moralizing, logical reasoning
Look at it differently.
You are entrusted with this, so this is your problem.
At your age, I didn't have that.
Clarification, interrogation
Who advised you?
What will you do next time?
Why did you do it this way?
Avoidance of the problem, distraction, joke
Why don't you put it out of your mind?
Let's talk about something else
What if every time something doesn't work out, you stop doing it?
Warning, threat, promise
It will happen again - and it's all over with you.
Calm down, and I will listen to you willingly.
You will regret if you do this.
All this, as well as refusal in an aggressive form, creates barriers in communication. People react very emotionally to these and other forms of difficult communication, and emotions are negative in nature.
Now we propose to perform the following exercise /35/. After getting acquainted with the situation, it will be necessary to write down on pieces of paper or in notebooks the first phrases that come to mind that you could say in this situation.
So, your good friend has long lost her job, her family does not have enough money. And in the organization where you work, a suitable vacancy has appeared for her. You talked with the boss, recommended a friend as a conscientious, executive woman. The boss invited you for an interview at 12 o'clock.
At 12 o'clock, my girlfriend was not at the door of the boss's office. She did not come even at 15 minutes past one. At half past one, a friend appears, and you tell her ...
Now put your notes down. Now we will offer a speech that would be effective (competent) in this situation. To do this, let us name in the first person the feelings that the heroine might experience in such a situation, simply list them in order, and then state her supposed desires.
"Yesterday we agreed to meet you at 12 o'clock. Now my clock shows half past one. Having agreed on this job for you, I was very glad and thought I could help you. When I realized that you were late I, of course, at first very got angry, then started worry and thought something bad happened. Now the only thing I feel - it's tired and I'm very worried about what my boss would think of me in connection with my recommendation. That's why I would like to so that you yourself explain to the boss the reason for being late, and if he still takes you, you will henceforth be very punctual at our work.
In this text, in the first person, feelings are simply named and desires are reported, but all this is using the pronoun "I" and is open.
Now review your responses to see how many barriers there were in those responses, and which ones. We will also trace how many open expressions of feelings and desires there were.
The question arises why barriers come to mind first, although feelings are easier to understand when they are expressed in an open, rather than hidden form.
In this situation, such barriers as questions, orders and generalizations are most often used. What kind of response will we get? The first response to questions from any person is detailed answers and explanations ("first I was carried there, then there, etc.), the first response to orders is resistance (and who are you to order me? ), the first response to generalizations is a protest and proof of the opposite (are you yourself never late?, Yes, this happened to me for the first time).
What is usually heard in response to questions, orders and generalizations (not to mention insults)? They hear something like this: “I wasn’t carried anywhere. It’s just that there was no transport for a long time. And in general, I’m almost never late. Yes, it’s your own fault - you had to negotiate more precisely. What is the result? Relations will inevitably worsen, the mood will be completely spoiled - and for both.
Just like aggressive underhand expression of feelings, also downplaying one's feelings, refusing to solve a problem ("Well, okay, okay, it's okay, let's go quickly, we're already late ...) is not socially competent behavior. Such a refusal does not lead to eliminate negative feelings towards the partner.Even if everything is resolved successfully with the boss, the unpleasant feelings will still remain in the soul and will gradually spoil the relationship.In addition, the partner will not receive feedback on how his lateness was perceived.This means that delays will continue again and again, will lead to an even greater deterioration in relations.
For us, when we experience strong feelings, the essence of interaction is that we ourselves, our feelings and desires are understood and reflected, so that we finally hear: "I'm late and understand your irritation very well. Now I'll try everything myself settle." And this is much easier to achieve if you speak directly and openly about feelings and desires.
People quite rarely purposefully use the barriers of communication in order to make it difficult to understand each other, to stop communication. Most often they do it involuntarily and unconsciously. At the same time, they think that the partner perfectly understands what is at stake. They say to themselves: "It's so clear after all." People don't notice the difference between what they say and what they want to say. More often than not, the assumption that everything is clear without comment turns out to be wrong. Misunderstanding" simple words"very annoying, makes you use stronger and stronger language, speak louder and louder, get angry and boil. If this process grows on both sides, then you should not expect accuracy of communication.
