'Leading evidence' is very convincing

There’s a dandruff shampoo advertisement on television which features a ‘dandruff swipe test’. They swipe a woman’s hair and the sticky strip comes away with loads of dandruff. Then they make the claim that after using the shampoo being advertised, that the amount of dandruff on the sticky strip is virtually non-existent.

It’s very convincing because the sticky strip comparison appears to present an obvious truth – now you see the dandruff, now you don’t. As such the mind accepts it as fact and then automatically reaches a broader conclusion – that the shampoo cures dandruff – without bothering to question further.

However, does it just wash the dandruff out without addressing the underlying medical problem? Whether it does or doesn’t, the ‘strip test’ is not a valid scientific test result, but it is believable.

It’s a bit like the copywriter’s ‘pre-supposition’ technique. Using certain words or key phrases, coupled with information delivered quickly, the writer induces the brain to accept part of the message as a fact.

For example, words and phrases such as: ‘Clearly;’ ‘as you discovered;’ ‘obviously;’ ‘it’s a known fact;’ ‘the results are clear;’ ‘Look, it’s all gone...’

If the person receiving the message has an emotional investment in the problem, the compulsion will be all the more powerful.

Personally, I prefer marketing messages based on fact. Using things like the strip test have a powerful illustrative effect, and if used as an analogy, can be very effective – provided they are underpinned by credible scientific research.

I am not saying this particular brand of shampoo does not have the credible research to back up its claims, but it does serve as a good example of how to build a strong case on the flimsiest of evidence.

Social proof and loss language are steps towards a tipping point

A government official told me about an American wheat farmer who was entertaining an overseas delegation at his farm. He told them about his nosy neighbours and how farmers were forever watching what the next one was doing so they didn't 'miss out' on anything'.

It was early September and as I understand it, most wheat farmers will sow their winter wheat in about October or November. To prove his point, he had his staff go out on the farm with their machinery and pretend to sow the winter wheat - the machines of course had no seed. By that afternoon all his neighbours were sowing their winter wheat.

This story demonstrates that we, human beings, fear loss more than anything else, and secondly, we use the behaviour of others to justify our own actions - this is called social proof and its effect was very apparent with the farmers.

A recent study by social scientists told one group of people that installing insulation in their homes would save them 50 cents a day on heating costs. The other group were told that without insulation they would lose 50 cents a day. The 'loss' language group had a 150% higher uptake than the first group.

At the moment an organisation I am working with is active in creating export channels into the United States for pasture based technology in dairy. The United States runs a mainly confinement system. But by setting up successful New Zealand pasture based dairy farms - or monitor farms - we're able to show American dairy farmers that the confinement system is losing them profits and also simultaneously we benefit from providing 'social proof' to neighbouring farms.

In fact, farmers drive hundreds of miles to see what the New Zealand farms are doing. By implementing tactics around social proof and 'loss' language, we are putting in place catalysts that help create change.

The challenge of course is how we reach a 'tipping point'. Of course it can be a bit like winning the lottery. You can't win if you don't have a ticket. So we're busy 'buying tickets' at the moment - but I would be interested in any comments on how we achieve a tipping point.

www.strategicpr.co.nz

A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush

Those of us in the ‘influence marketing’ arena know that one of the most powerful motivators is the fear of ‘losing’ something – we love to have fun and get things – but that bird in the hand is definitely worth two in the bush.

It could be said that we’re naturally risk averse. Before we buy something, we worry that we’ll lose money by paying too much; we worry that it won’t return the value of the money we spent on it; we worry that it might break and leave us out of pocket...

Isn’t it interesting that what might be achieved through whatever we’re purchasing, is actually of secondary importance?

Your immediate concern is usually more on what you might lose than what you might gain. For example, price consciousness is actually a direct symptom of this ‘fear of loss’.

How do you overcome ‘fear of loss’ in the other person when trying to persuade them to accept a product, service or idea?

You already know.

You get a third party to champion your cause – somebody who has experienced a transaction with you and come away happy. These people will have some influence within their social or business circles. Others will ask them for advice, or they will offer it - and will it be you they talk about?

While we all know about testimonials a too often neglected tactic is to have a programme around your word of mouth advocates.

And that’s my point. What are you doing to actively turn your existing customers into advocates and champions eager to spread the word about what you do?

It is important that you do something. Once that bird leaves your hand, there’s no reason why it should be gone for good.

Is Botox influencing more than just facial nerves?

TV3's 60 Minutes ran another segment on Botox the night before last. I say 'another' because Botox documentaries are popping up on New Zealand television with alarming regularity. Is it because 'everybody' is doing Botox or is it because the Botox industry is doing a brilliant job of influencing public opinion?

