In his book Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion (affiliate link), Robert Cialdini presents these six principles of persuasion:
- Reciprocity
- Commitment and consistency
- Social Proof
- Liking
- Authority
- Scarcity
This series of posts at Lyden’s Lab will unpack each of these principles and explore how it applies to persuasive writing in marketing, advertising, public relations and sales.
***
In a previous post, we talked in-depth about persuasion through reciprocation – that is, when a vendor or sales rep gives us something of value, we often feel a need to give back (or reciprocate) by responding favorably to the offer.
But this begs the question: If our intention is to give in order “to get,” isn’t that really manipulation? In the extreme, isn’t that really bribery? Couldn’t you say that it’s the “quid pro quo” (or reciprocation) in backroom deals among politicians and lobbyists that often drives corruption in politics? Can it not also lead to unethical marketing and sales tactics, as well?
On the surface, there’s just something that seems unseemly and manipulative about using reciprocity as a tool of persuasion, right?
Perhaps.
Yet, I am reminded by an oft-quoted saying from sales guru Zig Ziglar:
"You can get anything you want in life if you help enough other people get what they want in life."
From that perspective, reciprocity can be a powerful and compelling force for mutual good.
Keeping Persuasion in the Proper Perspective
How do you apply this principle of persuasion-through-reciprocation in copywriting -- in a way that both the audience and marketer come out as winners? Ask yourself these three questions to keep your persuasion strategy in the proper perspective:
1. What does your audience want/need, relative to what your product/ service offers?
2. What can you give away that your audience wants/needs – and will make them hungry enough to pay for more?
3. What do you want in return for your give-away? A demo appointment? Contact information? Permission to market? Determine your goal upfront – and be transparent about your motives. If you’re offering something of genuine value – and it’s in the best interest of the audience – then you don’t have to be shy about your intentions.
Where I see the appeal to reciprocation sliding into manipulation is when the marketer is more focused on his or her company’s best interest – at the expense of the prospect/ audience.
The Bottom Line
So here’s my take on the reciprocation-versus-manipulation debate: What’s your focus -- mutual benefit (win-win) or your own benefit at the expense of others (win-lose)? Transparency or alterior motives?
If we think “win-win” when applying persuasion-through-reciprocation, I believe we’re on the right track.
What’s your take?
***
Related Posts
The Give-to-Get Method of Persuasion
Avoid Pain or Gain Pleasure – Which is the Stronger Motivator?
***
About the Author: Sean M. Lyden is a nationally recognized feature writer and columnist on sales, marketing, automotive and technology topics. As a ghostwriter and copywriter, Sean has served clients such as General Motors, SunTrust Service Corporation, Morgan Stanley, Embedded Linux Consortium and Shaw Industries. He’s also co-author of the book How to Succeed and Make Money on Your First Rental House (Wiley, 2003). Follow Sean on Twitter.
© Sean M. Lyden, 2012, All Rights Reserved
Recent Comments