Maximizer or Satisficer: Does it Make a Difference?

Remember when mom, dad, or maybe grandpa would espouse their philosophy about people, starting with something like this, “Ya know, there are two kinds of people in this world…” and then they’d give you their broad take on the human race? I’m here to add another grouping of two to the human race: maximizers and satisficers.

In the book “Welcome to Your Brain,” the authors describe maximizers as people who “spend a lot of time worrying about differences, no matter how small. In a consumer society with choices everywhere, maximizers suffer from an inability to recognize when an alternative is good enough. Indeed, from an economic perspective, spending the additional time on maximization doesn’t make sense since your time itself has some monetary value.”

On the opposite end of the spectrum we have satisficers who are described as individuals who “look until they find something good enough, then stop. Satisficers are decisive, don’t look back, and have little regret, even about mistakes.”

So what does this have to persuasion? Plenty, because in an information overloaded society in which some experts estimate the average person sees more than 3,000 marketing messages a day we cannot possibly process all the information that comes to us through our five senses. And put on top of that the fact that so much can change in a single day, sometimes it’s all we can do to not just cover our ears, close our eyes and start screaming.

For example; I can’t process all the features of all the smart phones and balance them with all the pricing options while weighing all the new features and options I hear might come out in the next few months. TMI – too much information! Therefore, if I’m like most people I will “satisfice.” Satisficing refers to “the act of choosing an alternative that is just sufficient to satisfy a goal.” I do it, I bet you do it and so do most other people.

Dr. Cialdini’s six principles of influence act as mental short cuts, decision triggers if you will, in an information overloaded society because they help us quickly process information in a way that allows us to make a quicker decisions that we’re satisfied with. Here are some quick examples related to buying a smart phone.

Liking – A good friend of yours owns the phone you’re considering and has nothing but good things to say. He encourages you to buy the same phone and you trust his opinion because you have the same tastes in a lot of things.

Reciprocity – When you were comparing phones and asking questions the store clerk spent a lot of time with you. You’d feel kind of bad not buying from him after he did all that for you.

Authority – You read Consumer Reports and it rated one phone you’re considering highest in three of four categories. The magazine is the most reputable, unbiased source you know.

Consensus – Everyone has the brand you’re looking at and people are raving about it. They can’t all be wrong.

Consistency – When you told the salesperson the general features you were looking for she pointed you to a phone that had almost every single one. How can you not buy it after you said that’s what you wanted in a phone?

Scarcity – You’re shown a phone and told a newer model is coming out in a few months. Now you worry because you might not be able to get this one at the low price because everyone else will buy them up while it’s still a great deal.

As noted earlier, most people engage in satisficing but that still leaves the maximizers so how do we deal with them? Maximizers by nature are probably more analytical so my advice would be to concentrate on these principles of influence:

Authority – Let them know what the experts are saying and show them hard data because this appeals to their strength – logic.

Consistency – Get them to tell you in detail what they want. The more detail the better because if you can show them how your offering matches up then it’s only logical for the deep thinker to go with your request.

Scarcity – No one likes to lose so show them their lost dollars, time, and opportunity by not going with your recommendation relatively soon. Remind them that new features and upgrades will always come out but they’re losing the opportunity to enjoy your product in the meantime.

So whether your mom, dad, or grandpa were right about their two tier classification systems, science tells us there’s at least one other category, maximizers and satisficers. It would do you well to not only understand which category you fall into but which category those you’re trying to persuade fall into because it will make the persuasion process much easier.

Brian, CMCT 
influencepeople 
Helping You Learn to Hear “Yes”.

Keynote Speaking and Training

"When Brian Ahearn speaks, people listen. That is so because he knows his material thoroughly, and he knows how to present it superbly. The upshot is that the genuine insights he provides are not just immediately understandable, they are also immediately actionable and profitable." 
– Robert B. Cialdini, Ph.D., author of Influence Science and Practice 

Wouldn't you agree; most of your professional success and personal happiness come about when people say "Yes" to your requests?

• Prospects become clients when they say "Yes" to your proposals.
• Ideas become projects when management says "Yes" to your presentations.
• You get raises and promotions when the boss says "Yes" to your reasoning.
• And peace reigns in the home when your spouse or kids say "Yes" to you.

