Real Influence

Mark Goulston, Dr. John Ullmen

• Publisher: AMACOM
• Year: 2013
• ISBN:
  9780814420164
• Topic: Business
• Subtopic: Meetings & Presentations
• Index: Business

Authentic influence is about more than creating a strong initial connection--it's about sustaining professional relationships long after an agreement has been reached.

When others sense they are being pushed, their guard goes up. In business interactions, even if the person you are pitching to does comply with your requests, lingering resentment may undermine the relationship forever. So why do most books on influence still portray it as something you do to someone else to get your way?

Based on their commitment to listening, genuine engagement, and the pursuit of win-win outcomes, doctors and authors Mark Goulston and John Ullmen share a new method that business leaders can utilize to persuade others.

In Real Influence, Goulston and Ullem teach you how to:

• examine priorities,
• learn about the needs of key players,
• earn others' attention,
• motivate others to hear more,
• and add value with question and actions.

Outdated approaches that portray influence as a means to get your way invites resistance and cynicism from those who recognize the techniques. Manipulative tactics fail to produce the mutual trust that sustains successful relationships.

Complete with examples of the steps in action and insights from real-world "power influencers, " Real Influence is a one-of-a-kind guide that showcases how being straight with everyone means winning for all.

SECTION 1

The Problem: Why Are You Struggling to Influence People?

You can use tricks and manipulation to gain short-term compliance, but disconnected influence doesn’t earn you the commitment you need to achieve great things. Why? Because when you’re stuck in your here, you can’t get to their there—and that’s where you need to be in order to persuade people effectively. In Section One, you’ll discover the risks of disconnected influence and the four traps that cause you to fall into it. Then we’ll share the secret for becoming a powerful influencer: the four simple steps of connected influence.

1

The Dangers of “Disconnect”

You cannot antagonize and influence at the same time.

J. S. Knox, in Fundamentals of Success

Did you ever try to get other people to do something that would be better for them, better for you, better for a project team or a company, better for their family or yours, or even better for the world . . . and fail?

Odds are you had good intentions. You had hard facts to support your point of view. Maybe you even set deadlines, offered rewards, or threatened penalties.

You tried your best, but they didn’t budge.

It’s an unhappy experience. But what’s far worse is when it happens over and over again. And for millions of smart, caring, and creative people just like you, it does. Even when these people are right—when they have brilliant ideas, inspiring goals, or the best of intentions—they can’t get through.

If they’re managers, they can’t light a spark under their teams. If they’re in sales, they can’t make the big plays. If they’re in relationships, they can’t get their partners or children to agree to their ideas. And if they have revolutionary ideas that could make the world better, they can’t get anyone to listen.

This book is for them.

If you’re one of these people, the methods you’re using to influence people aren’t working. They’re not inspired by your vision, and they’re not willing to share your goals. And here’s why: Most people, most of the time, aren’t motivated to do what you want them to do. They don’t feel your urgency, they’re busy with their own priorities and crises, or they have hidden reasons for rejecting your ideas.

To break down these walls, you need to create powerful connections that make people want to do what you’re recommending. But you don’t, because here’s what you’re thinking:

“How can I get my boss to . . .”

“How can I get my team to . . .”

“How can I get this client to . . .”

“How can I get my partner to . . .”

“How can I get my kids to . . .”

“How can I get this interviewer to . . .”

These are examples of disconnected influence. And they don’t work.

On the surface, of course, disconnected influence makes perfect sense. You’ve got to get things done. Important priorities are at stake. You size up a situation and see gaps that need to be filled and mistakes that need to be fixed. Maybe your project team is making a foolish decision. Or your boss needs to allocate more money to your project. Or your daughter is dating someone who isn’t good for her. Or your partner isn’t sticking to your family budget.

But when you view influence as “getting people to do what I want,” you actually reduce your influence. That’s because you’re viewing the person you’re trying to influence as a target, an object, something to be pushed or pulled. You’re not hearing the other person’s message. And the other person either recognizes this immediately or—even if you get temporary compliance—resents it later.

Disconnected influence is what many business schools teach. It’s what most experts teach. But if you have big goals and need long-term commitments, it’s a prescription for failure.

To explain why, we’d like to start with a story. But be forewarned: The take-away lesson may surprise you.

Scott is a manager at a large global healthcare firm. He’s at a strategic off-site meeting today.

Scott has a strong working relationship with Marcus, the vice president in charge of his division. Marcus values Scott’s intellect, business acumen, and no-nonsense directness. He considers Scott the “honest broker” in the group—the person Marcus can count on to speak the truth even when it’s risky.