What to do when communication barriers prevent achieving clarity in communication, destroy relationships? There is always a way out, and even several ways out of the situation.
First of all, you need to learn how to track the appeal to barriers that violate interpersonal communication in your speech behavior. Having learned to notice one's own readiness to resort to barriers, to form the skill of a ban on such ineffective behavior. As for those situations where barriers are used by the opposite side, several methods of coping behavior are possible here.
V.G. Romek /35/ argues that it is possible to ignore interfering behavior, as if jumping over the barrier, you can prohibit it (in this series, the most ineffective form of behavior), you can destroy it.
Ignoring The emerging barrier is to allow the partner to get angry, to express inaccurately and to use barriers. It is important for ourselves to remain calm and speak to him in a friendly and calm manner, in a confident manner. It is necessary to ignore unflattering remarks, to behave as correctly and sustainably as possible.
It is very important at the same time to try not to reject what the interlocutor says, to create in him a feeling of understanding and cooperation. It is necessary to start with the consent - "yes", "agree", "true", "correct".
Of course, it is difficult to remain calm, especially one has to hear insulting and obviously untrue assessments. But in this case, there is always the opportunity to agree with what you can agree with, to emphasize what leads to mutual understanding, to mark the points at which our opinions coincide with the partner.
Trying to stay "above the barriers", one should, of course, not refuse to express one's own opinion and attitude to the problem (otherwise it would very much resemble uncertainty). However, this opinion must be expressed without haste. In order for this opinion to be heard and understood by the "problem" partner, you first need to get his attention.
Agreement with what can be agreed allows you to win the attention of a partner and provide access to his attention "over the barriers".
For example, /35/, after a daughter's noisy birthday party, when there were mountains of dirty dishes, dirt on the floor, the smell of tobacco smoke, the mother is annoyed and says: "Who needs these noisy festivities? Couldn't you have invited a couple of your closest friends, and even better "I would have made a friend for myself. After all, you are 25 years old, and you only have these fools in your girlfriends. Here, take everything yourself and mine after your friends."
BarrierAbove barriersWhoever I want, I invite. It's my birthday. And don't spoil it for me, please! It would be better to go somewhere - everyone would be calmer! Yes, indeed, there were a lot of people, and a lot of dishes accumulated. But we had a lot of fun, and I am very pleased with the evening. If we work together together, we can get through this quickly.
Mother: And the girls are all already married. You're the only one who drives me away. Look how much money they spent on food and drink. It would be better if you bought a new dress. And then you walk like a ragamuffin.
BarrierAbove barriersMy money - I buy what I want. And in general - get away from me. So you're trying to ruin my holiday. Go away, don't stand over your soul! Yes, a lot of money was spent. But I did not want to skimp on my anniversary. The main thing is that everything turned out so nicely.
The method of ignoring barriers is quite simple and effective. However, it will not work in two cases:
2. when the conversation partner is in a very strong emotional arousal
Ignoring the barriers, although it does not lead to an increase in tension, does not reduce the readiness of the partner to selflessly build new and new barriers. If there is no desire to put up with the aggressiveness hiding behind the barriers, you need to get direct access to it by breaking the barrier.
You can recall the benefits of using the pronoun "I" and say something like this:
To me unpleasant are your reproaches on my birthday.
I I don't want to argue with you now, and it would be nicer to talk in a more relaxed manner.
I I consider myself an adult and want to be spoken to with great respect.
In this case, there will be more chances for mutual understanding, and in official relations such phrases are quite acceptable. But we assume the existence of interpersonal relationships, and here we have another very important reserve.
IN interpersonal relationships it is quite acceptable and even desirable to talk about the feelings of another. Most effective remedy destruction of barriers - a reflection of the partner's feelings. Let's take the same example and see how it works:
Annoyed, the mother says: “Who needs these noisy festivities? Couldn’t you have invited a couple of your closest friends, or even better, you would have made a friend for yourself. herself and mine after her friends.
Over the barriersBreaking the barrierYes, indeed, there were a lot of people, and a lot of dishes accumulated. But we had a lot of fun, and I am very pleased with the evening. If we take it together together, we will quickly cope with all this. I see, mother, that you are very tired and want to rest. I understand that you want me to be happy. The more I visit different companies, the easier it will be for me to find a real person. But in order to be invited to my place, I myself have to arrange parties. If you are very tired, I can handle the dishes myself.