All of these situations and many more can happen with much greater frequency when you understand how people think and respond. Once you understand that the next step is to ethically apply scientifically proven methods of persuasion to your communication. I can help you understand that science and its application to your professional and personal situations. In other words, I can help you learn to hear "Yes."

For example, did you know using "because" can make you more persuasive? To find out how watch this short clip where I talk about the power of "because" in the communication process.



My company is called Influence PEOPLE because we don't try to persuade things. PEOPLE stands for Powerful Everyday Opportunities to Persuade that are Lasting and Ethical. In this video I unpack the PEOPLE concept.



Does this really apply to you and the situations you routinely face? Here's what small business owners had to say about that after a presentation I gave at The Ohio State University.

To view more presentation videos click here.

Are you looking for a keynote speaker, training, or consulting on how to apply scientifically proven principles of influence to sales, marketing, management or leadership?  If so, reach out to me by email, BFA654@gmail.com, or phone, 614.313.1663, and we'll talk about your specific needs. 

Brian, CMCT 
influencepeople 
Helping You Learn to Hear “Yes”.

The Saddest Kodak Moment

Many of you reading this might remember the Kodak commercials in the 1970s that introduced the world to the “Kodak moment.” This phrase referred to those times – happy, heartwarming, fun – you wanted to preserve forever on film. That ad campaign helped Eastman Kodak, founded in 1889, reign supreme in the photographic film industry with a 90% share by 1976! That dominance began to slide in late ‘90s with the advent of digital photos and culminated in the company declaring bankruptcy in January 2012.

When I read an article recently, Barriers to Change: The Real Reason Behind the Kodak Downfall, it brought me back to a conversation I had with Dennis Gilbert, owner of Appreciative Strategies, LLC. During our talk Dennis told me he found the fall of Kodak fascinating and wanted my take on it from an influence and persuasion perspective.

According to John Kotter, author of the article noted above, “The Kodak problem, on the surface, is that it did not move into the digital world well enough and fast enough. Recent articles dig a bit more and find that there were people who saw the problem coming — people buried in the organization — but the firm did not act when it should have, which is decades ago.”

What really caught my eye was, “there were people who saw the problem coming — people buried in the organization — but the firm did not act when it should have.” Some people in Kodak knew what to do but couldn’t persuade the ultimate decision makers to make the necessary changes.

In hindsight, do you think Kodak would have made the necessary changes two or three decades ago if they had a mulligan? Of course they would have. I won’t claim to have any clue on what Kodak should have done, when they should have done it, or how they should have implemented those changes. What I do know is the lack of persuasion skills by those who had a pulse on the market has cost this once great company dearly. And let’s not forget, Kodak’s fall isn’t just about shareholder value, it’s about the people who’ve poured their heart and soul into the company who might be facing major life changes as the company restructures. Jobs may be lost, benefits will probably be restricted and pensions could be impacted to name just a few things that could create hardship for tens of thousands of current and former employees.

Is persuasion an important skill? You bet it is! There’s no substitute for expertise in your chosen field but expertise isn’t enough. Knowing the most about stocks does you little good of you can’t persuade people when to buy and sell. Likewise, a manager knowing her company and the industry inside and out isn’t enough if she can’t persuade her team to take the necessary actions that will lead to success.

I’m sure the mid-level managers at Kodak knew the business, competition and could clearly see the trends. However, despite their skills they were unable to convince people up the corporate ladder to start making the necessary changes. I don’t know what they did or did not do but knowing they were probably dealing with a lot of pragmatic and analytical personality types I’d have suggested some variation of the following: Tapping into scarcity – here’s what we stand to lose if we don’t act now – might have helped. Maybe tying the needed changes back to Kodak’s mission statement – consistency – might have done the trick. Perhaps sharing more stats – authority – with attention grabbing methods would have arrested senior management’s attention.

Convincing someone to change is never easy but we cannot put the blame on others anymore than a teacher can blame students for not learning. I’m a sales trainer and when someone asks me for sales advice the number one thing I tell them is this: no matter what the outcome, take full responsibility for it. If you made the sale, figure out what you did right then keep doing it and refining it. Likewise, if you didn’t make the sale ask yourself why then set out to learn from your mistakes and figure out ways to overcome them in the future.

