【英语生活】你想说服别人

Before you read this, get yourself a double espresso. Or have a couple of Diet Cokes. Or a latte with an extra shot. Or a grande skinny soya macchiato with a squirt of caramel. It doesn't matter what form the caffeine comes in so long as the dose is large. There is a point to this, which I'll explain in a minute.For now it is enough to know I am changing the way I write columns. Over the past 13 years I have developed a technique that goes roughly like this: find something daft from the world of management. Give examples of how widespread it is, then use irony laced with reason to ridicule it. On this model I have written 600 columns, or 600,000 words. Last week I made the dismal discovery that all have been wasted.

According to Robert Cialdini, a US professor in psychology and marketing, persuasion is a science. Some tricks work, and some don't. Unfortunately all my efforts fall squarely into the second category.

Take a column I wrote two weeks ago ridiculing people who say “going forward”. At the time I judged it to be a great success as nearly 100 people told me they agreed. On reflection, they were the only 100 people left in the world who don't use the phrase themselves. The only “user” converted was Christopher Cox, the chairman of the SEC, who wrote to the Financial Times saying he was quitting the habit. But that may have been because I had fingered him in print and he was simply clearing his name.

As for the rest of the world, there seems to be more going-forwarding than ever. Last Wednesday I turned on the Today Programme to hear Robert Peston, BBC business editor, saying four “going forwards” in three minutes.

Prof Cialdini explains the trouble: by drawing attention to the fact that so many people say “going forward” I am contributing to the spread.

He describes an experiment in a US national park. A sign was put up pointing out that lots of people had stolen wood in the past, much damage had been done and asking people to stop. The result: wood theft went up threefold.

So this week I am going to use principles taken from his book Yes! 50 Secrets from the Science of Persuasion to see if I can become more effective than before. My aim today: to persuade people to stop saying “reach out”. First, I am going to do this by adapting the following experiment on hotel towels.

Most hotels have signs in bathrooms saying: “We invite you to join with us to conserve water by using your towels more than once,” which are successful about 60 per cent of the time. Prof Cialdini and his team replaced these with a sign saying: “Sixty per cent of guests in this hotel re-use towels” and found that compliance went up by 26 per cent. The implication is that we are sheep: we don't want reasons, we just want to know what people just like us do, and then do the same.

So here is my assertion: “Sixty per cent of business people never say ‘reach out'.” One small problem: this is a lie.

A second proven persuasion technique is foot-in-the-door. In another weirdly depressing experiment, researchers knocked on doors in a posh neighbourhood trying to get people to put a giant notice on their lawns saying “please drive carefully”. Almost no one agreed. They then asked another group to put a small sticker in their cars to the same effect. Almost everyone agreed. A couple of weeks later they asked these same people to take the hideous sign. Lots said yes. Lesson: people will agree to something big if you soften them up first by getting them to agree to something small.

So to get people to stop saying “reach out”, I need to convince them to stop saying something more obviously awful first. Unfortunately, I can't think of anything except “going forward” and I've done enough damage there already.

Another good persuasion technique is to work on people's fear. Using fear alone (which is what I used to do) is hopeless as it just paralyses them. If, instead, you hype up the danger while offering an easy solution, your audience will roll over obediently. So how about this: “If you say ‘reach out' you will look like a moron, and discerning people will recoil. But if you say: ‘call' or ‘e-mail' or ‘get in touch' you will seem like a normal person.”

Are you convinced? I don't feel terribly convincing writing this. I am not persuaded that these persuasion techniques are right for me. The trouble is that my message to readers is always the same: plug in your brain.

By contrast, the persuasion book is based on finding that we have our brains semi-unplugged most of the time. Which brings me to the book's last and most frightening tip. If you ply your audience with caffeine they are 35 per cent more likely to agree with you, so long as what you are saying isn't total twaddle.

Just as I write these last words, an e-mail has landed. It is from the BlackBerry of a US colleague sitting in an SEC meeting. He tells me that Commissioner Kathleen Casey just uttered the words “going forward” but then she stopped and looked at Chairman Christopher Cox. “Oops. I can't believe I just said that,” she said.

I can believe it only too well. But what I can't believe is that she corrected herself. Thank you, Ms Casey. My faith in my own ways is restored. Next week I will revert to my tried-and-tested formula.

