They allow you to expose and discredit the opponent who used them. They are:

· judgments based on falsified facts;

· decisions that have become invalid;

· conjectures, conjectures, suppositions, fabrications;

· arguments designed to appeal to prejudices and ignorance;

· conclusions drawn from fictitious documents;

· promises and promises issued in advance;

· false statements and testimony;

· forgery and falsification of what is said.

1. When arguing, use only those arguments that you and your opponent understand equally.

2. If the argument is not accepted, find the reason for this and do not insist on it further in the conversation.

3. Don't downplay your opponent's strong arguments. It is better, on the contrary, to emphasize their importance and your correct understanding.

4. Present your arguments that are not related to what your opponent or partner said after you have responded to his arguments.

5. More precisely measure the pace of argumentation with the characteristics of your partner’s temperament.

6. Excessive persuasiveness always causes resistance, since the superiority of a partner in a dispute is always offensive.

7. Give one or two compelling arguments and, if the desired effect is achieved, limit yourself to them.

Laws of argumentation and persuasion

Law of embedding (implementation). Arguments should be built into the partner’s logic of reasoning, and not driven in (breaking it), not presented in parallel.

The law of the common language of thinking. If you want to be heard, speak the language of your opponent's basic information and representation systems.

The law of minimizing arguments. Remember the limitations of human perception (five to seven arguments), so limit the number of arguments. It is better if there are no more than three or four.

The law of objectivity and evidence. Use as arguments only those that your opponent accepts. Don't confuse facts and opinions.

The law of demonstrating equality and respect. Present your arguments by showing respect for your opponent and his position. Remember that it is easier to convince a “friend” than an “enemy”.

The law of reframing. Do not reject your partner’s arguments, but, recognizing their legitimacy, overestimate their strength and significance. Increase the significance of the losses in case of accepting his position or reduce the significance of the benefits expected by the partner.

The law of gradualism. Do not try to quickly convince your opponent; it is better to take gradual but consistent steps.

Feedback law. Provide feedback in the form of an assessment of your opponent’s condition and a description of your emotional state. Take personal responsibility for misunderstandings and misunderstandings.

Law of ethics. In the process of argumentation, do not allow unethical behavior (aggression, arrogance, etc.), do not touch the “sore spots” of your opponent.

CLASSICAL RULES OF BELIEF

Homer's Rule

The order of the arguments presented affects their persuasiveness. The most convincing order of arguments is: strong - medium - one is the strongest. The strength (weakness) of arguments should be determined not from the point of view of the speaker, but from the point of view of the decision maker.

It follows from this rule that it is better not to use weak arguments: having identified them during the preparation process, do not use them to persuade. They will do harm, not good.

Indeed, the interlocutor pays more attention to the weaknesses in your arguments. Therefore, it is important not to make a mistake. It is not the number of arguments that decides the outcome of the case, but their reliability.

One very important circumstance should be noted. The same argument can be both strong and weak for different people. Therefore, the strength (weakness) of arguments should be determined from the point of view of the interlocutor.

Socrates' rule

To get a positive decision on an issue that is important to you, put it in third place, prefacing it with two short, simple questions for the interlocutor, to which he will answer you “yes” without difficulty.

This rule has existed for 2400 years, it has been tested by hundreds of generations of educated people. It is alive because it is true.

It was only relatively recently that the deep physiological reasons explaining the effectiveness of this technique were discovered. It has been established that when a person says or hears “no,” norepinephrine hormones enter his blood, setting him up to fight. Conversely, the word “yes” leads to the release of “pleasure hormones” (endorphins). Having received two portions of “pleasure hormones,” the interlocutor relaxes, is in a favorable mood, and it is psychologically easier for him to say “yes” than “no.” One portion of endorphins is not always enough to overcome the bad mood in which the interlocutor may be. In addition, it is impossible for a person to instantly switch from one mood to another; he must be given more time and more “pleasure hormones” to ensure this process.

Preliminary questions should be short so as not to tire the interlocutor or take up a lot of his time.

3. Pascal's rule. Don't drive your interlocutor into a corner. Give him the opportunity to “save face” and preserve his dignity. Nothing disarms more than the terms of honorable surrender.

In law enforcement, the most widespread methods of influence are those based on verbal means. These methods include:

Persuasion (argumentation);

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 justifying the position of one person with the aim of its subsequent understanding and acceptance by another person.

Argumentation is the expression and discussion of arguments in favor of a proposed decision or position with the aim of forming or changing a person’s attitude towards this decision or position.

The structure of an argument includes a thesis, arguments, and demonstration. A thesis is the formulation of your position (your opinion, your proposal to the other side). Arguments are arguments, positions, evidence that you give to justify your own point of view. Arguments answer the question: "Why should we believe something or do something?" Demonstration is the connection between thesis and argument (i.e., the process of proof, persuasion).

Conditions for constructive argumentation:

A. The employee must clearly understand the purpose of the argument and openly formulate it for the object of influence, for example: “I’ll now try to convince you of the advantages of my proposal^”, “I’ll still try to convince you...”. If the purpose of the influence is not proven to the recipient, he may perceive it as cunning, manipulation, or deception.

B. Before attempting an argument, it is necessary to obtain the recipient’s consent to listen to the employee, for example: “is there any point in convincing you, do you agree to listen to my arguments first...?”

It is advisable to carry out the argument in a state of “emotional calm” of the addressee, for which it is necessary to carry out preliminary work to create a state of psychological comfort.

G. You can’t be convincing at all. You can be convincing to someone in particular; persuasiveness arises in the process of interaction with a specific person, taking into account the logic of this interaction and relationship.

General rules of argumentation.

