“There’s a special rung in hell reserved for people who waste good scotch.” If you saw the movie Inglorious Bastards, you might recall that quote. A good friend introduced me to scotch a little over a year ago. I’d never tried the drink before but was willing to give it a try when he brought a bottle to my home. It turns out Jane and I both liked it…a lot! It’s less filling than beer, doesn’t make us sleepy like wine, and there’s an amazing variety of different scotches to choose from.This post isn’t about the virtues of scotch or an attempt to convert anyone. Rather it’s about an interesting marketing ploy. There’s a well-known scotch called Ardbeg, which boasts a very peaty flavor. The distillery first began producing whisky in 1798 but eventually closed its doors in 1981. Limited production started up again in 1989 and continued through 1996. Full production resumed in 1997.When I bought my first bottle I noticed the distillery had an Ardbeg Committee, which I could join if I was so inclined. Out of curiosity I decided to fill out the paperwork. Eventually I received my committee membership. A few persuasive principles were at play here:First, they shared a compelling story about the history of the distillery. People are drawn to stories, particularly those that have to do with overcoming adversity. Ardbeg’s long history, closure and reopening made for a compelling story.When I became a committee member the principleof consistency was engaged. We like to behave in consistent ways so it’s only natural a committee member will probably buy more Ardbeg than some other brand.Not all scotch drinkers are committee members so the exclusivity taps into scarcity. I’m not a committee member for any other scotch so it’s special community for me and the other 60,000+ committee members. This is an example of very clever marketing to revive a once struggling brand and build loyalty. The approach reminds me somewhat of the professional football team The Green Bay Packers. Unlike all the other pro sports franchises, the Packers will never leave Green Bay because of the business decision of an owner or group of owners, as has occurred with many other NFL teams. You see, the Packers are owned by the fans. Their stock has no appreciating value, pays no dividends and cannot be sold or traded like other stocks but all the fans care about is this – they are all part owners of one of the most storied franchises in all of football. More than 110,000 people own nearly 4.8 million shares.Maybe you don’t want to own the team, just go to the games. Season tickets for the team have sold out every year since 1960! Currently there’s a waiting list of more than 81,000 names to become a season ticket holder! This is Green Bay, Wisconsin, not some big city or exotic get away destination, and people are registering kids at birth to get tickets. Green Bay fans are … fanatical!A good product isn’t always enough when it comes to making the sale and that’s where persuasion comes in. How you talk about your product or service and how you position it makes a BIG difference. Limited availability (scarcity), and a sense of belonging and community (commitment) go a long way toward impacting our decisions and behaviors. So take a lesson from Ardbeg and the Packers and see if you can create something special for your customers and prospective customers when it comes to you and your product or service.Brian Ahearn, CMCT® Chief Influence Officer influencePEOPLE Helping You Learn to Hear “Yes”.
Free is Great Except When We Don’t Want What’s Being Offered
Normally people go nuts for free stuff. It seems like ads touting “Buy one get one free,” or “25% more for free” cause shoppers to almost salivate. I bet you’ve been places where things were being given away for free and you found yourself taking items (pens, card holders, travel mugs, post it notes, etc.) that ended up in the trashcan within weeks of getting home. And still, we take the goods because they’re free. After all, you can’t loose by taking advantage of free…or can you?Have you ever ordered something on Amazon for less than $25 then found yourself ordering another book or item just to bump you over the threshold in order to take advantage of the free shipping? I bet you have and you probably ended up spending $33-$38 in total. Sure, you convinced yourself you needed that extra book or CD but in reality you would not have purchased it were it not for the enticement of the free shipping. Dan Ariely highlights our obsession with “free” things in his book Predictably Irrationalin a chapter he calls “The Cost of Zero Cost: Why We Often Pay Too Much When We Pay Nothing.” He convincingly shows readers sometimes they end up worse off because of free.The obsession with free has its limits and this came to light recently with Apple’s promotion with the Irish rock band U2. It seemed innocent enough, and generous of Apple and U2, to have the band’s latest album, Songs of Innocence, automatically added to the iTunes library of some 500 million people. Unfortunately for both, many subscribers didn’t appreciate the free album and voiced their opinion rather loudly on social media. In fact, there was an article titled Free U2 album: How the most generous giveaway in music history turned PR disaster. Ouch!I think what was missed by Apple and U2 in their well-intentioned giveaway was this – free isn’t really free if it’s not freely chosen. While there may have been no purchase cost for the album, people lost their freedom to choose whether or not they wanted to add it to their libraries. In other words, forced isn’t free no matter how good the intention.What should they have done instead? In my opinion offering the album for free for a limited time would have enticed many people to take advantage of the giveaway. Think about it; U2 is an iconic band that’s done a lot of good for people across the globe through charitable work that could only have come about because of their fans. They could have positioned the opportunity for the free album as their way of saying thanks. I’m sure each band member is probably set for life financially so they don’t need the money and could have really made a splash.By putting a timeframe on it they would have engaged the principle scarcity, which would have caused many people to want the album even more and act quickly. This is important because when things are free and abundant we usually don’t value them nearly as much as when they are restricted in some way. Think about air and water. Without air we die within minutes and without water we won’t survive for very long either. There may not be two things more necessary for life and yet they are an afterthought for most people…until they’re in short supply. When that happens we’d pay more for either than just about anything else in the world because our lives might be at stake.I don’t think Apple or U2 deserved the intense backlash they got but let it be a lesson to all of us – no matter how beloved we, our company, our products/services, may be, never infringe on people’s freedom to choose. Understanding that and correctly positioning a gift could make all the difference in how it’s received and how we’re perceived. Brian Ahearn, CMCT® Chief Influence Officer influencePEOPLE Helping You Learn to Hear “Yes”.