Mother: And the girls are all already married. You're the only one who drives me away. Why do they need family gatherings? Look how much money they spent on food and drink. It would be better if you bought a new dress. And then you walk like a ragamuffin.
Over the barriers Break the barrier Yes, it took a lot of money. But I did not want to skimp on my anniversary. The main thing is that everything turned out so nicely. So, mother, do you think that the choice of guests was unsuccessful? But I wanted to celebrate my birthday with people who are nice to me. There is no particular need to specifically say that breaking barriers requires more effort than ignoring them. But the benefits brought by the destruction of barriers in interpersonal relationships easily compensates for all mental costs. As the relationship strengthens, it becomes less and less necessary to spend energy and energy on this.
In order to understand in what situations barriers can be tolerated, ignored and destroyed by V.G. Romek introduces two criteria. Firstly, in what area does the problem lie (outside the scope of your relationship with your partner or concerns your relationship), and secondly, whose problem is more significant, yours or your partner
The problem you care about is much more significant than your partner's problem Your partner's problem is bigger than your own The problem lies outside the scope of your relationship with a partner 3) you can limit yourself to ignoring barriers and openly expressing your feelings and desires 4) It is necessary to break down barriers, reflecting the feelings of a partner and retelling his problems
Real communication looks like this:
Quadrant 1: Your own non-relationship problem
At work, you are undeservedly criticized by your superiors. When you tell your partner about this, he begins to accuse you of cowardice and laziness. You ignore barriers and only reiterate that you need support and advice.
Quadrant 2: non-relationship partner problem
Your partner at work is unfairly criticized by your boss. He comes to you and attacks you with reproaches and accusations. You are trying to find out what brought your partner into such a state, and if the problem lies outside the scope of the relationship, help him find a way out of a difficult situation.
Quadrant 3: Your own relationship problem with your partner:
In the presence of other people, the partner often starts to sting and make fun of you, which hurts you a lot. When you are alone, you tell your partner about this several times, not paying attention to his injections and ridicule.
Quadrant 4: Your partner has a relationship problem:
The partner is offended by you for your behavior. You communicate that you understand his feelings and are ready to improve relations, help him.
In law enforcement, the most widespread methods of influence, which are based on verbal means. These methods include:
Persuasion (argument);
Compulsion;
Suggestions;
Informing.
Method of persuasion (argumentation)
Persuasive influence in professional communication is achieved through argumentation. Argumentation is a logical and communicative process aimed at substantiating the position of one person for the purpose of its subsequent understanding and acceptance by another person.
Argumentation is the statement and discussion of arguments in favor of the proposed solution or position in order to form or change a person's attitude to this decision or position.
The argumentation structure includes the thesis, arguments and demonstration. The thesis is the formulation of your position (your opinion, your proposal to the other side). Arguments are the arguments, positions, evidence that you give to justify your own point of view. Arguments answer the question: "Why should we believe in something or do something?" Demonstration is the connection of the thesis and argument (i.e., the process of proof, persuasion).
Conditions for constructive reasoning:
A. The employee must be clearly aware of the purpose of the argument and openly formulate it for the object of influence, for example: "I will now try to convince you of the advantages of my proposal ^", "I will still try to convince you ...". If the purpose of the impact is not proven to the addressee, he may perceive it as cunning, manipulation, deceit.
B. Before making an attempt at argumentation, it is necessary to obtain the consent of the addressee to listen to the employee, for example: "does it make sense to convince you, do you agree to listen to my arguments first ...?".
Argumentation should be carried out in a state of "emotional calm" of the addressee, for which it is necessary to carry out preliminary work on the formation of a state of psychological comfort.
D. One cannot be persuasive at all. You can be persuasive for someone specifically, persuasiveness arises in the process of interaction with a specific person, taking into account the logic of this interaction and relationships.
General rules of reasoning.
1. Politeness and correctness. With any statements of a person, the employee must remain polite. Statements that degrade the dignity of a person are unacceptable. Irony and sarcasm should also be avoided, for example: "I thought you had at least average intelligence." Such statements violate emotional comfort and reduce the effectiveness of the impact.
