12.00

120
1024×768

Normal
0

false
false
false

EN-GB
X-NONE
X-NONE

/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:””;
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin-top:0in;
mso-para-margin-right:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt;
mso-para-margin-left:0in;
line-height:115%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:”Calibri”,”sans-serif”;
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}

What is persuasiveness?

Persuasive \Per*sua”sive\, n.

                That which persuades; an inducement;
an incitement; an exhortation. — Per*sua”sive*ly,
adv. —

Per*sua”sive*ness,
n.

the power to induce the taking of a course of action
or the embracing of a point of view by means of argument or entreaty; “the
strength of his argument settled the matter”

The
literature usually instructs us to follow two parallel streams of logic. First,
we are taught to frame the message based on the other party’s needs and the
specifics of the situation. Sadly, this advice is tantamount to telling an
insomniac that the best cure for his problem is a good night’s sleep. ‘Framing’
your message should be based on the needs and the situation.  ADDIN EN.CITE
<EndNote><Cite><Author>Sussman</Author><Year>1999</Year><RecNum>50</RecNum><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>0</REFERENCE_TYPE><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>Lyle
Sussman</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1999</YEAR><TITLE>How
to frame a message: the art of persuasion and
negotiation</TITLE><SECONDARY_TITLE>Business Horizons</SECONDARY_TITLE><VOLUME>42</VOLUME><NUMBER>4</NUMBER><PAGES>2-7</PAGES><DATE>July-August
1999</DATE><REVIEWED_ITEM>Infotrac Web: General File
ASAP&#xD;Electronic collection
A55542112</REVIEWED_ITEM><ACCESSION_NUMBER>RN:
A55542112</ACCESSION_NUMBER><KEYWORDS><KEYWORD>Persuaaion</KEYWORD><KEYWORD>Negotiation</KEYWORD></KEYWORDS></MDL></Cite></EndNote>(Sussman 1999).

Secondly,
the message should be constructed such that the recipient perceives it with an
overarching theme, either evaluative or descriptive. For example, we may want
the recipient to interpret the message through a filter of “good-bad”,
“profit-loss”, or “cost-benefit”.

Framing messages

A frame
orients the recipient to examine a message with a certain disposition or
inclination. Framing a message focuses recipient’s attention on data and
premises within the frame – i.e. attempts to reduce ‘noise’ and external
environment influences that may detract from the intended message.

By framing
a message we achieve three interrelated goals. First, we select an evaluative
theme or perspective believed to be the most credible, compelling and
appropriate to our intent. This perspective provides a filter through which we
want the recipient to assess our position and supporting evidence. Secondly, we
select specific evidence that best supports the perspective. Finally, we create
a structure for organizing the evidence. Thus, the frame provides the recipient
with a focus of perspective and rational supporting evidence presented in a
clear sequential pattern.

Sussman
(1999) presents four practical steps to creating a frame.

Determine
your specific objective. What specifically do you want the decision-maker to
do?

1. Conduct a focused SWOT analysis on the
   other party’s current status. This enables you to develop strategies that
   either make the most of the recipient’s strengths and external
   opportunities or minimize internal weaknesses and external threats.
   Sussman’s advice is to focus attention on the most significant element in
   each of the four quadrants rather than being exhaustive.
2. Determine the recipient’s core values. Values
   reflect character, motives and behaviour. For some individuals and groups,
   the values are implicit and must be inferred. One useful technique for
   developing a frame based on analyzing core values is to demonstrate any
   inconsistency between what other party’s espouse and how they actually
   behave. This technique is an application of Festinger’s  ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite
   ExcludeAuth="1"><Author>Festinger</Author><Year>1957</Year><RecNum>53</RecNum><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>A.
   Festinger</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1957</YEAR><TITLE>Theory
   of Cognitive
   Dissonance</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Stanford</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Stnaford
   University Press</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>(1957) cognitive dissonance theory.
   If you are able to frame your message by demonstrating a contradiction
   between stated values and actual behaviour, you have tapped into a
   powerful persuasive technique.
3. Write a simple, vivid, evaluative
   statement that links steps 1 and 2.
4. The statement should be simple and short
   to convey the message quickly. Use of ‘emotional’ words makes the
   statement vivid. The frame created by the statement must orient the
   decision-maker from the specific perspective that casts the most
   favourable light on the proposal. This prepares the recipient to judge the
   subsequent arguments and evidence as being on either end of the following
   value dichotomies: good-bad, right-wrong, smart-stupid,
   risky-conservative.

 

Williams
and Miller  ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite
ExcludeAuth="1"><Author>Williams</Author><Year>2002</Year><RecNum>54</RecNum><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>0</REFERENCE_TYPE><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>Gary
A. Williams</AUTHOR><AUTHOR>Robert B. Miller</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2002</YEAR><TITLE>Change
the way you persuade</TITLE><SECONDARY_TITLE>Harvard Business
Review</SECONDARY_TITLE><VOLUME>May
2002</VOLUME><KEYWORDS><KEYWORD>Persuasion</KEYWORD><KEYWORD>Persusiveness</KEYWORD></KEYWORDS></MDL></Cite></EndNote>(2002) identify five styles of
decision-making and the ways to influence each. Their study of over 1600
executives across a wide range of industries identified the different styles of
decision-making exhibited by senior executives in a purchasing decision. Whilst
recognizing that executives may not exhibit only one style exclusively, they
suggest that they will typically show a default style. The five styles are:

1.       Charismatics – enthusiastic, captivating,
talkative and dominant characteristics – they are easily intrigued by a new
idea but experience has taught them to decide based on balanced information.

2.       Thinkers – cerebral, intelligent, logical and academic
characteristics – impressed with arguments supported by data, tending to be
risk averse.

3.       Skeptics – demanding, disruptive, disagreeable and
rebellious characteristics – tend to be highly suspicious of every data
especially anything challenging their own worldview – often aggressive and
combative.

4.       Followers – responsible, cautious,
brand-driven and bargain conscious characteristics – make decisions based on
similar choices in the past or how others have made them.

5.       Controllers – logical, unemotional, sensible,
detail-oriented, accurate and analytical characteristics – abhor uncertainty
and ambiguity – tend to focus on the pure facts of an argument.

Williams
and Miller suggest tactics for dealing with each style fitting with the way in
which decisions are made.

In
practice, the styles are useful guides but it is especially difficult to
pigeonhole a decision-maker in a short period of time. Questioning and probing
skills may reveal underlying characteristics as discussions unfold, though this
may be too late to change tactics mid-stream or indeed prepare for a different
decision-making style. However, preparing in advance for each of the different
styles makes for thorough preparation and the persuader’s art is in choosing
the approach that instinctively feels right given their current understanding.

 ADDIN EN.REFLIST Festinger, A. (1957). Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford, Stanford
University Press.

Heiman, S.
E. and D. Sanchez (1998). The New Strategic Selling. London, Kogan Page.

                Selling
techniques

Sussman, L.
(1999). “How to frame a message: the art of persuasion and
negotiation.” Business Horizons 42(4): 2-7.

Williams,
G. A. and R. B. Miller (2002). “Change the way you persuade.” Harvard
Business Review May 2002.