The further removed management is from the customer the more difficult it is to make good decisions unless they have excellent communication with the field people. Sun Tzu said as much in his classic, The Art of War, when he warned readers to beware of high-level dumb saying, “Those who are not at the scene of action and do not know what is going on should not give orders.”

Sun Tzu also told the world, “Those who know where and when the battle will be fought can marshal all of their resources to the right place.” Some Kodak employees knew when and where the battle was to be fought but senior managers acted too late. Now it remains to be seen how many Kodak moments are left.

Here’s my advice for you – continue to become an expert in your field because that gives you the credibility you need to have a platform that people will listen too. But don’t stop there! Make sure you learn the science of influence so your great ideas turn into projects or your great presentations turn into sales. That will ensure your professional success.


If you're viewing this by email and want to leave a comment click here. 

Brian, CMCT 
influencepeople 
Helping You Learn to Hear “Yes”.

A Persuasion Trump Card

Are you a fan of Donald Trump’s show “The Apprentice?” When it first aired I watched it religiously because I learned some business tips but I don’t watch it so much anymore because there’s usually too much drama and too few tips. That said, I was watching an episode recently where Donald Trump’s new cologne, “Success by Trump,” was introduced. Each celebrity team’s challenge was to design an in-store display and come up with a slogan for the new fragrance which will be carried by Macy’s. The teams were judged by Trump and Macy’s executives on the creativity of their slogan, their brand messaging and the in-store display presentation they developed.

Aubrey O’Day, project manager for one team, suggested the tagline, “Trust your instinct.” Almost immediately Arsenio Hall found a Donald Trump quote online where The Donald asked, “Do you trust your instinct?”

At that very moment I knew Aubrey’s team would win the task. How did I know? I knew because I understand the principle of consistency and it is very apparent Donald Trump is a pragmatic when it comes to personality type. Allow me to explain how these two facts led to my immediate conclusion.

Let’s start with one of Robert Cialdini’s six principles of influence, the principle of consistency, sometimes known as “commitment and consistency.” This principle tells us people feel internal psychological pressure to remain consistent in word and deed. Most people feel bad when they say they’ll do something but then back out, even if their reason for backing out is completely legitimate. That’s why people go to great lengths to keep their word.

In addition to that aspect of consistency we need to remember people are more easily persuaded to do something when it aligns with what they’ve already said or done. In other words, tying your product or idea to what someone has already publicly stated will make the persuasion process much easier. I think you can see where I’m going with this.

Several years ago I did a survey with my blog readers on personality types and influence approaches. Using a basic four quadrant DISC model (pragmatic, expressive, amiable, analytic) I had people self-identify then take a short survey so I could find out if there were influence approaches that worked best with certain personalities. My data clearly showed there were, and when it came down to it, for the pragmatic consistency was one of the three principles that worked best.

Pragmatics are described using these terms: action-orientated, decisive, problem solver, direct, assertive, demanding, risk taker, forceful, competitive, independent, determined, thrive on challenges, strong intrinsic motivation to succeed, practical, focused, results oriented, direct and straight to the point. Doesn’t that sound like Donald Trump to you?

Let me ask you a couple of questions about persuading someone like Donald Trump:

1. Do you think he will be more persuaded by someone trying to buddy up to him using the liking principle or will he respond more to potential lost opportunities using scarcity? I vote scarcity every time. 

2. Do you think he will be more swayed by what everyone else is doing using consensus or more by the presentation of hard data using the authority principle? I’ll go with authority in this case.

As soon as Aubrey O’Day came up with the tagline and Arsenio Hall tied it to Trump’s own words it was a sure bet The Donald would love it. It was also a sure bet if he loved it the Macy’s executives would not try to change his mind. When both teams went to the board room I was proven correct.

So what does this mean for you? In your attempt to persuade others you’ll certainly be more successful when you understand the psychology of persuasion and how to ethically leverage it. However, using a shotgun approach with the principles is akin to mass marketing which will never be as effective as target marketing that considers the specifics of the audience. In the same way, knowing the type of person you’re trying to persuade allows you to look for legitimate opportunities to use principles that will be most effective for that personality type.