2. Simplicity. All statements should be simple, understandable to the interlocutor, not contain abstruse expressions. It is unacceptable, for example, like this: "Let's approach the problem of testimonies of witnesses ontologically ...".
3. General speech. In the process of argumentation, you need to use a language that is understandable to both interlocutors. In some cases, it is allowed to speak with the object of influence in his language, even if it is too simple and contains elements of profanity.
4. brevity. you can not force a person to listen to his long statements. Brevity is one of the criteria of respect for the interlocutor.
5. visibility. When arguing in favor of his proposal, the employee can, if necessary, illustrate his statements clearly: with photographs, examples, objects, figurative comparisons.
6. Prevention of over-persuasiveness. Excessive persuasiveness challenges the interlocutor's sense of importance of his intellect and provokes a reaction of resistance. Direct indications of errors in judgment, as well as an excessive number of arguments, can become suspicious. It is necessary to act according to the principle: "Better less is more."
Argumentation Techniques and Counterargumentation Technique of Socrates' Positive Answers is a consistent proof of the proposed solution. Each step of the proof begins with the words: "do you agree that ...". If the person answers positively, this step can be considered completed and proceed to the next one. If - negative, the employee continues with the words: "Sorry, I did not formulate the question very well. Do you agree that ..." until the person agrees with all the steps of the proof or the decision as a whole. "Do you agree to confirm this in court?".
When using this method, asking questions other than "Do you agree that..." is not recommended. Especially dangerous are the questions: "Why do you object to the obvious facts?".
Technique of Two-Way Argumentation is an open presentation of both strong and weaknesses proposed solution. In this case, the strengths should prevail. This enables the person to weigh the positive and negative aspects of the decision himself, which will avoid problems in the future when the negative aspects become apparent.
Argument rewriting technique. Tracking the progress of the solution to the problem or task proposed by the opponent, together with him until a contradiction is found, indicating the validity of the opposite conclusions.
Aerobatics method: help the person come to the conclusion: "I was wrong."
Argument separation technique. Separating the arguments of the object of influence into true, doubtful and erroneous and discussing them according to the formula:
2. "True, I'm already less sure that ..." or "I can not get rid of some doubt that ..." or "I wish it was that way, but as it shows ..., this is not always...." (followed by a dubious argument).
With the help of arguments, you can completely or partially change the position and thoughts of your interlocutor.
If you have experience, know the situation, understand personality traits, are observant, attentive to details, then you already have some arguments at your disposal. However, in most cases, if you are going to convince someone of something, you need to stock up on convincing arguments in advance. To do this, you can, for example, make a list of them, evaluate each argument and choose the strongest.
There are several criteria for evaluating arguments:
1. Strong arguments must be based on facts. Therefore, from the list of your arguments, you can immediately exclude those that you cannot support with factual data.
2. Your arguments must be directly relevant to the case.
3. Your arguments must be relevant to your opponents, so you need to find out in advance how interesting and timely they can be for them.
Rhetorical methods of argumentation. Consider the most significant rhetorical methods for situations of professional communication.
1. Fundamental method. Its essence is in a direct appeal to the interlocutor whom you acquaint with the facts, which is the basis of your evidence. Numerical examples and statistical data play an essential role here. They are the perfect backdrop to support your thesis.
2. Method of contradiction. It is defensive in nature. This method is based on identifying contradictions in reasoning, as well as the argument of the interlocutor and focusing on them.
3. Method of figurative comparison. It is of exceptional importance in cases where comparisons are well chosen.
4. Method "yes, .. but ...". It is best used when the interlocutor treats the topic of conversation with some prejudice. Since any process, phenomenon or object has both positive and negative aspects in its manifestation, the "yes, .. but ..." method allows us to consider other options for resolving the issue.
5. The method of "pieces" is similar to the method of rearranging arguments. The essence of the method is to divide your interlocutor's monologue into clearly distinguishable parts: "this is for sure", "doubt", "there are all kinds of points of view", "this is clearly wrong".
6. Boomerang method. Gives the opportunity to use the "weapon" of the interlocutor against him. This method has no force of proof, but it has an impact on the audience, especially if it is used with a fair amount of wit.