1. Politeness and correctness. Whenever a person makes any comments, the employee must remain polite. Statements that degrade the dignity of an individual are unacceptable. You should also avoid irony and sarcasm, 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, and not contain abstruse expressions. It is unacceptable, for example, something like this: “Let’s approach the problem of witness testimony ontologically...”.

3. General speech. In the process of argumentation, you need to use language that is understandable to both interlocutors. In some cases, it is permissible to speak to the object of influence in his own language, even if it is too simple and contains elements of profanity.

4. Brevity. You cannot force a person to listen to your long statements. Brevity is one of the criteria of respect for the interlocutor.

5. Visibility. When arguing in favor of his proposal, an employee can, if necessary, illustrate his statements visually: with photographs, examples, objects, figurative comparisons.

6. Avoiding over-persuasion. Excessive persuasiveness challenges the interlocutor's sense of the importance of his intelligence and causes 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: “Less is better.”

Argumentation techniques and counterargumentation Socrates' technique of 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 move on to the next one. If the answer is negative, the employee continues with the words: “Sorry, I didn’t 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. Particularly dangerous are the questions: “Why do you object to obvious facts?”

Double-sided argumentation technique is an open presentation of both the strengths and weaknesses of the proposed solution. In this case, strengths should prevail. This allows a person to weigh the positive and negative aspects of a decision for himself, which will allow him to avoid problems in the future when the negative sides become obvious.

Technique of turning arguments. Tracing the progress of a solution to a problem or task proposed by an opponent, together with him, until a contradiction is found, indicating the validity of the opposite conclusions.

The highest aerobatics of the method: helping a person come to the conclusion: “I was wrong.”

Argument separation technique. Dividing 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’t get rid of some doubt that...” or “I would like it to be exactly like this, but as it shows..., it’s not always...." (what follows is 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, master the situation, understand personal characteristics, 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 anything, 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 ones.

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. Let's consider the most significant rhetorical methods for situations of professional communication.

1. Fundamental method. Its essence is in direct appeal to the interlocutor, whom you introduce to the facts, which is the basis of your evidence. Numerical examples and statistical data play a significant role here. They are the perfect backdrop to support your points.

2. Method of contradiction. It is defensive in nature. This method is based on identifying contradictions in reasoning, as well as the argumentation of the interlocutor and focusing attention on them.

3. Method of figurative comparison. It is of exceptional importance in cases where the comparisons are chosen well.

4. The “yes,..but...” method. It is best used when the interlocutor approaches 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 “pieces” method 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 accurate,” “doubt,” “there are all kinds of points of view here,” “this is clearly wrong.”

6. "Boomerang" method. Gives you the opportunity to use your interlocutor’s “weapons” against him. This method does not have the power of proof, but it does have an impact on the audience, especially if used with a fair amount of wit.

7. Method of ignoring. As a rule, it is most often used in conversations, debates, and arguments. 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. Based on a gradual subjective change in the essence of the matter.

9. Visible support method. It requires especially careful preparation. It is most advisable to use it when you act as an opponent (for example, in a discussion).

False arguments. In the process of solving problems of professional communication, a law enforcement officer may be faced with the situation of using false arguments against him.

Psychologist D. Halpern identified twenty-one of the 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 happen. The person may begin to feel associated states.

You should be very careful about association-based messages. If this argument is identified, the other part of the message should be analyzed, because it may be based on an appeal to the emotional, rather than the rational, component of the personality.

Arguments against the individual. This term is adopted to mean “calling by a spade.” With this form of persuasion, you can speak out against the people who support an idea, rather than against the idea itself. A false argument is based on antipathy towards the person, not towards the idea itself.

Emphasis on pity (empathic influence). It is very easy to highlight it in the proposed message: “Do this because we need your help.” Such premises 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 abandoned 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 persuaded to support a position or take an action because everyone else is doing it. The implicit assumption is that "if everyone is doing it, it must be right." A variation of this method is to use recommendations. The false argument is compounded when the recommendations don't even touch on an area in which the popular personality has expertise. In the latter case, a false argument intersects with “appeal to authority.”

Wrong dichotomy. This is “sometimes called problem simplification 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 what is offered,” thus limiting her own field of consideration of this problem.

Appeal to pride or vanity. In this case, reliance on praise or flattery is used. While flattery itself may not be an “evil intent,” it can be used to confuse the issue.

Fraud or concealment of information. This is a method of persuasion by withholding information that supports an undesirable position.

Vicious circle. With this type of reasoning, the premise is a differently formulated conclusion. If you construct a structural diagram of this type of argument, you will end up with 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 was too low.”

Irrelevant arguments. In Latin, this type of false argument is called non sequitur, which translates to “this is not a consequence.” In other words, the argument or premise is not related to the conclusion. The most important criterion for the persuasiveness of an argument or recommendation is the presence of premises associated with the conclusion.

"Downhill" 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 dictate who we let into church, who we invite to guests and even who to marry. The reasoning is that if we give the court jurisdiction over events at one end of this continuum, then the court will also take power over other events within it. Most life events can be arranged in a series. But it does not at all follow from this that actions relating to some part of this series will also be applicable to others.

"Straw Man" The straw man is unstable and easy to topple. This is the name of the method when the opponent’s conclusion is presented in its weakest form and then 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 significantly weaker ones.

"Part is the whole." Incorrect part-whole arguments are the other side of the same error. When using such an argument, one assumes that propositions that are true of the whole are also true of all its parts, and judgments that are true of the parts are also true of the whole.

Taking advantage of ignorance. The thing about using ignorance is that it can often support two or more completely different conclusions. This should be a sign that the arguments presented are flawed. Our ignorance is used to prove that a conclusion is incorrect because there is no evidence to support it. Our ignorance of the issue can also be used to support a conclusion by claiming that it is true because there is no evidence to support it.

