We are all different...and good job too!

I was first introduced to science-based aptitude tests about 40 years ago. As an upwardly mobile sales manager I was delighted when they identified in me the requisite "predictors of success." Even the so-called weaknesses of "aversion to planning" and  "a tendancy to socialise" to me meant natural optimism and people minded...and were definitely valuable attributes in the role.
No surprise then that I have been a long term advocate of such tests to "scientifically" assist the otherwise mysterious art of fathoming people out!
Over the years one of my recurring fathoming challenges has been the question "What motivates salespeople...and in particular how important are incentives and rewards?"

And some recent work by neuroscientists at Washington University in St. Louis, has introduced both new answers...and a few questions on this perennial issue.
The key point emerging from their research seems to be that given a task...there are people who are motivated to perform better whether there is a reward or not. At the same time there are those that don't respond to money!   Closer reading was enlightening. Apparently it's to do with our "lateral prefrontal cortex (PFC), located right behind the outer corner of the eyebrow, an area that is strongly linked to intelligence, goal-driven behavior and cognitive strategies."
When researchers scanned activity in this area they found that reward sensitive individuals have persistent motivation even in the absence of rewards. As they report "once the rewarding motivational context is established in the brain indicating there is a goal-driven contest at hand, the brain actually rallies its neuronal troops and readies itself for the next trial, whether it's for money or not."
At first read it seemed a repeat of the McGregor X and Y Theory that I'd previously encountered ...and erroneously interpreted as saying "Some will... and some won't give a ----!"

Of course it's not as simple as that. People are motivated to do things for different reasons.

Some of them will be motivated by money... some will not. Even those motivated by money will reveal differences...some being attracted to adding wealth...others more interested in reducing costs.

Some people will do things for personal benefit others will be motivated by altruism. And so it goes on.

So what do you do when trying to fathom out what motivates the group of the people that you are trying to influence?

Lateral prefrontal cortex scans and personality profiling tests aren't really on! Questions will tell you... but that's not really practical either. No...the simple answer is just remember to cover all the bases in your presentation:  Appeal to:

• 
  
  The Security minded...by describing the profitability benefits or perhaps the efficiency gains
• 
  
  The Social approval minded...by covering maybe the welfare benefits or sponsorship plans
• 
  
  The Self-Esteem minded...by possibly highlighting the bonus scheme or recognition programme
• 
  
  The Self-fulfillment minded...by pointing out the long term growth and career opportunities.

One thing is sure....we aren't all motivated by the same things or share the same traits and tendancies. 
If we did you might never plan a thing .... and spend too much time socialising!

Bob Howard-Spink is a partner in Persuadability. For tips and advice on improving your business messages please visit us at http://www.persuadability.co.uk/

Brown, Cameron, Clegg or Aristotle?

I frequently find myself referring back to the lessons of the "ancients" on persuasion. Maybe it's an anti-ageist instinct on my part...I hope not?    But Aristotle is a bit of a hero for me as I indicated two posts ago...and whatever aspect of persuasion I'm considering his Ethos, Logos and Pathos principle seems to provide an ideal template for discussion.

And so it was when watching the Party Leaders TV Debate between messrs Brown, Cameron and Clegg.
I listened to the logic of their arguments. I gave my feelings a free hand to see how the implications of their arguments affected me. But inevitably it was the big "E" of Ethos that kept coming to the fore and swaying my preference. Which of them spoke most convincingly from the heart... rather than with "spin- primed" answers?. Who was most passionate about his views and responses? Who seemed genuinely moved when criticised by his opponents? Who shared beliefs and values that accorded best with mine? Was it Dave, Gordon or Nick that I could most trust to be PM?
Inevitably these questions were partly answered by their existing reputation. They were also partly answered by some of the personal background comments that they slipped into their answers...but this always seems a bit self-serving so it doesn't work for me.  And of course their body language also gave us clues....although personally I think too much is made of body language in these debates. I don't see non-verbal skills being entirely relevant to the election of a government...unless of course there is a plan for a follow up TV programme where Andrew Lloyd-Webber and a panel of judges auditions our next PM. Now there's a thought!
What did interest me though was their persuasion style and what that might say about them. We are so used to seeing confrontational politicians arguing the toss....attempting to shout each other down. No wonder we stop listening. No one enjoys hearing somebody else's row!  And to quote another of Aristotle's principles: "it is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it!"

