Sunday 1 August 2010

Influence

The theory

My post about death got a lot of reactions, not surprisingly. In one of the meetings of the writing group I go to, somebody said once that death and love are the two things guaranteed to get the interest of everybody. Especially if the story is true and personal, as mine.

But my latest posts have been a tad too dark for some people, and I should compensate by going to the other great theme that everybody is interested in: love. But, because I'm trying to stick to stuff useful to eco-activists (even though I sometimes digress), I will be a bit broader than "boy-meets-girl" or "person-meets-person-of-appropriate-sexual-orientation". So, instead of talking about romantic love, I'll tackle the more general issue of influence. This is something that can happen whenever there is a link between two people.

There is a popular view that says that it's impossible to change somebody else. That's so patently untrue that I can't understand how some people can think that. People are changing each other all the time. For some obvious examples, think of anything that you've picked from friends or lovers that you didn't do before.

If you are an activist, it's almost sure that you want to influence other people to see things your way, and you've tried all sorts of things, with varying success. You probably have some ideas of what works and what doesn't, or maybe you have concluded that it's all a big mystery. The good news is that a lot of people have dedicated a lot of time to study this subject, and by now it's pretty well known what kind of things are most likely to influence people.

The fundamental thing that you need to know is that people have been social for millions of years, even before they could be called "human beings" and were just apes. This means that when somebody is influenced, it's almost always that some deep instinct is telling them that it would be a good thing to change in this way. And instincts can be wrong sometimes, but they are right a lot of the time.

Some of the instincts that play a part in influence are:
  • Avoiding difficulty: That's an instinct that all animals have - in fact, humans are exceptional because, with our big brains, we sometimes actively look for complications, for the sake of entertainment... But as a general rule, people, like all animals, prefer the simple, safe and familiar. Between several options, if one is presented as simple, safe and familiar, it's always going to be popular. This is especially effective when we are distracted, nervous or confused, because all these things interfere with the hard thinking needed to realise that maybe the complicated or new choice is better in some way. That's why advertisers and propagandists often deliberately confuse people.
  • Curiosity: Because we're so damn clever, we just can't help ourselves wondering about all sorts of things. Anything that looks new and interesting is going to attract our attention, and get us in the right frame of mind to consider doing something different, as long as it all seems safe enough and good clean fun.
  • Looking for number one... and for number two: Like all living beings, we have a survival instinct and we'll always look for things good for ourselves. We all know that. But in our capitalist individualistic society, it's seldom mentioned that we are also very much social animals, and often number two is as important or more than number one... You know who is number two, the person or the small circle of people closest to you. Ordinary people die and make noble sacrifices for their loved ones, not just heroes. If a choice is good for you and for the closest people to you, it's a no-brainer. But our social instincts go well beyond our closest circle. If everything else is the same, even a small thing in common with a stranger will make you prefer that person and what that person is saying.
  • Following the leader: Part and parcel of being social animals is that some people are leaders. I'm not going to go here into how and why somebody becomes a leader. The important thing is that people will follow their leaders, sometimes even against all of the other instincts I listed above - think of soldiers following difficult orders without questioning them, risking their own lives and sometimes the lives of good friends.
  • Being consistent: Most people don't see it this way and call it a matter of principles, but our social instincts are the fundamental reason we like to be consistent. Being spontaneous and flexible could be the best thing when we are alone. But it makes other people's lives a lot easier when we are consistent and predictable, and we always behave according to the same rules. If something is presented as consistent with the rules we already follow, we are very likely to accept it.
The practice

Experiment 1

In the post about difficult problems there was an experiment to do if you have a pet that keeps doing something that you would like it to stop doing. The experiment revolved around removing all possible difficulties. But if that isn't working, or the problem is rather that there is something you would like it to do but it isn't doing, it may be better to try to influence it using the other instincts listed above. Most pets are intelligent enough to have some curiosity. Many are social, so getting them to follow the leader (that's likely to be you) or look for number two (their young) is reasonably easy. What doesn't work so well is expecting them to be consistent. It takes somebody very clever and very flexible to see the advantages of behaving predictably, even if it makes you look stupid!

For example, let's suppose that your cat keeps scratching furniture. You can experiment with different approaches to influence your cat:
  • Avoiding difficulty: Make sure that your cat undestands there will be trouble when it scratches furniture. Get it out of the way, shout at it and be generally ungrateful about it. Spraying a cat with water is an easy way of inconveniencing them without inconveniencing yourself much.
  • Curiosity: The problem can be that your cat doesn't have a good scratching pad. Cats know when their claws are too long, and do everything they can to wear them out. A nice new scratching pad will attract their curiosity, and they are likely to become fond of it when they notice how good it is for scratching compared with other surfaces.
  • Following the leader: A cat that has never used a scratching pad may not know what to do. Demonstrate the scratching pad with your own nails, then you can also hold them next to it and scratch their claws to show them.
Experiment 2

Have you ever been involved in producing any educational or promotional material that clearly failed in its goal of influencing people? This is your chance to have a second look at it and figure out what went wrong. This is best done by a group of people, because different people have different reactions to the same material.

What insticts of the list above do you think the material appealed to? Was there any instinct in the list that was actually pushing people away? (For example, was it asking people to take on more trouble in their lives or be inconsistent with the way they behave normally?)

Try to fix the material so that it pushes all the buttons and there is nothing that pushes people away. Some instincts could be pushed quite weakly, but try to touch on all, the effect is much stronger if they reinforce each other. If it's unavoidable to give up on one or two of the list - sometimes you have to ask people to do difficult things - say clearly that this may go against some of their instincts, but make sure that all the others are touched as hard as you can.

For example, when Kennedy proposed to go to the moon within a decade, he knew he couldn't possibly say that it would be avoiding difficulty. And he couldn't say that it was necessary for individual Americans or their families. So what did he say?

"For the eyes of the world now look into space, to the moon and to the planets beyond, and we have vowed that we shall not see it governed by a hostile flag of conquest, but by a banner of freedom and peace. We have vowed that we shall not see space filled with weapons of mass destruction, but with instruments of knowledge and understanding. Yet the vows of this Nation can only be fulfilled if we in this Nation are first, and, therefore, we intend to be first. In short, our leadership in science and industry, our hopes for peace and security, our obligations to ourselves as well as others, all require us to make this effort, to solve these mysteries, to solve them for the good of all men, and to become the world's leading space-faring nation [...] But why, some say, the moon? Why choose this as our goal? And they may well ask why climb the highest mountain? Why, 35 years ago, fly the Atlantic? Why does Rice play Texas? We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon, not because it is easy, but because it is hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win!"

Can you see? He admitted openly his defeat on the bases he knew were lost - no, it isn't easy, and we don't need it. But all the other important instincts for influence - look for number one and two (the Russians might put weapons up there!), curiosity, follow leadership, and be consistent with the American way - were not just touched, they were hammered in.

No comments:

Post a Comment