Reciprocal Concessions

Cialdini was walking down the street when he was approached by an eleven or a twelve-year-old boy. He introduced himself and then said that he was selling tickets to the annual Boy Scouts Circus to be held on the coming Saturday night. He asked if Cialdini wished to buy any at five dollars apiece. When he declined, the boy said “Well if you don’t want to buy any tickets, how about buying some of our big chocolate bars, they are only a dollar each.” I bought a couple and right away realized that something noteworthy had happened. I knew that to be the case because: (a)I do not like chocolate bars;(b) I do like dollars; (c) I was standing there with two of his chocolate bars; and(d) he was walking away with two of my dollars.

The general rule says that a person who acts in a certain way toward us is entitled to a similar return action. We know that one consequence of the rule is an obligation to repay favours we have received. Another consequence of the rule, however, is an obligation to make a concession to someone who has made a concession to us. The Boy Scout’s request to buy chocolate bars was put in the form of a concession on his part; a retreat from a larger to a smaller request and hence Cialdini changed from a non-compliant to a compliant, even though he was not really interested in either of the things the boy offered.

Here is a classic example of how a weapon of automatic influence can infuse a compliance request with its power. Cialdini had been moved to buy something not because of any favourable feeling towards the item but because the purchase item had been presented in a way that drew force from the reciprocity rule. Of course, this tendency of reciprocity will not work in all cases and on all people. None of the weapons of influence considered in the book is that strong. However, the tendency had been sufficiently potent to leave the author in the mystified possession of a pair of unwanted and overpriced candy bars.

Research shows that most subjects of this weapon of influence- reciprocal concession were quite satisfied with the final arrangement and what is more, since the tactic uses a concession to bring about compliance, the victim is likely to feel more satisfied with the arrangements as a result. And it stands to reason that people who are satisfied with a given arrangement are more likely to agree to further such arrangements.

Commitment and Consistency is another weapon of influence. A study by a pair of Canadian Psychologists uncovered something fascinating people at the race track: Just after placing a bet, they are much more confident of their horse’s chances of winning than they are immediately before laying down that bet. Of course, nothing about the horse’s chances actually shifts, it’s the same horse, on the same track, in the same field: but in the minds of the bettors, its prospects improve significantly once that ticket is purchased. Although a bit puzzling at first glance, the reason has to do with a common weapon of social influence. Like the other weapons of influence this one lies deep within us, directing our actions with quiet power. It is quite simply, our nearly obsessive desire to be (and to appear) consistent with what we have already done. Once we have made a choice or taken a stand, we will encounter personal and interpersonal pressures to behave consistently with that commitment. Those pressures will cause us to respond in ways that justify our earlier decision.

As Leonardo Da Vinci put it- “It is easier to resist at the beginning than at the end.”

Weapons of Influence – Cialdini