在你读这篇文章之前，先给自己来一杯双倍浓缩咖啡，或者来两听健怡可乐(Diet Coke)。或者来一杯拿铁咖啡，要加大的。或者来一大杯淋上焦糖的豆香玛奇雅朵浓咖啡。什么咖啡无关紧要，只要量够多就好。这其中是有道理的，我一会儿就解释。现在，这足以让你明白，我正在改变自己写专栏的方式。在过去13年中，我开创了一种方法，大致是这样的：从管理领域中找些愚蠢的东西，举例说明这种现象有多么普遍，然后用看似理性的讽刺嘲笑它一下。运用这种模式，我写了600篇专栏，有60万字。上周，我沮丧地发现，所有一切都白费劲了。

美国心理学及营销学教授罗伯特•恰尔尼迪(Robert Cialdini)称，说服是一种科学。一些窍门奏效，另一些不奏效。不幸的是，我的所有努力都直接进入了第二类。

以我两周前写的一篇专栏为例。这篇文章嘲讽了那些说“going forward”（意为“以后”）的人。当时，我认为它获得了巨大成功，因为有将近100人告诉我，他们同意这种观点。回头想想，他们是这个世界上仅剩的100个不用这个短语的人。唯一转变自己习惯的“使用者”，是美国证交会(SEC)主席克里斯托弗•考克斯(Christopher Cox)——他写信给英国《金融时报》称，自己正在改掉这个习惯。但这或许是因为我在文章中点了他的名，而他这么做只是为了给自己正名。

至于世界其它地区，似乎讲“going forward”的人比以前更多了。上周三，我收听《今日节目》(Today Programme)，听到英国广播公司(BBC)商业编辑罗伯特•佩斯顿(Robert Peston) 3分钟内说了4个“going forward”。

恰尔尼迪教授解释了这个问题：通过让人们关注有很多人说“going forward”这个事实，我为这个词的推广作了贡献。

他讲述了在美国国家公园进行的一个实验。一个告示牌指出，过去有许多人偷伐树木，造成的十分严重的破坏，并请求人们停止这种行为。结果是：树木偷伐量增长了3倍。

因此，本周我将运用他在《是的！说服科学的50个秘密》(Yes! 50 Secrets from the Science of Persuasion)一书中提供的原则，看看我的作用能否变得比以前更有效。我今天的目标是：说服人们别再说“reach out”（意为“联系”）。首先，我将学习下面这个有关酒店毛巾的实验。

大多数酒店在浴室里有这样的提醒：“请您重复使用毛巾，加入我们节约用水的行列。”这种提醒的成功机率约为60%。恰尔尼迪教授和他的团队将这个提醒换成了：“这家酒店60%的客人重复使用毛巾”，结果发现，重复使用毛巾的客人比例又提高了26%。这暗示我们都是易受摆布的人：我们不需要理由，我们只想知道别人希望我们做什么，然后照做。

所以我的命题是：“60%的商务人士从不说‘reach out'。”有个小问题：这是谎话。

另一个得到验证的说服技巧是“一点点来”。在另一个古怪郁闷实验中，研究人员在一个高档社区挨家敲门，试图让人们在各自草坪上竖起一个写着“请小心驾驶”的大布告牌。几乎没人同意这么做。然后他们让另一群人在各自的车上放一个意思一样的小贴士。几乎所有人都同意了。几周后，他们要求同样这些人做那个可恶的牌子。很多人都同意了。教训是：如果你首先让人们同意一些小事使其软化下来，那么他们（随后）将会同意一些大事。

因此，为了让人们不再说“reach out”，我需要首先说服他们停止说一些显然更糟糕的话。不幸的是，除了“going forward”，我想象不到任何东西，而我在“going forward”方面已经做得够糟了。

另一个比较好的说服技巧是利用人们的恐惧心理。单独利用恐惧心理（我过去经常这么干）是没有前途的，因为这只会使人们麻痹。相反，如果你说明危险性同时给出一种容易的解决方法，你的听众将顺从地听你摆布。那就这样：“如果你想说‘reach out'，你会看起来像个低能，有辨别力的人是不会用这个词的。但如果你说‘打电话'、‘发电邮'或‘联系'，你将会看起来像个正常人。”

你被说服了吗？我写这些东西的时候都不觉得十分有说服力。我不信这些说服技巧适合我。问题是，我传递给读者的信息总是一样的：给你的脑子充充电。

相反，这本讲说服的书所基于的结论是，我们的脑子在多数时候处于半断路状态。这让我使用了这本书最后、最吓人的贴士。如果你不断地让你的听众喝咖啡，他们赞同你的几率可能会增加35%——只要你说的不全是废话就好。

正当我写这些最后的话时，来了一封电邮，来自一位出席美国证交会会议的美国同事的黑莓。他告诉我，凯瑟琳•凯西(Kathleen Casey)委员刚刚说了“going forward”这个词，但随后她停住了，看了看克里斯托弗•考克斯主席。她说：“哎哟。我不相信自己刚才会那么说。”

我非常相信会发生这种事。但我不太相信她会更正自己。谢谢，凯西女士。我对自己的方式重新树立了信心。下周，我将恢复我经过实践检验的公式。

译者/梁鸥