The Necessary Art of Persuasion - Jay A. Conger

The language of leadership is misunderstood, underutilized and more essential than ever. T ECESSARY ART OF O BY ]AY A. CONGER G THERE EVER WAS A TIME for businesspeople to learn the fine art of persuasion^ it is now. Gone are the command-and-control days of executives managing hy decree. Today husinesses are run largely hy eross-functional teams of peers and populated hy hahy hoomers and their Generation X offspring, who show little tolerance for unques- tioned authority. Electronic cominunication and glohalization have further eroded the traditional hierarchy, as ideas and people flow more freely than ever around organizations and as decisions get made closer to the markets. These fundamental changes, more than a decade in the making hut now firmly part of the economic landscape, essentially come down to this: work today gets done in an environment where THE NECESSARY ART OF PERSUASION TWELVE YEARS OF WATCHING AND LISTENING The ideas behind this article spring from three streams of research. For the last 12 years as both an academic and as a consultant, I have been studying 23 senior business leaders who have shown themselves to be effective change agents. Specifically, I have investigated how these individuals use language to motivate their em- ployees, articulate vision and strategy, and mobilize their organizations to adapt to challenging business environments. Four years ago, I started a second stream of research exploring the capabilities and characteristics of suc- cessful cross-functional team leaders. The core of my database comprised interviews with and observations of 18 individuals working in a range of U.S. and Cana- dian companies. These were not senior leaders as in my earlier studies but low- and middle-level man- agers. Along with interviewing the colleagues of these people, I also compared their skills with those of other team leaders-in particular, with the leaders of less successful cross-functional teams engaged in similar initiatives within the same companies. Again, my fo- cus was on language, but I also studied the influence of interpersonal skills. The similarities in the persuasion skills possessed by both the change-agent leaders and effective team leaders prompted me to explore the academic litera- ture on persuasion and rhetoric, as well as on the art of gospel preaching. Meanwhile, to learn how most man- agers approach the persuasion process, I observed sev- eral dozen managers in company meetings, and I em- ployed simulations in company executive-education programs where groups of managers had to persuade one another on hypothetical business objectives. Finally, I selected a group of 14 managers known for their outstanding abilities in constructive persuasion. For several months, I interviewed them and their col- leagues and observed them in actual work situations. people don't just ask What should I do? but Why should I do it? To answer this why question effectively is to per- suade. Yet many businesspeople misunderstand persuasion, and more still underutilize it. The rea- son? Persuasion is widely perceived as a skill re- served for selling products and closing deals. It is also commonly seen as just another form of lnanip- ulation-devious and to be avoided. Certainly, per- suasion can be used in selling and deal-clinching situations, and it can be misused to manipulate people. But exercised constructively and to its full potential, persuasion supersedes sales and is quite the opposite of deception. Effeetive persuasion be- coines a negotiating and learning process through which a persuader leads colleagues to a problem's shared solution. Persuasion does indeed involve moving people to a position they don't currently hold, but not by begging or cajoling. Instead, it involves careful preparation, the proper framing of arguments, the presentation of vivid supporting evidence, and the effort to find the correct emotional match with your audience. Jay A. Conger is a professor of organizational behavior al the University of Southern California's Marshall School of Business in Los Angeles, where he directs the Leader- ship Institute. He is the author of Winning 'Em Over: A New Model for Managing in the Age of Persuasion (Simon &) Schuster, 1998). Effective persuasion is a difficult and time- consuming proposition, but it may aiso be more powerful than the command-and-control mana- gerial model it succeeds. As AlliedSignal's CEO Lawrence Bossidy said recently, "The day when you could yell and scream and beat people into good performance is over. Today you have to appeal to them by helping them see how they can get from here to there, by establishing some credibility, and by giving them some reason and help to get there. Do all those things, and they'll knock down doors." In essence, he is describing persuasion-now more than ever, the language of business leadership. Think for a moment of your definition of persua- sion. If you are like