Weak and inappropriate analogies. Using analogies is a fundamental thinking skill. We turn to analogies when we encounter something new and try to understand it based on what we already know. Although analogies are an extremely useful tool for understanding, they can be used incorrectly. Two objects or events are similar if they have certain properties in common. When we reason using analogies, we assume that propositions that are true for one object or event are also true for another.

Incomplete comparisons. Incomplete comparisons often use evaluative expressions such as “better” or “safer”. This is a special case of considering the missing components of an inference. What is "better"? How to measure it? Who measured? Compared to what?

Knowledge of what cannot be known. “We need to increase the number of law enforcement agencies, since the number of unreported rapes has sharply increased,” “Currently, 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 false argument occurs when someone claims that because two events occur simultaneously or follow one another, one of them is the cause of the other. “At the same time as the number of churches in the city increases, 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 and appeal to emotions. "Only a fool would support this candidate." Thus, by supporting this point of view, you automatically fall into the category of fools, people devoid of patriotic feelings or intelligence.

Appeal to traditions. "We've always done it this way." Anyone who has tried to change any rules has heard this phrase or a variation of it: "Don't try to fix what isn't broken." It may be that the current system is indeed better than the proposed changes, but it may also turn out that it is not. Just because “we've always done it this way” does not mean that it is a good or best way to achieve a goal. One of the qualities of a critical thinker is flexibility.

False accusations on false grounds. This is a false argument! It seems that some people, having learned to recognize fallacious reasoning, immediately call everything that others say wrong reasoning.

Persuasiveness of speech and conviction. Persuasiveness depends on taking into account the inherent 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 adhere to certain rules:

The logic of persuasion must correspond to the intelligence of the target;

It is necessary to convince with evidence, based on facts known to the object;

In addition to specific facts and examples, the information should contain general provisions (ideas, principles);

Persuasive information should look as believable as possible;

It is better to comprehend what is presented in small meaningful parts (blocks);

The facts and generalities communicated must be such as to evoke an emotional reaction from the target;

The more dynamic the text and the facts that clearly appear in it, the more it attracts attention;

What is better perceived is what is close to the interests and needs of the target;

The material that is presented in accordance with the national traditions of perception of the object is better perceived, comprehended and assimilated.

The criterion for the effectiveness of persuasive influence is conviction. This is a deep confidence in the truth of the acquired ideas, concepts, concepts, and images. It allows you to make unambiguous decisions and implement them without hesitation, to take a firm position in your assessment of certain facts and phenomena. Thanks to conviction, attitudes are formed that determine a person’s behavior in specific situations.

An important characteristic of conviction is its depth. It is directly related to a person’s awareness, life experience, and 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 response.

It is advisable to carry out persuasive influence in the following cases:

When the target 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 and analyze the argumentation system. In other words, the influence 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 argumentation he uses are close to the peculiarities of thinking of the object. Hence the importance of taking into account the national-psychological characteristics of the object, social, national-religious, cultural factors that predetermine its perception of the content of the message;

If there is time to convince. Convincing people of something, especially something that benefits the other side, takes time. Changes in the sphere of rational thinking of people occur only after comparison and reflection of the facts.

Persuasive influence usually includes:

Impact of information source;

Impact of information content;

Impact of the information 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 target understands the inevitability of coercive measures taken against him. And this is achieved when coercion precedes persuasion. This provision is the basis for the choice of coercion as a method of influencing an individual in law enforcement activities (Chufarovsky Yu.V.).

Coercion is a type 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.

The prisoner was brought to his cell. Looking around at his cellmates, noticing their grins and winks, he darted towards the door:

- I won’t sit here! Save me, there are only sadists here!

They brought him to another one. At first glance, it became clear to him how difficult it would be here, and he also flatly refused:

- Yes, these are all drug addicts! No, I'm not into this part. Get me out of here!

They brought him to a cramped cell where a decrepit, thin old man was sitting.

“I’ll stay here,” the prisoner agreed.

Left alone with his neighbor, he explained why he sat down and asked:

- Why are you here, grandfather?

- For cannibalism, son, for cannibalism!

To begin with, examining the logical components of persuasion (where would we be without them?), we will describe Socrates’ method of positive answers (most often used in persuasion), and then we will examine at what moments, due to which the harmonious, logically verified structure of persuasion can “break.”

So, Socrates' method of positive answers implies consistent proof of the proposed solution to a problem. Each step of the proof begins with the words: “ Do you agree that..." If the recipient answers in the affirmative, this step can be considered completed and proceed to the next one. If the partner answers negatively, the initiator continues with words like: “ Sorry, I didn't formulate the question very well. Do you agree that...”, etc. until the addressee agrees with all the steps of the proof and with the proposed solution as a whole. It is not recommended to ask questions like: “ Why don't you agree?" or " Why do you object to obvious things?».

Let us allow ourselves a number of critical remarks that make such logic vulnerable.

Note #1. Why would a partner want to give us the opportunity to experiment with the wording of the question?

Most often, inaccurate formulations and attempts to correct them on the fly are perceived as an opponent’s weakness ( “Why didn’t you prepare in advance?”). Let us note once again that the formulations must be precise not only in meaning, but also in form (remember the story about the Khan’s son).

Note #2. Why would a partner even want to agree with all the steps and the overall decision?

How many times in the course of training and consulting work have we encountered situations where an argument that is obvious to the person proving it is not at all so to the opponent of the persuasion.

– Do you agree that it is profitable to buy shares when the market is down?

- Is not a fact.

As an illustration of what can be considered facts, here is an excerpt from the book: “ Weapon is the word. Defense and attack with» .