Win or Lose, You Can Do Better!
A few months ago I had the pleasure of addressing nearly three dozen lawyers. I know some of you are thinking “pleasure” and “lawyers” don’t always go hand in hand. However, in this case it really was a pleasure because the topic was a one-hour overview of influence for legal professionals. It was my first time talking with attorneys and it was much different, and a bit more challenging, than working with supervisors, managers and salespeople.A bit of irony is one description used to define the principles of influence. They’re often referred to as proven rules or laws governing human behavior. Personally I shy away from calling them laws (even though I was talking to lawyers) because when I think about laws, such as the law of gravity, they describe phenomenon that will happen each and every time unless an outside force intercedes in some way.The principles of influence will not get a yes response each and every time, even in the sterile environment of a campus laboratory. It becomes more problematic in the real world because of the myriad of outside forces. With that in mind, when I talk with audiences I generally tell them the principles are proven rules for human behavior. I emphasize if they’re used ethically and correctly they will lead to yes responses more often. I’m confident of that because more than six decades of research from social psychologists and behavioral economists proves this. We could call the principles “brain rules” because they describe how people typically think and behave in different situations.As noted above, the attorney crowd was challenging. They asked very pointed questions about using liking with juries, admitting weakness in a case, looking for common ground with opposing attorneys and even how the principles work when raising kids.At one point during my talk I described the principle of scarcity – we value things more when they’re rare or diminishing. Then I segued into a concept known as “loss aversion.” Loss aversion labels the truth that people hate to lose and when we think we’re going to lose we take steps to avoid that. If you’re a football fan think about the “prevent defense.” When a team gets up on the opposing team and time is winding down quite often the team in the lead changes what they’re doing because the thought isn’t about winning as much as it is about not losing. All too often the team playing from behind throws caution to the wind, gambles and ends up winning. It’s quite frustrating for the fans of the team that used the prevent defense and that’s why so many joke about how it prevents your team from winning!Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky studied loss aversion and came to the conclusion that most people feel the pain of loss anywhere from 2.0-2.5 times more than the joy of gaining the very same thing. This is probably why the sting of a loss in a big game stays with us so much longer than the joy we feel when our team wins the big game.After my presentation a few attorneys came up to talk with me and one of them shared something profound. He said he rarely thinks back on cases he won but he dwells on the ones he loses. Could it be that’s why we learn so much in defeat as opposed to victory?I often tell salespeople whether you win the sale or lose it you should learn from the experience. If you win, what did you do that you can replicate into future success? When you lose, analyze what you could have done better then look for ways to change going forward. Victory is usually celebrated with little reflection and losses are replayed over and over in our minds. It’s just how we’re wired. But, the best athletes work on doing things right and commit as much of their game to “muscle memory” as possible. They become so conditioned through practice that they barely have to think in order to execute properly during their chosen sport.We can learn from the elite athletes. Next time you win – whether in business, sports, or life in general – discipline yourself to take time to figure out why and look for ways to build on that. The more you repeat winning behaviors the more like you are to repeat as a winner.Brian Ahearn, CMCT® Chief Influence OfficerinfluencePEOPLE Helping You Learn to Hear “Yes”.
- « Previous Page
- 1
- …
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- …
- 15
- Next Page »