most businesspeople I have encountered [see the insert "Twelve Years of Watch- ing and Listening"), you see persuasion as a rela- tively straightforward process. First, you strongly state your position. Second, you outline the sup- porting arguinents, followed by a highly assertive, data-based exposition. Finally, you enter the deal- making stage and work toward a "close." In other words, you use logic, persistence, and personal enthusiasm to get others to buy a good idea. The re- ality is that following this process is one surefire way to fail at persuasion. (See the insert "Four Ways Not to Persuade.") What, then, constitutes effective persuasion? If persuasion is a learning and negotiating process, then in the most general terms it involves phases of 86 ARTWORK BY DAVID JOHNSON THE NECESSARY ART OF PERSUASION discovery, preparation, and dialogue. Getting ready to persuade colleagues can take weeks or months of planning as you learn about your audience and the position you intend to argue. Before they even start to talk, effective persuaders have considered their positions from every angle. What investments in time and money will my position require from oth- ers? Is my supporting evidence weak in any way? Are there alternative positions I need to examine? Dialogue happens before and during the persua- sion process. Before the process begins, effective persuaders use dialogue to learn more about their audience's opinions, concerns, and perspectives. During the process, dialogue continues to be a form of learning, but it is also the beginning of the nego- tiation stage. You invite people to discuss, even de- bate, the merits of your position, and then to offer honest feedback and suggest alternative solutions. That may sound like a slow way to achieve your goal, but effective persuasion is about testing and revising ideas in concert with your colleagues' con- cerns and needs. In fact, the best persuaders not only listen to others but also incorporate their per- spectives into a shared solution. Persuasion, in other words, often involves- indeed, demands-compromise. Perhaps that is why the inost effective persuaders seein to share a common trait: they arc open-minded, never dog- matic. They enter the persuasion process prepared to adjust their viewpoints and incorporate others' ideas. That approach to persuasion is, interestingly, highly persuasive in itself. When colleagues see that a persuader is eager to hear their views and willing to make changes in response to their needs and concerns, they respond very positively. They trust the persuader more and listen more atten- tively. They don't fear being bowled over or manip- ulated. They see the persuader as ficxible and are thus more willing to make sacrifices themselves. Because that is such a powerful dynamic, good per- suaders often enter the persuasion process with judicious compromises already prepared. Four Essential Steps Effective persuasion involves four distinct and es- sential steps. First, effective persuaders establish credibility. Second, they frame their goals in a way FOUR WAYS NOT TO PERSUADE In my work with managers as a researcher and as a consultant, I have had the unfortunate opportunity to see executives fail miserably at persuasion. Here are the four most common mistakes people make: 1. They attempt to make their case with an up-fiont, hard sell. I call this the |ohn Wayne approach. Man- agers strongly state their position at the outset, and then through a process of persistence, logic, and exu- berance, they try to push the idea to a close. In reality, setting out a strong position at the start of a persua- sion effort gives potential opponents something to grab onto-and fight against. It's far better to present your position with the finesse and reserve of a lion tamer, who engages his "partner" by showing him the legs of a chair. In other words, effective persuaders don't begin the process by giving their colleagues a clear target in which to set their jaws. 2. They resist compromise. Too many managers see compromise as surrender, but it is essential to con- structive persuasion. Before people buy into a proposal, they want to see that the persuader is flexible enough to respond to their concerns. Compromises can often lead to better, more sustainable shared solutions. By not compromising, ineffective persuaders un- consciously send the message that they think persua- sion is a one-way street. But persuasion is a process of give-and-take. Kathleen Reardon, a professor of orga- nizational behavior at the University of Southern Cal- ifornia, points out that a persuader rarely changes an- other person's behavior or viewpoint without altering his or her own in the process. To persuade meaning- fully, we must not only listen to others but also incor- porate their perspectives into our own. 3. They think the secret of persuasion lies in pre- senting great arguments. In persuading people to change their minds, great arguments matter. No doubt ahout it. But arguments, per se, are only one part of the equation. Other factors matter just as much, such as the persuader's credibility and his or her ahiUty to cre- ate a proper, mutually beneficial frame for a position, connect on the right emotional level with an audi- ence, and communicate through vivid language that makes arguments come alive. 