A young man from a very famous, wealthy and fairly decent family entered one of the most prestigious educational institutions in the country. Exceptionally gifted children studied with him, and the teachers did everything possible so that the students could realize their creative potential to the fullest.

However, the young man did not particularly bother himself with his studies. He studied extremely unsteadily, paying absolutely no attention to the basic disciplines. His main hobby was reading erotic literature, which, of course, left a deep imprint on his entire subsequent life.

After graduating from school, he, unlike his classmates, did not even try to find a permanent job and lived mainly at his parents’ expense. He became interested in playing cards for money, and in addition, he was partial to women of easy virtue and alcoholic beverages. He earned money for playing cards through odd jobs.

Quite late, he started a family, marrying a woman much younger than himself, as a result of which he felt jealous of her. Thanks to family connections, he managed to get a certain position, but he was dissatisfied with it, because he considered himself more worthy. This may have been helped by the fact that almost all of his classmates took up very prominent positions in the civil service. Some of them became generals, and some even became ministers.

And it is likely that this feeling was the reason why the young man almost took the path of high treason. The only thing that saved him was that he was very superstitious, like, perhaps, other people who do not have a firm position in life. And it was superstition that helped him avoid participation in a crime aimed at undermining the foundations of statehood, which, of course, would have ended in a long prison sentence.

This man did not think at all that his classmates had achieved their prominent position in society through determination and hourly work, while he himself was ready to work mainly only to pay off gambling debts and the expenses of an idle lifestyle.

The story of this man ended very sadly. In a fit of jealousy, he tried to kill his young wife's supposed lover, but was killed himself. Law enforcement agencies, having studied the case materials, tried to hush up this incident, and did so quite successfully. And from this we see what the lack of clear life goals and clear moral principles can lead to. The instructive story of this man is known to almost everyone in Russia.

And his name was... Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin.

Conclusion: There are no facts, there is an interpretation of them, which we must agree with our partner during negotiations of persuasion.

What is a fact? Description of an object, event, action that:

a) double-checked (preferably through different channels of information);

b) protected from subjective perception;

The same speaker was presented in different ways in different student audiences: as an assistant at the department, as a teacher, as a professor, as an academician. After the lecture, students were asked to rate the teacher's growth. The difference in grades was more than 15 cm - taller height was, of course, awarded to the academician...

c) suits both opponents (if two agreed to consider some event an armed conflict, then in their picture of the world this is a fact...).

As you can see, there is a lot of subjectivity in the facts...

Having gone through our entire chain of evidence, a partner can draw completely “perpendicular” conclusions: simply because in his perception, thinking style, mode of action, values ​​and interests, a different conclusion is logical.

- Girl, you are like an interesting book to me - I would read and read!

– Okay, just don’t touch the cover.

In one discussion, the parties made a decision about which potential partner to implement a promising project with. We determined the selection criteria, agreed on the entire chain of “sifting” applicants, and in the end, everyone defended their partner...

Conclusion: often the partner uses the situation of persuasion only in order to accumulate arguments in favor of the decision chosen in advance.

There are also a number of pitfalls of logical persuasion related to both the meaning and the logical structure of arguments. These traps trigger resistance to persuasion. Let's list them.

Statement of the planned outcome of the discussion: “We have come to convince you that our offer is the best...” Such formulations are acceptable as a seed, an intrigue in the discussion, but only if you are 100% sure of the result. When we come confident that our decision is the only correct one, we have already questioned the effectiveness of persuasion. And if we also stated this, then we increase the risk of irrational resistance ( “You’re lying, you won’t take it”), when the partner’s motivation “not to let him win” wins.

Listing Events– is not an argument. Rate your feelings when reading the following chain:

– Do you agree that in the first negotiations we agreed...

- Do you agree that then we sent you...

– Do you agree that your experts gave an opinion...

Tiring, isn't it? And it causes personal prejudice because it creates a feeling of unpreparedness for negotiations.

Complex Arguments– death of logical belief: “ Do you agree that due to the high demand for our services, increasing prices and positioning the person providing these services in a higher price segment would be a justified measure?» After the second comma, the listener forgets the beginning of the sentence.

Long chain of arguments– “firstly, secondly, ... and finally, twentiethly: do you agree that...” forms perception fatigue. Within the framework of such exhausting tactics, it is easier for a partner to agree than to object, but he may not agree to our proposal at all.

Two people are sitting at a table in a restaurant. One unsuccessfully tries to prick an olive with a fork, which is actively “running” across his plate. In the end, the olive energetically flies into the neighbor's plate. He automatically pricks the naughty food with a fork and puts it in his mouth. The first one says annoyedly: “It’s unlikely that you would have eaten her if I hadn’t tortured her.”

Short chain of arguments also triggers doubts like “ it's all very simple" Your opponent doesn't want you to think he's that easy to convince. Therefore, he will resist, and this resistance will be rather irrational. In other words, victory should not come too easily...

It’s no coincidence that they say: “If you walk wide, you’ll tear your pants.”

Repeating what was said earlier- another trap. Often we intuitively strive to return to our partner’s previous “agreements” - this will bolster our self-confidence. We often call this method “from the stove.” But this is dangerous because it provokes a loss of attention of the opponent ( “he begins to repeat himself, which means he has exhausted all arguments”).

I explained and explained, and finally I understood, but he still resisted.

Important remember that logical proof method not applicable in the case of an initially negative attitude of the partner, when he does not want to listen. The same applies to the situation of positional bargaining: “ I don't want to take your position into account. It will be our way or not at all. All your arguments are patent nonsense».

And most importantly - bare logical constructions can not affect a person emotionally. The idea of ​​speech and its content reach consciousness through the emotional sphere.

It couldn't work any brighter here. paradox of belief.

