. It may also allow the other side to find more advantageous ways of giving us what we want or need. For the professional negotiating specialist, understanding clearly what the other side is looking for is a crucial part of the process.

However, it will not always work.

The strike by UK public sector workers on Wednesday of this week was not caused by a lack of understanding of what either side needed to achieve. The government wants to reduce the massive budget deficit; the union wants to protect their members in retirement. The rationale for both sides is utterly clear.

The failure of agreement is not based on rationale, it is based on conflict. Resolving conflict is when negotiation comes into its own.

Alan Smith

 


SHARE

Alan Smith

About the author:

Alan Smith
My background is marketing and advertising. After graduating in Economics I entered the agency world to become, at 28, MD of London's largest independent below-the-line marketing provider.

Read more about Alan Smith

More posts by Alan Smith

Latest Blog:

Qualifications

“When it comes to the qualifications we demand of our president, to start with, we need someone who will take the job seriously.” Michelle Obama. Don’t stop reading - this blog is not about Donald Trump. In the run up to the election of a new Labour Party Leader 4 years ago, the four candidates were invited by LBC radio to quiz each other. You can see the questions to Jeremy Corbyn here. There are two points of note. Firstly, when asked if he wants to be Prime Minister he ducks the question several times, instead referring to the ideological changes he wants to make within the Labour Party. Secondly when asked about his qualifications and experience to be leader of a major political party his answer is objectively underwhelming – before being an MP, he says, he had been a local councillor for 10 years. I don’t think it is difficult to relate those answers in 2015 to the current divided state of the Labour Party.

Latest Tweet:

Scotwork UK Limited
7 Fortrose St
Glasgow
G11 5NU
United Kingdom
+44 (0) 1413573989
info@scotwork.com
Follow us
Scotwork 21092 - Training Course.png
award 2.jpg
award 1.jpg