4. They assume persuasion is a one-shot effort. Per- suasion is a process, not an event. Rarely, if ever, is it possihle to arrive at a shared solution on the first try. More often than not, persuasion involves listening to people, testing a position, developing a new position that refiects input from the group, more testing, incor- porating compromises, and then trying again. If this sounds like a slow and difficult process, that's because it is. But the results are worth the effort. HARVARD BUSINESS KEVIEW May-|uno 1998 87 THE NECESSARY ART OF PERSUASION that identifies common ground with those they in- tend to persuade. Third, they reinforce their posi- tions using vivid language and compelling evi- dence. And fourth, they connect emotionally w i^th their audience. As one of the most effeetive execu- tives in our research commented, "The most valu- able lesson I've learned about persuasion over the years is that there's just as much strategy in how you present your position as in the position itself. In fact, I'd say the strategy of presentation is the more eritical." Establish credibility. The first hurdle persuaders must overcome is their own credibility. A persuader can't advocate a nev '^ or eontrarian position without having people wonder, Can we trust this individ- ual's perspectives and opinions? Such a reaction is understandable. After all, allowing oneself to be persuaded is risky, because any new initiative de- mands a commitment of time and resources. Yet even though persuaders must have high credibility, our research strongly suggests that most managers overestimate tbeir own credibility - considerably. In the workplace, credibility grows out of two sources: expertise and relationships. People are con- sidered to have higb levels of expertise if they bave a history of sound judgment or have proven tbem- selves knowledgeable and well informed about their proposals. For example, in proposing a new produet idea, an effeetive persuader would need to be perceived as possessing a tborougb understand- ing of tbe product-its specifications, target mar- kets, customers, and competing products. A history of prior successes would further strengthen tbe per- ivi^'iVt sironeiv >si.^ . overeslimi: rs are in Ihc the suadcr's perceived expertise. One extremely sue- cessful executive in our research bad a track record of 14 years of devising higbly effective advertising campaigns. Not surprisingly, be bad an easy time winning colleagues over to bis position. Anotber manager bad a track record of seven successful new-product launcbes in a period of five years. He, too, bad an advantage wben it came to persuading bis coUeagiies to support bis next new idea. On tbe relationsbip side, people witb bigb cred- ibility have demonstrated-again, usually over time - tbat they can be trusted to listen and to work in tbe best interests of otbers. Tbey bave also con- sistently sbown strong emotional cbaraeter and in- tegrity,- tbat is, tbey are not known for mood ex- tremes or inconsistent performance. Indeed, people who are known to be bonest, steady, and reliable bave an edge wben going into any persuasion situa- tion. Because tbeir relationsbips are robust, tbey are more apt to be given tbe benefit of tbe doubt. One effective persuader in our researcb was consid- ered by colleagues to be remarkably trustwortby and fair; many people confided in her. In addition, she generously shared credit for good ideas and pro- vided staff witb exposure to tbe company's senior executives. This woman bad built strong relation- sbips, which ineant her staff and peers were always willing to consider seriously wbat sbe proposed. If expertise and relationships determine credibil- ity, it is crucial that you undertake an bonest as- sessment of wbere you stand on both criteria before beginning to persuade. To do so, first step baek and ask yourself tbe following questions related to ex- pertise: How will otbers pereeive my knowledge about tbe strategy, product, or change I am propos- ing? Do I have a track record in tbis area tbat otbers know about and respect? Tben, to assess the strength of your relationship credibility, ask your- self. Do tbose I am boping to persuade see me as helpful, trustwortby, and supportive? Will tbey see me as someone in sync witb tbem-emotionally, intellectually, and politically-on issues like this one? Finally, it is important to note that it is not enough to get your own read on tbese matters. You must also test your answers witb col- leagues you trust to give you a reality cbeek. Only tben will you bave a complete picture of your credibility. In most eases, tbat