In other words, seeing your emotional involvement, your willingness to personally invest in the idea and worry about its success, your partner will be ready to forgive you for logical inconsistencies and half-thought-out risks. There are no ideal schemes or solutions (by the way, this is a truism - everyone will agree with it). Your positive emotionality when defending your idea will be the best argument in favor. Everything else is nothing more than a chain of arguments that will allow your partner to be convinced that his infection with your idea will be positive...

When is the Socratic method applicable?

– When preparing persuasion: analyzing options from the point of view of the partner’s interests, assessing whether he will answer “yes” in response to our: “ Do you agree that...».

– At the stage of presenting positions: the logic of presenting your own position raises the bar high for assessing you as a constructive partner.

– At the stage of summarizing agreements, when it is useful to restore the chain of conclusions and capture a single image of what happened.

It is important:

- use KISS principle(keep it simple and short (stupid)): speak briefly, clearly and simply (add “in an understandable language”);

– in arguments, appeal to values, significant for your opponent criterion that was fixed during the negotiation interaction. Such formulations, as we have already said, are called truisms(from the word truth– truth; a truism is thus a true (for the partner) statement). Truisms actually prevent the situation of refusal, since in this case the opponent will contradict himself;

– describe assumption field– thereby establishing control over uncertainty. At the same time, in the zone of uncertainty, instead of unambiguous formulations, use hypothetical formulas like “may be...”, “probably...”, “capable.”

COMMENT: At trainings on persuasive communication, we often ask participants the following task: at an oriental bazaar, a seller sells souvenir T-shirts. He makes them himself and sells them for 10 tugriks (hereinafter tg). One morning, the very first buyer, having decided to buy a T-shirt, gave the seller a 20 tg banknote. The seller did not have change, so he went to the money changer and received two 10 tg banknotes from him in exchange for this twenty. Having received the goods and change, the buyer, satisfied, left. After some time, a money changer came to the seller and said that the twenty was counterfeit, and therefore he must return two 10 tg banknotes to him. The seller, as an honest person, fulfilled the requirement. In the evening, while counting the proceeds, he came across the ill-fated twenty and thought about his losses. Question: “What did the seller lose?” It is interesting that not a single group ever gave a single answer to this question - we always received from 4 to 8 answer options. When we asked participants to prove (using the Socratic method, of course) their version of the solution, we received completely different models and methods of argumentation. And this clearly demonstrated that to prove does not mean to convince: people could agree with individual arguments, but not with the logic of their relationship; they accepted the whole chain, but said “no” at the last conclusion... The final question we are almost always asked is: which solution is correct? We invariably answer: the one you managed to come to together with your partner

Conclusion: persuasion is an invitation to a partner to jointly develop and follow a path to a given goal in order to find the right one there wording total.

COMMENT: following this “logic”, during the training we successfully convinced the group, in particular, that the seller:

– didn’t lose anything;

– lost 60 tg;

- gained valuable experience for nothing, from which he will later benefit...

Does the above mean that logical constructions are not needed? Not at all. They just need to be served correctly (let’s say “serve” again). This is the next section...

“Other” logic, or Persuasion by contradiction

Below we will present you a sequence of steps that allows you to technologically control persuasion. There are only five of these steps.

1. Removing prejudice + creating motivation for interaction.

2. Declaration of your interest.

3. Throwing in a resource that is significant for the partner.

4. Objection management.

5. Completion of persuasion.

We will not only describe in detail the actions of the negotiator at each step, but also consider the effect of this technology using a film example (the film “Glass of Water”).

Let's describe the situation. XVIII century. England is in a protracted war with France. The monarchs of both states understand the impossibility and destructiveness of continuing the war for both sides. However, the war cabinet is in power in England. The first lady of state, the Duchess of Marlborough, is the wife of the Duke who commands the troops of England in this war. In addition, for the continuation of the war, England’s ally is Austria. There is no question of any open negotiations between the monarchs - the parties are too mired in a long-term confrontation, and the first one to declare the need for negotiations will be considered a loser. Nobody wants to “lose face.” Therefore, we can only talk about informal contacts.

The secret envoy of the French king, the Marquis de Torcy, comes to London on a “private visit”. He brought a letter from his monarch to the Queen of England with a proposal to begin peace negotiations. His old friend and opposition leader, Lord Bolenbrock, undertakes to help him. The lord's task is to organize an invitation to the marquis to the palace. The Duchess’s task is not to give an invitation in order to prevent peace negotiations, to avoid complications with Austria, and most importantly, to adhere to the previous course - the course of war, since its change will mean a change of cabinet. Possessing remarkable political talent, as well as certain powers, the Duchess ensured the departure of the Marquis, who threatened her interests, from the country (he was issued a passport and was obliged to leave London the next day).

At this moment, the leader of the opposition, Lord Bolenbrock, becomes aware that the Duchess is incognito showing interest in a certain young man. On this interest of hers, he begins a game, the price of which is an invitation to the marquis to the palace to receive the queen. How does a visitor achieve the decision he needs? This is what we read about (and for those who wish, we recommend watching the movie “A Glass of Water”).

Duchess: What do you owe to such a rare guest?

Lord: My lady, I have come to express my admiration for your talents.

Duchess: You could add “by my honesty”: I kept my promise, and your dear little Abigail has been regularly spying on me for two weeks now and faithfully serving you. Did you achieve this?

Lord: Is it possible to hide anything from you - you are so insightful.

Duchess: You have a devoted assistant. She even tried to persuade the queen to accept the Marquis de Torcy into the palace.

Lord: Oh, that was my mistake. I apologize to you; of course, I should have turned not to her, but to you. I hasten to correct my mistake and humbly ask you, Duchess, to invite the Marquis de Torcy to the palace this evening.