In today’s meeting, an important issue involving new hires comes up. Marcus makes a quick decision and tells the group to move on to the next issue.

Scott speaks up: “Wait a minute. Can we take a look at this decision? There are a lot of implications here.”

“No,” says Marcus, “we’re moving on.”

Scott knows Marcus is making a mistake. The distribution of new hires will have a huge impact on how well Marcus’s team performs. There are crucial questions to ask and trade-offs to consider. Scott and Marcus have been discussing an exciting new project for the team, and this decision could make it much harder to launch.

Scott chooses his next words carefully. “But Marcus,” he says calmly and respectfully, “let’s consider a couple of things that I expect everyone will agree are important to discuss for the good of the organization as a whole.”

Marcus says firmly, “Scott, I’ve made my decision.”

Scott is confused, but he knows he’s right. He’s not trying to pick a fight. He’s not trying to score points. He’s simply hoping to stop Marcus from making a decision that could harm the whole team. No one else will speak up, and he knows Marcus will appreciate his honesty later. It’s up to him.

So he says, “I understand, but I think it would help to . . .”

Marcus cuts him off sharply, “Enough. We’re moving on. The next issue is . . .”

Scott is stunned. He feels devalued and disrespected. He’s only trying to do the right thing, and he has the knowledge and expertise to back up his concerns. He’s frustrated, and he leans back and folds his arms. He’s angry that Marcus is behaving in an authoritarian manner, making abrupt choices on a complex issue, and cutting him off rudely. Scott won’t act out, but he’s displeased, and they’re going to talk about it later.

This is an unpleasant situation, and it’s likely to get worse. It’s the kind of disagreement that can cause a close-knit team to fracture, or even make a top performer like Scott think about leaving.

But here’s the thing.

It’s not Marcus who’s screwing up.

It’s Scott.

The “Blind Spot” in Our Brains

Why are we pointing the finger at Scott, who is the rational, respectful manager who’s trying to make a logical point while his boss is riding roughshod over him?

Because Scott is making a dangerous mistake. He’s practicing disconnected influence—“How can I get Marcus to do what I want?” He’s completely focused on his own point of view, and as a result, he’s failing to connect with Marcus. And that means he’s operating in his blind spot.

To get a feel for this, imagine you’re driving on the highway. You scan everything around you through the windshield and the rearview and sideview mirrors. The road is clear, so you move into the next lane.

The next instant, you feel a thud and hear a wrenching of metal. Your heart leaps into your throat as you realize you’ve sideswiped a motorcyclist who was coming up behind you. From your perspective, he “came out of nowhere.” But he was there all along. You just didn’t see him, because you didn’t check your blind spot.

What does this have to do with influence? Your brain doesn’t merely have a blind spot when it comes to driving; it also has a blind spot when it comes to influencing. And like a driver who changes lanes without checking to see what’s in the blind spot, you’re dangerous when you’re blinded by your own point of view.

When you practice disconnected influence, you’re stuck in what we call your here. You can see your position, your facts, and your intentions clearly. But to connect with the people you’re trying to influence, you need to communicate from a perspective we call their there. You need to see their position, their facts, and their intentions clearly. And you can’t reach their there if you can’t see it. From your point of view, these people are invisible—just like the motorcyclist.

And that brings us back to Scott. Because he’s focused solely on his own message, he’s communicating from his here. As a result, his brain has a blind spot when it comes to Marcus’s there—and that’s where he gets into trouble.

Scott and Marcus do talk later, but things don’t go the way Scott expects them to. Scott is expecting an apology from Marcus. Instead, Marcus shuts the door and says tersely, “Sit down.” Then he lights into Scott.

“You ignored the clear signals I sent you,” Marcus says. “You know I respect your opinions. You know I don’t normally cut you off. You know I don t make snap decisions. So you should have realized that I did what I did for a reason.”

As it turned out, upper management was planning a reorganization that would affect Scott’s peers and their teams. Things weren’t entirely settled, and the senior team needed to keep the discussions confidential until the final decisions were made. Marcus knew that discussing the new hires would quickly put him into an ethical bind, because he’d have to say things that weren’t true.

“I was annoyed when you continued to press the matter,” Marcus says, “but I know that’s what you do—and usually I appreciate it. But what really disappointed me is how you sulked afterwards and tuned me out. That was immature.”

Three months later, on Scott’s next performance review, along with the usual excellent ratings and comments, there’s a critical entry for the very first time: “However, sometimes when Scott doesn’t get his way, he’s prone to act with immaturity and petulance.”

Scott made a huge mistake in the meeting because he was blind to the urgent messages Marcus was sending him. He was so sure he was right that the only question he asked himself w...