exercise helps people discover tbat tbey bave some measure of weakness, eitber on tbe expertise or on tbe relationsbip side of credibility. Tbe challenge tben be- comes to fill in sueb gaps. In general, if your area of weakness is on the expertise side, you bave several options: • First, you can learn more about tbe complexities of your position tbrougb either formal or informal education and tbrougb conversations witb knowl- edgeable individuals. You migbt also get more rele- vant experience on the job by asking, for instance, to be assigned to a team that would increase your insight into particular markets or products. • Anotber alternative is to birc someone to bolster your expertise-for example, an industry consul- tant or a recognized outside expert, such as a profes- 88 HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW May-June 1998 THE NECESSARY ART OF PERSUASION sor. Either one may have the knowledge and experi- ence required to support your position effectively. Similarly, you inay tap experts within your organi- zation to advocate your position. Tbeir credibility becomes a substitute for your own. • You can also utilize other outside sources of infor- lnation to support your position, such as respected business or trade periodicals, books, independently produced reports, and lectures by experts. In our research, one executive from the clothing indus- try successfully persuaded his com- pany to reposition an entire product line to a more youthful market after bolstering his credibility with articles by a noted demographer in two highly regarded journals and with two inde- pendent market-research studies. • Finally, you may launch pilot projects to demon- strate on a small scale your expertise and the value of your ideas. As for filling in the relationship gap: • You should make a concerted effort to meet one- on-one with all the key people you plan to per- suade. This is not the time to outline your position but rather to get a range of perspectives on the issue at hand. If you have the time and resources, you should even offer to help these people with issues that concern them. • Another option is to involve like-minded cowork- ers who already have strong relationships with your audience. Again, that is a matter of seeking out sub- stitutes on your own behalf. For an example of how these strategies can be put to work, consider the case of a chief operating offi- cer of a large retail bank, whom we will call Tom Smith. Although he was new to his job. Smith ar- dently wanted to persuade the senior management team that the company was in serious trouble. He believed that the bank's overhead was excessive and would jeopardize its position as the industry entered a more competitive era. Most of his col- leagues, however, did not see the potential serious- ness of the situation. Because the bank had been enormously successful in recent years, they be- lieved changes in the industry posed little danger. In addition to being newly appointed. Smith had another problem: his career had been in financial services, and he was considered an outsider in the World of retail banking. Thus he had few personal connections to draw on as he made his case, nor Was he perceived to be particularly knowledgeable about marketplace exigencies. As a first step in establishing credibility. Smith hired an external consultant with respected creden- tials in the industry who showed that the bank was indeed poorly positioned to be a low-cost producer. In a series of interactive presentations to the bank's top-level management, the consultant revealed how the company's leading competitors were tak- ing aggressive actions to contain operating costs. He made it clear from these presentations that not A pei'siiader should make a conceited effort to meet one-on-one with all the key people he or she plans to persuade. cutting costs would soon cause the bank to fall drastically behind the competition. These findings were then distributed in written reports that eircu- lated throughout the bank. Next, Smith determined that the bank's branch managers were critical to his campaign. The buy-in of those respected and informed individuals would signal to others in the company that his concerns were valid. Moreover, Smith looked to the branch managers because he believed that tbey could in- crease his expertise about marketplace trends and also help him test his own assumptions. Thus, for the next three months, he visited every branch in his region of Ontario, Canada-135 in all. During each visit, he spent time with branch managers, lis- tening to their perceptions of the bank's strengths and weaknesses. He learned firsthand about the competition's initiatives and customer trends, and he solicited ideas for improving the bank's serviees and niinimizing costs. By the time he was through. Smith had a broad perspective on the bank's future that few people even in senior management pos- sessed. And he had built dozens of relationships in the proce