Duchess: Are you kidding?!

Duchess: Convinced? Has my lord intercepted or bought one of my notes again? Well, on this subject I have some charming letters from your wife, Lady Bolentbroke, to Lord Ashward.

Lord: Keep them, my lady. I don't rule out the possibility that you will need them someday. I don't intend to threaten you today. On the contrary, I came to do you a favor. I want to tell you news that cannot but interest you.

Duchess: Pleasant?

Lord: I'm afraid not. You have a rival, and, it seems to me, a happy one: one high-ranking court lady has designs on Captain Masham. And it looks like she managed to take him away from you.

Duchess: Lies!

Duchess ( freezes): Hm… ( Gets up and walks around the office, thinking.)

Lord: In the end, the Marquis is leaving anyway, the issue of his expulsion has been resolved. He's not dangerous...

Duchess ( after a pause): This is impossible. The Ambassador of Austria will be invited to the reception.

Lord: But, Duchess, this is not an audience, or even an official reception, but just a small evening, at which the Marquis will be present as a completely private person. But... look...

Duchess ( thinks, then makes a decision, approaches the table and, signing the invitation, asks): Who is this lady?..

Let's begin with a description of the proposed technology.

Step 1 (universal). Removing prejudice. Formation of motivation

The point is to make sure that partner wanted to hear what we want to say. That is, here you need to work with the first law of persuasion, using adjustment, self-submission and presenting the topic of discussion in terms keys of motivation.

What's useful:

- “screw in” the intrigue: “ I have an offer that may interest you...»;

– state the purpose of the visit (in essence, this is the formulation of a position): “ I came to discuss an idea that would...».

Result: receive and record the presence of interest.

: We ask you to immediately note that this stage takes the main character most of the negotiation time. We will simply recall the key phrases that work for self-presentation and presentation of the topic (Table 9).

Table 9

Key phrases of persuasion (using the example of a film)

In the next section of the book, we will dwell in detail on how exactly it is worth declaring the purpose of your visit. In the meantime, the next step...

Step 2: Declaring your interest

Your interest is what actions, what decision you expect from your partner following the negotiations. Let us remind you that the ability to calmly express your interest, firstly, increases your credibility, and secondly, works to motivate you to interact. Especially if we have expressed an interest that is real for us and feasible for our partner.

Question: Why wouldn’t a partner want to use this information against us? Because:

– we do not cause negative emotions (we leveled them out in the first step);

– we intrigued the partner by describing the purpose of the visit in terms of benefits and hinting that his interest would also be taken into account;

– we offer something that may be interesting to him...

How it works in our example:

Lord: ...I hasten to correct my mistake and humbly ask you, Duchess, to invite the Marquis de Torcy to the palace this evening.

Duchess: Are you kidding?!

Lord: Not at all. And I am convinced that you will fulfill my request.

Please note that there are no specifics yet in response to the question: “Why do I need this?” But this question is already in the air. The important element here is the opportunity to let the Duchess figure out her opponent’s train of thought. She may be mistaken or guess (and then another compliment), but the main thing is not to interfere... If a discussion has begun on a given topic, it is worth raising the temperature.

What works here is what we call for ourselves “ The principle of the green mausoleum" As an illustration, and also to understand the meaning of the name, here is an anecdote.

There is a congress of people's representatives. At some point, a man approaches the podium, accompanied by armed guards, takes the microphone and says: “So, I have two proposals: 1) shoot the presidium and 2) paint the mausoleum green. Will there be any questions? There were few people willing to speak at gunpoint—one. He timidly raised his hand and asked: “Why green?” To which the speaker replied: “I knew that there would be no objections to the first question...”

SUMMARY If your partner begins to talk about a given topic, it means that negotiations about your interest are still possible...

By the way: This principle is often used during the bargaining stage. Evaluate: “I understand that if I can find an opportunity to provide you with a discount, would you be willing to consider purchasing?”

Step 3. Throwing in a resource that is significant for the partner

I love sardines, but when I go fishing, I bring a worm.

Lord: ...You have a rival, and, it seems to me, a happy one: one high-ranking court lady has designs on Captain Masham. And it looks like she managed to take him away from you.

Here again, a pause is important. Because we need to evaluate whether the resource we have declared is really interesting for the partner. Let him ask you questions, answer them. Questions are a sign of interest. Fuel that interest...

How it works in our example:

Duchess: Is this Lady Eckford? No...Lady Glover! Not true…

Lord: Alas, things have gone so far that she has already made an appointment with him.

Duchess: Lies!

Lord: I know the day, the hour and even the symbol...

Duchess: Can you tell me them?

Lord: Of course. As soon as you sign the Marquise de Torcy's invitation to the palace...

ALL! Position determination is complete. The cards are revealed. Now what do you need? BE SILENT!!!

Polonius (to Hamlet): “Give everyone your hearing, but no one your voice.”

The most important rule at this stage is to wait for objections. The most serious mistake is to start campaigning for your idea and giving reasons for it. Give your partner the opportunity to do it all on their own - don’t rob him of his right to be smart...

Step 4. Objection management

1. Take a break until the partner begins to object. You need this pause to see the reaction. The partner needs this pause to compare how much your request is worth the winnings you offer. He begins to weigh the pros and cons. And him objections are voiced doubts, which he can handle on his own or with your help. Only after hearing objections can you move on. Because only his objections will show you exactly what arguments you need to present - you will avoid unnecessary communication.

2. If the pause is too long - provoke feedback, for example, like this: voice a view of your proposal from the position of the other side. Reveal your partner's internal train of thought, but on the condition that the final decision is still positive.