Sure Donald Trump likes to be liked and is somewhat interested in what others are doing, but if you rely on those to persuade him you’ll never be as effective as you could be by tapping into principles as I outlined in the questions above.

Here’s my advice: next time you go into an influence situation give thought to the personality type you’ll be dealing with then consider the best principles of influence to use. If you do so you'll have a persuasion Trump card.

To find out more about how to do this click on each of the personality types below.

Pragmatic/Driver  
Expressive/Influencer  
Facilitator/Amiable  
Thinker/Analytic

Brian, CMCT 
influencepeople 
Helping You Learn to Hear “Yes”.

Influencers from Around the World - A Nightmare on Persuasion Street

This month our Influencers from Around the World guest post comes from across the pond from my old Irish friend Sean Patrick. Sean owns a sales training company, Sales Training Evaluation, and writes a blog, Professional Persuader. Sean is a big fan of Dr. Cialdini and attended the Principles of Persuasion workshop I led when he visited the States in October 2010. Always thought-provoking, Sean’s post this week is no different.

Brian, CMCT 
influencepeople 
Helping You Learn to Hear “Yes”.

A Nightmare on Persuasion Street

Persuasion is one of my life long loves.  It is constant learning and working out practically what makes people say "Yes."  There are many types of persuasion principles and methods and one of those is coercion. When I refer to coercion, I mean two things; unethical use of persuasive techniques and emotional tampering.

The world is a changing place and has changed dramatically over the past three to four years, in particular. People realize we have moved into a new reality in which economic uncertainty is here to stay. As a result many bury themselves into fantasy land with the help of the internet and television soap operas.

Television has become one of the most potent forms of persuasion abuse in recent times. Politicians remind us constantly that we are all ok, that we’re being looked after, and that the sons and daughters of our countries are doing the right things by sacrificing themselves to affront a common enemy. As this all goes on we remain ignorant of the true facts even as our pension funds, life savings and home values erode to nothingness.

What I have just described is known as the “Lucifer Effect.”  What makes people accept brutality and evil as normal? The Lucifer Effect raises this question and also delves into the psyche of perpetrators of abuse or coercion. Throughout history we have been conditioned to accept one rule of thumb as being our normal even if other people in different countries vehemently oppose our ideals. Yet we gladly accept that what is normal should not be questioned in case we are ridiculed or have our loyalties questioned.

Human character is a dynamic thing, it transforms on the basis of different chronologies. What makes normal, law abiding, educated and healthy people become raving stewards of hate? When we look back in time at the inquisitions of the Catholic Church, The Third Reich, Rwanda, the abuses of the U.S. military in Abu Ghraib, Iraq and similar episodes in Afghanistan, what we see are normal law abiding citizens becoming perpetrators of sadistic evil.

This is where social proof in the influence process comes in. Robert Cialdini's principles of persuasion are subliminal and powerful! In all of history’s foibles you can spot the persuasive mechanisms at work. Even today in North Korea, the power of the crowd plays an important role in keeping the population at large from uprising against a despotic regime.

It isn't just politics where the abuse of influence is at work, we can see it every day in the mainstream news media, the press, soap operas, Hollywood films, advertising, and even religion. Once you've become accustomed to seeing the six principles it becomes more and more apparent how each principle is embedded in the context in which it is given.

Finally, where we see dehumanization at work we need to ask questions about what is really going on, and we can do this by seeing exactly how much effort is being put into the persuasive mechanism and how much others really want us to buy into it. Usually, such efforts are preceded by what I call the “Carrot and Stick” approach. This is the highly coercive act of offering a solution to a perceived problem by provoking a public reaction.

Hitler’s genocidal policy began through the introduction of a re-education of school children. Educational propaganda is nothing new and is intentionally designed to form dehumanization towards the common enemy.  This necessarily doesn't need to be targeted towards people; it can be attitudes towards finance, work, immigration, foreign policies, centralization of government etc. A manipulation of public attitudes is definitely affected by this principle.

I've become more intrigued about this principle that was coined by Philip Zimbardo and to this end the fascination of watching the trial of Anders Breivik in Norway keeps reminding me that there is a greater degree of understanding needed when normal people become evil.


If you're viewing this by email and want to leave a comment click here. 

Sean