The bit about the economist and similar example between Paris and Rome (with and without coffee) are darn close to how I recall a lot of negotiations taking place. The fact that you place a completely useless decision next to a decision that normally would look nothing out of the ordinary, suddenly makes it extraordinary in comparison. We do this unconsciously when making our first offer to a client - you can have this produced within the time frame and shipped ground - in which case the item would not arrive in time for your production, or you can have this shipped 2nd day air and pay the same shipping rate. This statement would make the buyer loose track of looking into additional ground in the negotiation and focus on making what would seem the rational decision in the offering, instead of requesting a different set of terms.
I just recently tried something in regards to social influence - I dressed up with a tie and suit when I had to assist with putting on a show overseas. The next day I didn't wear the jacket, just the shirt and tie. I had a sudden increase in the number of people asking me for directions on how to get to particular booths in the show, even if I was in the middle of a conversation with someone else! They somehow felt I was .. less important and approachable for information? My job was not to give directions, but deal with the technical content and organization/controls for part of the event. Those that were asking knew this as I was no where near an information desk... I answered anyway as the number of people doing it was around 4-5 / hour in a 8 hour day vs. 1 / hour in the previous day having worn a jacket.
Anish
No comments:
Post a Comment