The principle of operation of this technique(also called the two-way argumentation technique):

– having joined the position of the other side, make some exaggerated attack on your own position. Moreover, the wording can be harsh, partly even uncomfortable (decent people don’t talk about it out loud like that). This causes the other party to experience some embarrassment and internally reject such thoughts;

In effect, you are using a "shifter". The speech formula is as follows(in relation to our example): “ I understand you. If they came to me with such a proposal, I would think that they were offering me to nullify all my efforts. But then I would think that...(further read the arguments given by the hero in our example).”

Distinctive features of this technique:

It is most effective in a group work situation, when one of the participants acts as a translator or mediator;

It is very important to start influencing at the moment when the other party is in a decision-making situation. She hesitates and it's important carefully push to the right choice;

This technique is applicable only to highly intelligent partners.

3. And finally, only after hearing the objections, present your counterarguments. We described speech formulas earlier, but now we’ll just see once again how to how it works in our example.

The hero provides the female duchess with arguments in a dispute with the duchess, a government official. He does not convince her, but helps her overcome internal differences, providing arguments in defense of the beneficial to him solutions, while simultaneously calming the Duchess’s internal “opponent”.

Firstly, he minimizes the risks: the issue of deportation has already been resolved, the Marquis is not dangerous (note that the heroine is ready to believe this simply because she wants it).

Secondly, he offers ready-made formulas for presentation, justifying this decision to third parties (the Ambassador of Austria, for example):

– this is not an audience or an official reception;

– the marquis will be present as a completely private person...

Ah, it’s not difficult to deceive me - I’m glad to be deceived myself!

Step 5: Completing the Persuasion

The last - and not at all unimportant - point in persuasion is to leave the decision to the opponent. This is very important: if you overdo it with argumentation, overwhelm it, and the responsibility for the decision made will be shifted to the one who convinces. This means that we risk overpaying for what our opponent said “I agree.”

How it works in our example.

The hero finally says the phrase: “ However, decide for yourself..." He leaves the Duchess alone with his dragons. And in the end he gets his way...

In a situation of working with the needs of another person, it is very important to leave him with the feeling that he made the decision on his own. If you have identified a person’s needs correctly, then he will still pass through a certain corridor.

You ask, “What if we don’t have enough information?” We will answer: “Get it.” You ask: “How?” We will answer: during negotiations and within near negotiation communication. We certainly cannot do this for you. But we can offer a way to analyze this information in order to clearly know what interest to show and what resource that is significant for the opponent to “throw in”, using persuasion by contradiction. More on this in the following sections...

How to analyze information about a partner to prepare persuasion

Below we will propose a sequence of steps that can be used for a preliminary analysis of the information available about a partner and the subsequent formulation of your position and speech formulas of argumentation.

Step 1. Analyze your opponent's strengths and weaknesses

To implement this step, the logic of SWOT analysis is often used. Let us recall that SWOT analysis allows you to assess opportunities, advantages, weaknesses and threats (Table 10).

Table 10

SWOT analysis

First remark

It is important that factors that are truly significant for the partner’s activities appear in the threat and opportunity cells. And the wording of these points should reveal why this is a threat or an opportunity.

Example: increasingly, SWOT analysis takes into account such a factor as Russia’s accession to the WTO. The question is, where should this factor be attributed? And here people begin to argue: this is a threat, no, this is an opportunity... In this regard, a well-known joke comes to mind.

- Petka, devices!

- Fourty…

- What's forty?

- What about the devices?

What, exactly, is “Russia’s accession to the WTO”? This formulation describes the influence factor. But the result of this influence can be completely different. Therefore, there is no need to argue, but we need to be more specific, For example, So.

Threat: in connection with accession to the WTO, it is possible that Western players with more advanced and proven technologies that meet the specified quality standards will enter the Russian market...

Opportunity: in connection with accession to the WTO, procedures for exporting company products (services, technologies) to the Western market will be simplified.

Second remark

It is important that in the cells of advantages and weaknesses appear those characteristics and resources of the partner that are actually related to the listed opportunities and threats. This approach allows you to record only what is necessary and important. In addition, it is useful to ask yourself the question: “ Is this characteristic really an advantage or a weakness?»

Example: in the process of forming a SWOT matrix in working with a trading and manufacturing company, the main advantage was stated: “We have a strong brand locomotive.” A reasonable question will arise: “What, your competitors don’t have strong brands?” “Yes,” they answer us. “Then what is the advantage?” - we ask... There was no answer...

Remark three

After the initial compilation of the SWOT matrix, it is important to check each point for accuracy. If you can confirm this or that wording with a link to a reliable source, this item can be called fact. If not, consider this point as speculation.

Speculation is dangerous because you cannot rely on it for persuasion: your partner can always say: “Not a fact” - and he will be right... But speculation is useful if you can create an agenda from it “ businesslike" And " pre-negotiation» communication. These are the topics you need to talk about! These are the questions to ask!! This is the kind of information that needs to be recorded (using, for example, the “It’s important to you” technique and the “Green Mausoleum Principle”)!!!

In accordance with the results of such a check, you will have two SWOT matrices: factual and hypothetical.

In the process of negotiation consulting, we create one matrix, but we use a colored marker to highlight the facts. The more volume of the matrix is ​​shaded, the more justified your belief may be. We recommend…

Step 2. Review your own strengths and weaknesses

Of course, we can go the same way as in the first step, but what will that give us? It is more useful (and more economical in terms of time resources) to take as a basis points related to the opponent’s capabilities and threats. Because only in relation to them is it worth measuring your own strengths and weaknesses. Everything else in this particular situation of persuasion lies outside the needs of the partner...

If at a certain moment you understand that these opportunities and threats are in no way related to your area of ​​interest and cannot be influenced by your resources, this will mean that there is no subject of conviction (alas...).