7. Method of ignoring. As a rule, it is most often used in conversations, disputes, disputes. Its essence: the fact stated by the interlocutor cannot be refuted by you, but its value and significance can be successfully ignored.
8. Output method. It is based on a gradual subjective change in the merits of the case.
9. Method of visible support. It requires especially careful preparation. It is most appropriate to use it when you are acting as an opponent (for example, in a discussion).
False arguments. In the process of solving the problems of professional communication, a law enforcement officer may encounter a situation where false arguments are used against him.
Psychologist D. Halpern identified the twenty-one most common false arguments:
The influence of associations. If two events occur close to each other in time and / or space, then a connection is formed between them in the human mind. Therefore, when one of these events occurs, a person begins to expect that the other will also occur. The person may begin to feel associated states.
You should be very careful about messages based on associations. If this argument is revealed, another part of the message should be analyzed, because it can be based on an appeal to the emotional, rather than the rational component of the personality.
Arguments against personality. This term is adopted to mean "calling by proper names". With this form of persuasion, one can speak against the people who support an idea, and not against the idea itself. The false argument is based on antipathy for the person, not for the idea itself.
Emphasis on pity (empathic influence). It is very easy to single it out in the proposed premise: "Do this because we need your help." Such parcels can often be used in court by the defense. At the same time, the question of the real guilt or innocence of the suspect is not discussed, but it is said what a hard life he had, how it left him, how sad the circumstances were. IN Everyday life this type of argumentation is remarkably used by people with an external type of locus of control.
Popularity and recommendations. You are being urged to support a position or take an action because everyone is doing it. It is implicitly assumed that "if everyone does it, it must be right". A variant of this method is the use of recommendations. The fallacy is exacerbated when the recommendations don't even touch on an area in which the popular person is competent. In the latter case, the false argument intersects with "recourse to authorities."
Wrong dichotomy. So "sometimes called the simplification of the problem or black-and-white arguments, when a person is asked to choose one of two positions, without offering him other options or" gray areas ".
The main mistake of a person who is faced with a similar situation is that she begins to choose "from the offer", thus limiting her own field of consideration of this problem.
An appeal to pride or vanity. In this case, reliance on praise or flattery is used. While flattery in and of itself may not be "evil intent," it can be used to confuse the issue.
Fraud or concealment of information. It is a method of persuasion by withholding information supporting an undesirable position.
Vicious circle. In this type of reasoning, the premise is a differently formulated conclusion. If you construct a structural diagram of this type of argument, you get a circle, since the restatement of the conclusion serves as support for the conclusion. For example: "The victim needed to increase the speed limit because the current speed limit is too low."
Irrelevant arguments. In Latin, this type of false argument is called non sequitur, which means "it is not a consequence." In other words, the argument or premise is unrelated to the conclusion. The most important criterion for the persuasiveness of an argument or recommendation is the presence of premises associated with the conclusion.
"Slope" or continuum. One of the arguments against the adoption of court decisions on the unification of schools for different ethnic groups inhabiting the region was that if we allow the court to decide which schools our children will attend, then the court will also begin to indicate who we will let go to church, who will be invited to guests and even whom to marry. The argument is that if we place events at one end of this continuum under the jurisdiction of the court, then the court will take over the other events included in it. Most life events can be arranged in a row. But it does not at all follow from this that actions concerning one part of this series will be applicable to others as well.
"Straw Scarecrow". The straw man is unstable and easily knocked over. This is the name of the method when the opponent's conclusion is presented in the weakest form, and then it is easily refuted. At the same time, an opponent who opposes a certain conclusion distorts the arguments in favor of this conclusion and replaces them with much weaker ones.
"Part is whole". Wrong arguments like "part - whole" is reverse side the same error. In using this argument, one assumes that judgments that are true of the whole are also true of all its parts, and that judgments that are true of the parts are also true of the whole.
Use of ignorance. The peculiarity of using ignorance is that in this way it is often possible to support two or more completely different conclusions. This should serve as a sign that the arguments presented are erroneous. Our ignorance is used to prove that the conclusion is wrong because there is no evidence to support it. Our ignorance of the matter can also be used to support a conclusion by arguing that it is true because there is no evidence against it.
