In his blockbuster book, The Art of Influence, Robert Cialdini describes an experiment he conducted where a student with a stack of papers approaches a line of other students all waiting to use the copy machine and asks them if they would not mind letting him cut in line.
In one variation of the experiment, the student approaches all of the people waiting in line and says, "Excuse me, I've got five pages. May I jump in and use the machine?"
In another variation, the student does the same exact thing, except this time he says, "May I jump in and use the machine, because I'm in a rush..."
Seems like such a subtle difference, doesn't it? On the surface, yes. However, 
the differences between results were anything but subtle.
Only 60% of the students waiting in line agreed to let the student cut in front of them in the first variation of the experiment.
However, a whopping 94% of the students let the student cut ahead of them in the second variation where the person gave them a "because" in their reasoning.
What Cialdini's experiment sought to prove is something psychologists call a "trigger effect." Certain actions, certain gestures, certain words - for whatever reason - have a profound persuasive effect on us. Often, we do not even know we are responding to the trigger. As soon as it registers, we react. Cialdini calls this a "click & whirr" response, and compares it to the way some animals react instinctively to the markings of predators in the wild.
In this particular experiment, though, the trigger being tested was the word "because." Think about it: "Because" is a word we use all the time to justify our actions or reasons to other people. My 11 and 7 year old daughters use it constantly...they want to watch this TV show because...they want to stay up just a little later because...sound familiar, parents?
What the Cialdini experiment succeeded in revealing, however, is that the reasons we give are really not as important as the word itself.
Cialdini repeated the second variation of the experiment with the student using different reasons for cutting in line. Some of them were simply ridiculous, such as "Because I need to make copies." In all cases, the people waiting in line responded with the same degree of compliance.
Why? Because of "because."
What can we learn from this experiment? Consider all the times you ask people - your co-workers, your prospects, your clients, your boss, your kids - to do something without explaining why you need it done. Or, consider all the times you ask someone to do something and take their "NO" as the final end all, be-all, instead of coming back with a really good answer.
Keep this experiment in mind, and try it the next time you are in the middle of negotiating a contract or trying to land the deal with a new client.
Comment Preview