So step aside media consultants. Cue another of the "ancients and step forward Socrates! Let's see a bit more "socratic" persuasion from our would be leaders.
When you have to move audience opinion in your direction...and that happens all the time in business....then it's usually better to drop the "Tell and Sell style" in favour of the questioning style of Socratic persuasion.

• Don't make statements...offer your opinions as carefully planned questions -rhetorical if to an audience...open and real if engaged in debate.
• Don't confront or contradict...acknowledge and para-phrase responses, subtly and patiently aligning them towards your own point of view.

So come on then lads...let's see some quality debate next time and then we might start to get your Logos and Pathos!

Bob Howard-Spink is a Partner in Persuadability.  For tips and advice on persuasive communication visit  http://www.persuadability.co.uk/ 

The very essence of a great communicator!

I've been waiting for that knock at the door. You know...the knock of the friendly election canvasser anxious to see who I'm voting for in the general election. Funnily enough the only person who has knocked so far has been the chap from some energy company wanting me to change supplier. I thought at the time well you're either very brave or a bit daft...if there's ever a time when you won't be welcome on the doorstep it's right now.

There's an awful lot been said and written about Direct or "Door-to-Door" Salesmen...and a lot of it was awful! The utilities industry in particular has come in for a lot of attention with consumer groups, suppliers, Regulators and journalists having plenty to say about questionable door-step practices. Society in general has been quick to knock the door knockers!
I know there are some rascals out there....I've met a few of them. But having spent several years working in this industry I've gained a tremendous respect for what door step selling can teach you...and a huge regard for those that do it well. 
Because let's face it, it's tough! We all make it so because we don't like strangers knocking on our door. Some very natural instincts are triggered off as we open it. Defensive, protective, aggressive instincts that get us thinking: Who are you? What do you want? What right have you to disturb me? What are you doing in my space? How quickly can I get rid of you?
...and all of this before the poor bloke (they're mostly guys) has had a chance to open his mouth!.
Handling that situation successfully and ethically requires skilled application of those familiar  universal persuasion skills:
- Body language that instantly reassures and relaxes...
- Facial expression and voice tone that creates rapport...
- Clarity and brevity that immediately gains attention and interest...
- Attentive questioning and listening that quickly confirms a need...
- Conversational pacing and leading that reasssuringly satisfies a need.
Plus that other universal persuasion quality - positive attitude and the ability to reframe. The attitude which says "This is good...I can talk to 10 prospects just by knocking on 100 doors!. Whilst the "losers" will only ever complain about the rejection.
Door to Door selling is an exceptional "learning academy" instilling habits that transfer to any persuasion role. You don't prevaricate through fear of failure...you just get on with it, again and again because success is waiting. You learn from the continuous feedback and strive to improve again and again... and you become exceptionally good at it!   Ultimately you "graduate" as the very essence of a great communicator:

• clear and concise with your words...
• engaging and compelling with your body language. ...
• driven by unshakeable self-belief! 

So bring it on you election canvassers. Let's see your doorstep persuasion skills.
Actually thinking back to my friend the Utility Salesman. I've changed my mind. This is probably a time when people will be glad it is you knocking on their door!

What's in a name?

Well it's official. The election has been called for May 6th! And we got all the immediate images and sound bites thanks to morning television.