Weak and inappropriate analogies. Using analogies is one of the basic thinking skills. We turn to analogies when we encounter something new and try to make sense of it based on what we already know. While analogies are an extremely useful tool for understanding, they can be misused. Two objects or events are similar if they have certain general properties. When we reason by analogy, we assume that statements that are true for one object or event are true for another.
incomplete comparisons. Incomplete comparisons often use evaluative expressions like "better", "safer". This is a special case of considering the missing components of the inference. What is "better"? How to measure it? Who measured? Compared to what?
Knowing what cannot be known. "We need to increase the number of law enforcement agencies, as the number of unreported rapes has increased dramatically", "At the moment, 150,000 drug addicts have been recorded, but the real figure is 1,000,000." There is no way we can know what cannot be known.
False reason. A fallacious argument occurs when someone claims that because two events occur simultaneously or follow one another, one of them is the cause of the other. "Simultaneously with the increase in the number of churches in the city, the number of prostitutes also increases."
Reducing the credibility of the source. There is a decrease in the status of the opponent's authority, often due to humiliation, appeal to emotions. "Only a fool would support this candidate." Thus, supporting given point vision, you automatically fall into the category of fools, people devoid of patriotic feelings or mind.
Appeal to traditions. "We've always done that." Anyone who has tried to change any rules has heard this phrase, or a variant of it: "Don't try to fix what's not broken yet." It may be that the current system is indeed better than the proposed changes, but it may also be that it is not. The fact that "we have always done this" does not mean that it is a good or The best way goal achievement. One of the qualities of a critical thinker is flexibility.
False accusations in false arguments. This is a false premise! It seems that some people, having learned to recognize erroneous reasoning, immediately call everything that others say wrong.
Persuasiveness of speech and conviction. Persuasiveness depends on taking into account the attitudes, beliefs, interests, needs, way of thinking and individual style of speech inherent in the object of influence.
If you want to convince someone, you must follow certain rules:
The logic of persuasion must correspond to the intellect of the object of influence;
It is necessary to convince by evidence, based on facts known to the object;
In addition to specific facts and examples, information should contain generalized provisions (ideas, principles);
Persuasive information should look as believable as possible;
It is better to comprehend what is presented in small meaningful parts (blocks);
Reported facts and general provisions must be such as to cause an emotional reaction of the object of influence;
The more dynamic the text and the facts that are clearly manifested in it, the more it attracts attention;
It is better perceived that which is close to the interests and needs of the object of influence;
It is better to perceive, comprehend and assimilate the material that is presented in accordance with the national traditions of the perception of the object.
The criterion for the effectiveness of persuasive influence is conviction. This is a deep confidence in the truth of the learned ideas, ideas, concepts, images. It allows you to make unambiguous decisions and implement them without hesitation, to take a firm stand in assessing certain facts and phenomena. Thanks to conviction, attitudes are formed that determine human behavior in specific situations.
An important characteristic of conviction is its depth. It is directly related to awareness, life experience of a person, the ability to analyze the phenomena of the surrounding reality. Deep confidence is characterized by great stability. As practice shows, in order to shake it, logical conclusions alone are not enough. Arguments must evoke an emotional reaction.
Persuasive influence is advisable to carry out in the following cases:
When the object of influence is able to perceive information;
When the object is psychologically ready to agree with our opinion;
In the case when the object is able to compare different points of view, analyze the system of argumentation. In other words, the impact is effective only if the person is able to understand and appreciate what is being said to her;
If the logic of thinking of the subject of influence, the arguments used by him are close to the features of the thinking of the object. Hence the importance of taking into account the national-psychological characteristics of the object, social, national-religious, cultural factors that determine the perception of the content of the message;
If you have time to convince. To convince people of something, especially that which is profitable opposite side, need time. Changes in the sphere of rational thinking of people occur only after comparing and considering the facts.
Persuasive influence typically includes:
Impact of the source of information;
Impact of information content;
The impact of the informing situation. coercion method.
It is not always possible to achieve success by influencing a person with persuasion. Sometimes you have to use coercion. It is important that the object of influence realizes the inevitability of coercive measures taken against him. And this is achieved when coercion precedes persuasion. This provision is the basis for choosing coercion as a method of influencing a person in law enforcement (Chufarovsky Yu.V.).