A common theme of these documentaries is that everybody is doing it and if you're not, you're just not with it. The presenters usually keep a wry tone of scepticism, but the people they interview are gorgeous, smiling and very into it - the pro-messages and visuals, balanced by the journalists resigned cynicism, are a very powerful influence technique because it gives the illusion of balance.

Cut to the lone anti-Botox brigade and its a frumpy middle aged woman saying we should age gracefully. Yeah right. Sorry, couldn't help but see the hands of a very good PR company in this documentary. For example, did the presenter travel to New York on company money? I would love to know.

Some superficial research shows that public relations companies are indeed the main movers in the Botox industry. Med Ed public relations agency has just been awarded the contract, according to PR News, by Botox makers Allergan. The agency refused to confirm or deny - why?

Don't get me wrong. I work in the PR industry myself and I always admire good influence tactics, but something about this just doesn't sit well with me for some reason.

The way documentary segments on television are making out that anybody not doing Botox is not in the 'in-crowd', that 'everybody' is doing it and then repeating this message on a regular basis raises alarm bells about New Zealand journalism more than it does about the PR industry. They're doing their job - utilising tactics like 'social proof' (the everybody is doing it thing), delivering messages with just the right amount of scepticism to give the illusion of balance, and then repeating regularly... Sounds like a recipe for success to me.

Reciprocity requires personal cost

Today was Random Act of Kindness day... My 13-year-old daughter reports that a guy who 'looked like a gangster' held the door for them at the doctor's rooms. I didn't point out that holding the door was just good manners and he probably wasn't even aware it was RAK day - good manners and an act of kindness are two different things, aren't they??
Anyway, my wife put the rubbish out for me. That made feel like I should do something for her in return - and of course, I will... But that also got me thinking about the whole Law of Reciprocity.
When somebody does something for you, it engages a sense of obligation - as Marcel Mauss put it, 'we have an obligation to give, an obligation to recieve and an obligation to repay'.
Many people think that by giving free one hour consultations away, they're engaging reciprocity. Anybody with any sense at all knows they're really just going to deliver a sales pitch. The same applies to gifts like pens, plants and other gadgets... we know it's just marketing.
But, when somebody does something for you at personal cost - well that's powerful. Even if we know that what they're doing is done with an ulterior motive, the personal cost is a clincher, everytime.
Personal cost may involve going out of their way, raising a sweat on your behalf, giving up two or three hours of their time, recommending you to friends or referring business to you, putting out the rubbish...
If you want to engage a sense or reciprocity, it has to be earned. Again the theory is good, but the actual, effective application is not as easy as it may first appear.

It's not what you know, it's who you know

Like any other business owner, I'm always thinking about what it takes to be successful at what I do. In that vein, I'm rapidly coming to the conclusion that 'who you know' really is the key to success (whatever your endevour), and that the people you hang out with will largely determine whether you're going to be successful or not - at least in most things.
If you want to be a good cyclist, hang out with good cyclists - they'll teach you, motivate you and push your limits. If you want a promotion, choose carefully when it comes to those you hang out with at the water-cooler.
If you hang out with people who have no money, it's likely you also will have no money.
Ever noticed how many rock stars's kids go on to celebrity success. It's not because they're the most talented - although they certainly have that - it's mostly to do with the circles in which they move.
The movie 'The Pursuit of Happyness" is a great example. Played by Will Smith, the film tells the true story of Chris Gardner, a struggling salesman and father totally dedicated to his son, who takes the chance to try for a stockbroker internship position at Dean Witter. He experiences homelessness with his son, trouble with the taxman and other challenges.
At one stage he manages to get himself into the corporate box of a wealthy CEO at a football game, with the intention of securing the man's business. During the game the man tells him bluntly not to bother, but to instead sit back and enjoy the game.
What happened in the box though, was the ticket... because the other people he met in that corporate box liked him and ultimately became the clients who helped him secure that internship.
They told him: "Call me". But he didn't at first because he was so disappointed at losing the CEO's business. But they were also wealthy people and eventually he did call a couple and they had the wealth, influence and connections to recommend him to other, equally successful people.
But it's not easy, far from it. You need to be able to hold your own with those people at that level, be personable and draw on every social skill in the book, not to mention creativity, tenacity, grit, ambition - the price is high!
So while the secret to success isn't so secret, it's not so easy either.
I guess this is what this blog is about - extending your personal "circle" of influence; how to do it, networking, the price, motivations, ideas, questions... I call it The Silver Spoon Effect for obvious reasons.