//Who’s Left Holding the Weapons of Persuasion?
When you approach the beverage shelf and are confronted by a variety of brand names that you’re unfamiliar with, which drink do you reach for? If you’re me, a distant factor behind flavor is the quantity of the drink remaining on the shelf. That may sound strange, but less bottles of one particular beverage says that the demand—the fact that other consumers like the drink so much to deplete the supply--automatically makes the product more favorable than its neighboring drinks. Fortunately, I have the research of social psychologist Dr. Robert Cialdini to inform me that I’m falling for scarcity, one of the six “weapons of influence.” Shame on him, though.
I recently read Cialdini ’s book, “Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion,” which delves into reciprocation, consistency, social proof, liking, authority, and scarcity, the different methods used in persuasion and marketing. Cialdini’s points are well reinforced by example, but those examples include sitcom laugh tracks, good cop/bad cop interrogation techniques, and used car scams; methods that have become common knowledge and fail to delve deeper into the persuasive effect on decision making. I don’t say shame on Cialdini for the knowledge he’s offered me in his book though, but rather what he’s offered the advertising community through his presentations.
Aside from being a professor of psychology at Arizona State University and an author, Cialdini is president of “Influence At Work” (http://www.insideinfluence.com) a company that promotes his speaking to groups via the “Cialdini Method Certified Trainer Course.” Granted, his intentions could be genuinely philanthropic—Cialdini talks about “harnessing ethical influence”--maybe he wants to present a non-manipulative method of influencing others. Should his general goodwill come at $15,000 to $20,000 per speech, though? At this price (as mentioned on his site), he seems to be targeting large corporations—or at least companies that can afford to pay him, provided they learn a more lucrative way of promoting their products and services. Cialdini’s client list of Coca Cola, Merrill Lynch, and Compaq Computers isn’t exactly evidence of his humanitarian goals, and Influence At Work’s tagline “When the science is available why use anything else?” doesn’t make me think of compromising ad campaigns (I doubt that Coca Cola’s advertising has backed off or become “more ethical” as a result of Cialdini’s speeches).
Perhaps I shouldn’t be so hard on Cialdini; after all, he presented these innovative ideas in his book; he’s entitled to every penny he can get in presenting them. His Web site also claims, “Always Remember, Good Ethics = Good Business.”
What’s ethical, though, and who’s ethics are we judging this by? Aren’t corporations interested in the well-being of their stockholders? Is it ethical to deny investors of the investment that they expect to receive? Is it ethical to have a profitable business at all? One thing’s for certain, in the world of advertising ethics takes a back seat to profits.
According to the “Good Ethics = Good Business" philosophy on Cialdini’s Web site, the three types of influence practitioners include the bungler, who doesn’t know the principle of influence, the smuggler, who uses influence for one-sided gain, and the sleuth/detective, who uses influence naturally and honestly for spreading information.
Bunglers probably wouldn’t be saavy enough to seek Cialdini’s help, and if they were, their intentions would be to wield influence as a smuggler or sleuth/detective. The sleuth/detective, on the other hand, knows the nature of influence and uses it to help in their decision-making. Unfortunately, sharing information comes at a price (let’s not forget Cialdini’s fee, for instance), and those not out to make money through influence rarely have money to learn more about it. This leaves us with the smuggler. This isn’t to say that all people interested in influence are smugglers, but advertisers certainly are, as they’re focused on the benefit of one particular side (their client’s). If advertisers could be the detective/sleuth and rely on sharing the truth, after a point there’d be no need to advertise—the truth would trump any exaggerated sales pitch.
As you can tell, I felt a little betrayed by Cialdini after reading his book. His writings made it okay for me to accept gifts from Kirshnas with no thought of reciprocation. This author showed me the power of consistency through written and verbal actions. I’m even looking forward to explaining the salesperson’s pitch back at them to see what expression I’ll get back (as Cialdini did in his book).
Media gurus and marketing specialists should recognize the responsibility that comes with exposing persuasive tactics. Releasing documented marketing techniques into the world provides those techniques not only to those seeking awareness, but also to those wishing to use such tools as smugglers. Cialdini may have been right in labeling his outlined persuasion techniques as “weapons.” Let’s just hope Cialdini and specialists like him remain conscious of the hands they leave these weapons in.