Coercion is a kind of psychological influence that openly suppresses the ability to resist. This allows you to achieve a goal that is contrary to the desires, intentions and interests of a person.
Hello, friends!
Often in discussions with readers and participants of my seminars, one thought “slips” - "And how to convince?"
You know, an experienced person in the field of persuasion can be taken by surprise by such a question. And here's why - in many ways, the persuasion procedure is already running on autopilot, and you yourself do not notice how you follow some kind of system.
It's like a specialist in martial arts, for whom many defensive blocks have been worked out to such an automaticity that he himself does not understand how he can block an avalanche of enemy blows with such speed.
That is, we have a need to build theory on the basis of practice. Yes, this is how everything happens in our field - first you do something yourself, you make sure that the equipment works, and then you share it with others.
You know, when it comes to persuasion, it immediately comes to mind the classic formula proposed by the legendary copywriter Gary Bensivenga. I don't think this guy needs any introduction.
To be clear, it would be more correct to call this formula an "equation".
This equation looks like this:
Problem + Promise + Proof + Solution = Persuasion
A standard scheme by which you can build persuasion in your sales texts.
P show that you are familiar with the client's problems
In the life of every person there are problem situations - work, business, personal relationships, personal growth, health, appearance and so on.
We do not want to put up with these problems, because we understand that they slow us down and make unpleasant adjustments to our lives.
If you want to instantly attract attention, immediately voice the problems of customers that your product is designed to solve.
This is done so that from the first lines of your text, you show that the reader got to where he needs to be. That you understand him, and you are familiar with these difficulties.
But the main thing here is not to get carried away. To voice the problem does not mean to scare the reader terribly, so that he is huddled in convulsions of fear from your text.
I like to voice problematic moments in a soft style, starting their enumeration with a very loyal phrase:
“Surely, you are familiar with such situations ...”
* That is, we do not focus on the problem, but show its consequences that our reader has encountered.
For example, don't get carried away with "overweight", tell us about how a woman does not feel free in her favorite dress, as she did before.
What is the main purpose of your promise?
By the way, "promise" is the word for you. It is undesirable to use phrases in the text in the style "we promise you..."- as practice shows, the reader is suspicious of such self-confident promises.
The main purpose of the "promise" element is to show the reader that the difficulty is temporary and not the end of the world.
It is important for the reader to understand that the situation is fixable, that he is not the only one in it. He enjoys reading when he sees that many people have also experienced this situation, and that they have already overcome it and are enjoying life to the fullest again.
You are like a beacon of hope.
Such an element allows you to gently and gradually transfer the reader from the problem block to the solution block. This is only the first step, if you give hope, then you do not need to limit yourself to words - they should be confirmed with something.
Don't tell, prove
Judge for yourself, why should a reader who does not know you personally believe your words? Words are so devalued today that people are judged precisely by their actions.
When a politician puts up a campaign banner with the stamp "Man of his word" hackneyed to holes, all the passers-by laugh. That's exactly what the words - say what he said, but who, my friend, will do?
Same with sales...
If you say that your product helps to save 20% of electricity - if you please, with numbers to prove how and due to what this happens, only in this way they will believe you.
Don't forget the power of "social proof" (I hope Russian speakers will forgive me for using the term in this way). Give the reader a hero. Show on specific example from your customer's life the full power of your product.
The scheme is simple: before the product it was bad, but after the product it became great. Technique "past-future".
It's time to propose
When a man makes a marriage proposal to a woman, as a rule, with his words and deeds, he has already proved his own viability to be a caring husband and a decent family man.
You voiced the problem, gave hope, confirmed it with evidence, and now it's time to make an offer.
As they say, the client has already been "warmed up" (not to be confused with "warmed up") - now it's time to take decisive action.
And now your super product or super service appears on the scene, which are designed to overcome customer difficulties. Then your proposal no longer looks so intrusive and frontal.
You did everything according to science, and then we get a conviction, and not an amateur "push" for which signs are already posted in offices: "We shoot every third sales manager, the second one just got out".
Use this formula-equation in your texts, and then the process of persuasion will begin to bring a good harvest.