Gordon and his cabinet were talking to us outside no 10! Young Nick Clegg and Uncle Vince had a few reassuring words to say from somewhere or other. David "Dave" Cameron managed to find a soap box along the embankment....still pink-faced after the morning-jog. We saw that too... thanks to a well choreographed  photocall outside his home.  Oh and what's his name?....Alex Salmon was telling us that he would be holding the balance of power come May 6th

If that other old campaigner Aristotle had been anchoring the news broadcasts this morning he might have reflected on all the recent troubles of MP's expenses etc., and offered the advice "keep in mind Ethos, Logos and Pathos!"

• The ethics, integrity and trustworthiness of the orator.
• The logic of their argument.
• The compelling benefits of that argument.

And probably with a rider....that as far as political campaigners go Ethos, and getting across the right message about yourself is crucial.
Something that the New York Times picked up on in their March 22nd edition under a headline "Tories Put Posh Foot in Mouth!" They reported the story of Sir Nicholas Winterton and his preference for first class rail travel, and how in a radio interview he spoke of "the ghastliness of people in standard-class trains!"
The other Tory toff story they liked was about Annunziata Rees-Mogg and the suggestion from "Dave" that she might campaign as Nancy Mogg. She declined as it happens but the magnificently named Richard Grosvenor Plunkett-Ernle-Erle-Drax was happily caste down to a humble “Richard Drax” on campaign posters.
This "de-toffing" of names may have confused New York Times readers a bit.  After all, Americans seem  quite partial to double or even treble-barrell names...apparently seeing them as an indicator of status or reputation. And clearly a good reputation can be everything when you are in politics.....or business.
And if you are in the business of persuading others, either from a presentation lectern or in a board room pitch, you can be sure that interested parties are regularly "Googling" your name...double-barrell or not? So what kind of reputation will they find? Better make sure that it is the right one!
Regarding the name thing. Personally speaking...I don't think it matters if your name is Brown or Howard-Spink!

Practice makes perfect

Oh my! We're at it again. The sales guys on Linkedin have got into another discussion on selling technique...this time it's the #1 reason why salespeople can't close. And it's getting very competitive!!! 

And so it should be. Sales people need to be competitive. Not because they have to be pushy and assertive but because selling is a performance event. In athletics, tennis or boxing, success comes through the application of technique, stamina and correct attitude...and only the top few who train and compete hardest achieve real success.  So it is with selling.  Well that's my view...but I don't think I'm alone.
Very similar conclusions are offered in a new article from  the Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal. Looking at the issues of success and exceptional performance amongst entrepreneurs, they determined that these are  not necessarily linked directly to talent, experience, or luck. They say it is about "sustained, intense, and deliberate practice in a particular area of expertise, in order to improve performance and cognitive thinking levels."
The authors show that across many fields of expertise most people work only "hard enough" to achieve a level of performance that is deemed "acceptable" by themselves and others. Successful entrepreneurs of course want to perform above the "acceptable" and many of the most successful are seen to have previously excelled in another field of performance such as sport, art, music and science.  It seems that these experiences condition minds "to expect to have to work long and hard, and to delay gratification in pursuit of a more long term goal."  Such high performers instictively parallel the sustained intense effort associated with their sporting or musical excellence as being the qualities necessary in building a successful business. They become resourceful under pressure and acquire what the authors call mature intuition.

Highlighting what they call the principle of deliberate practice, the authors claim that through this principle most anyone can rise to true excellence.  Most of us will connect with that in some way of other. Expressions like "practice makes perfect" and golfer Arnold Palmer's famous quip "The more I practice the luckier I become!" occur to mind.

Thinking back to my earlier years in sale management it was recognised that ex-servicemen would make excellent sales recruits. They were certain to quickly respond to training and always semed to develop into exceptional salespeople.  This recent research suggests that their background of intensive situation-focused training is a very probable explanation.

Now this may seem like I'm stretching the point a bit! But I have aways argued that the intensely repetitive training I received on my introduction to selling contributed much to my success in later years.

I might just lob that suggestion into the Linkedin Discussion Group and see if anyone bites!!