Influencing others: Rational persuasion and the big problem with rational persuasion

Dale Carnegie wrote “How to Make Friends and Influence People” nearly 80 years ago, and the topic of influencing others is still of great interest to many. There are plenty of ways to influence someone. The nine most common (in ascending order) are: 

9. Consultation – asking others for help in either directly or indirectly influencing another 

8. Inspirational appeals – pulling at the heartstrings and/or emotions of the party you’re trying to influence

7. Coalitions – getting a group working together toward a common goal of influencing another 

6. Pressure – using threats or sanctions (when you have such power) to influence another

5. Ingratiation – make the person/group you’re trying to influence feel better – as they say, you get more flies with honey than vinegar¹

4. Exchange – works on the principle of give and take; this can be a direct quid pro quo arrangement whereby you give the other party something they want in order to influence them on a topic important to you

3. Personal Appeals – work when the other party likes you and you’ve asked for their help. You can influence them by appealing to them on a personal level – they don’t have to agree with the topic, but as long as they like you, that can be enough

2. Legitimating – refers to influencing someone based on the legitimate (or positional) power you have over them. Obedience to authority is stronger in some cultures than others, but saying “no” to your boss is a difficult proposition

1. Rational persuasion – using logical arguments and factual evidence to persuade others. 

30 years of research²  has shown that not only is rational persuasion the most common influence tactic used irrespective of hierarchical levels, it is also a relatively effective way of influencing others. But there’s a fatal flaw with using rational persuasion. Let me present the following situation: 

I was involved in a committee meeting the other day and presented a rational list of reasons for my proposal – I also used consultation in this case, building the rational case based on advice from experts in the field. One of the people in this meeting, who occupies the highest hierarchical position of those at the meeting, didn't like my proposal. My rational list wasn't impactful. Why not?  Because for rational persuasion to work, the individual you’re trying to influence actually has to be rational! My counterpart in this particular situation preferred to deal with philosophical musings, as opposed to concrete occurrences.

So what approach should I have taken, or take moving forward? Inspirational appeals are powerful –think John F. Kennedy and his vision to take us to the moon – but this topic wasn’t one that lends itself to such an appeal. I couldn’t pressure my counterpart, nor was legitimating an option. Personal appeals require a good personal relationship, and while I’ve worked with this individual before, we’ve clashed recently, and an appeal based on our friendship wouldn’t work. Exchange could have worked, in theory, but due to the positional power occupied by this person, I didn’t have much to offer.

Coalitions and ingratiation are the final influence tactics I could use. Ingratiation is most effective when it is perceived as honest, personal and well-intended, and it is most often perceived as such when infrequent. If you’re always seen as buttering someone up, ingratiation can backfire. In the committee meeting, ingratiation wouldn’t have been effective, as it could serve to alienate the other 10 people in the committee who I would want on my side.

Building a coalition of support is my final option to gain the support of my counterpart. And so it is, as the proposal I made and I have both been sent to another committee. At the end of the day, this second committee also reports back to the same individual with whom I had this conflict, but this individual isn’t present for that committee’s meetings. So if this second committee buys into my proposal, it goes back to the problematic individual with the weight of others who have better relationships and power positions in the organization.

So what’s the lesson here? Rational persuasion only works on rational people. But if you need to influence someone who isn’t rational, you need more persuasive tools in your tool-belt than just logic. I might even have to break out some honey, so I can finally catch this fly! 

*************************
1.  I’ll be honest, I’m not sure why you’d want more flies, but if you would, use honey.

2.  cf. Kipnis, D., Schmidt, S. M., & Wilkinson, J. (1980) Interorganizational influence tactics: Explorations in getting one’s way. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 440-452. 
Yukl, G., & Falbe, C. M. (1991) The importance of different power sources in downward and lateral relations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 416-423
Higgins, C. A., Judge, T. A., & Ferris, G. R. (2003) Influence tactics and work outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 89-106