If the situation is the opposite, i.e. you can clearly assess your resources in terms of taking advantage of opportunities and countering the threats of your opponent, then the next step becomes logical for you, namely...

Step 3. Formation of the semantic field of belief

The task of this stage is to compare your strengths and weaknesses with those of your partner. And distribute them in the matrix of the “Semantic Field of Persuasion” (Table 11). To make it easier to fill out the “field,” we recommend assigning a serial number to each statement of advantage or weakness. And distribute these numbers into four semantic “zones”.

Table 11

Matrix “Semantic field of belief”

During the analysis of the semantic field, we gain an understanding of WHAT EXACTLY should be offered to the partner as a topic of persuasion.

To answer this question, let’s take a closer look at each of the zones.

A. Area of ​​General Weakness

Risks in zone A

(to the question of “gravediggers” of motivation)

In this zone, it is not recommended to talk about risks and disadvantages directly - this can be perceived as emotional blackmail and cause an aggressive reaction. Suggestions must be implied and stated in a positive manner.

So, the risks.

1. Point out your partner’s shortcomings.

Tell him what she does in his absence: they will still make up, but you will never set foot in this house.

((according to M.M. Zhvanetsky))

2. Admit your own weaknesses without securing a guarantee of a positive attitude from your partner.

3. Be late in proposing a solution to the problem.

4. To be used for a partner’s temporary expansion of his own resource: we will cease to be needed as soon as, with our help, the partner overcomes his limitations.

As an illustration of project commitments in Zone A:

A turtle is swimming along the river, and a snake is curled up on it. “If I bite, it will throw me off,” the snake thinks. “If I throw it away, it will bite,” the turtle thinks.

B. Zone of joint advantage

Risks in zone B

1. Enter competition mode and start measuring your strength.

2. Show yourself as a less resourceful partner.

Remember: They don’t negotiate with the weak, they dictate terms to him.

3. Offer an analogue of an existing resource.

4. Propose high-risk projects that could negatively affect the partner’s leadership positions or image.

B. Partner's advantage zone

Risks in zone B

1. Acquire the image of a complainer and a beggar.

2. Stay with your problems.

D. Our advantage area

But there is more

risks in zone G

1. To be caught in “weakness” and “pressure for pity.”

Please give me something to drink, otherwise I’m so hungry that I have nowhere to sleep.

2. Point out your partner’s weaknesses > be a messenger of threats > cause defensive aggression.

Children play after the New Year. Masha: “Grandfather Frost gave me a doll and a dollhouse...” Petya: “And for me, a remote-controlled car...” Pavlik: “And for me, an electric railway and a construction set.” Vanya: “And to me... And I... I’ll give it to you all now!”

The “Clean Slate” situation

Let's look at an example of options for determining the topics of negotiations based on the information available about the partner. We will describe the situation schematically, in “large strokes.” But, in our opinion, this example well illustrates the rules for defining and formalizing the goals and topics of negotiations for the purpose of persuasion.

Background

Partner A. The conditional name is “Holding”: a 100% subsidiary of a large Russian Monopolist (a company with the majority of state capital). It is characterized by a forceful model of behavior in the market, a strict dictate of conditions.

General Director of the Holding – Petr Sergeevich, 62 years old. In "Holding" it is more likely to "reign, but not to rule." All operational management, including negotiations with partners, is the responsibility of the commercial director of the Holding, Igor. Commercial director, 42 years old, in this position for 6 years. Active career goals, a high degree of trust on the part of the general director (always remains in an acting capacity during periods of departure of the chief). Often visits Moscow, traveling business class. He has several expensive cars at his personal disposal, although he demonstratively drives a company Volga to work. A classic workaholic (management meetings started at 7:30 a.m. every Tuesday). He likes to leave work late, but insists that all key employees be with him at this time. He has two higher educations and is studying in the MBA program. The high level of personal wealth is not advertised anywhere. Reasonably public, paying attention to thoughtful PR: in all speeches he is emphatically loyal to management and expresses support for the administration. Welcomes innovation: several significant innovations were made in the economic system of the enterprise under his leadership.

At the moment, an order has been signed to transfer the general director to Moscow. There is a high probability that the commercial director of the Holding will take his place.

Partner V. A large financial and industrial group (FIG) engaged in the acquisition of diversified assets in the regions. He has significant authority and lobbying leverage at the republican level. Its power is not comparable to the scale of the Russian Monopolist (whose subsidiary is Partner A), but it has sufficient weight in the Holding’s region of operation. In this region, the financial industrial group acquired an asset - the Remstroy plant.

In the past, Remstroy was a structural division of the Holding, engaged in the production of pipes and repair work on its networks. Several years ago, this structural division was separated into a business unit and sold to a certain regional business structure. At the same time, management remained the same, since up to 87% of the plant’s work is focused on the needs of the Holding. The new owner failed to diversify production, and he was forced to constantly “beg” budgets and face the problem of accumulated debt on the part of the “Holding”. At the time of the acquisition of the plant by the FIG group, the amount of debt was more than $10 million.

Problem situation

Considering the current situation, FIG purchased the plant at a fairly reasonable price, i.e. the deal is already profitable for them. However, if it is possible to “expand” existing debts, then the deal will turn out to be extremely profitable. At the same time, it is clear that the future activities of this enterprise will largely be determined by the nature of the relationship with the Holding. The amount of debt is such that it is inappropriate to resolve it through negotiations between the management of Monopolist and the financial and industrial group. The situation must be resolved at the regional level.

To the region as acting A representative of the financial and industrial group is sent to the General Director of Remstroy. The goal is to monitor opportunities to resolve the debt issue.

Considering the nature of the interaction between Holding and Remstroy, as well as the ratio of the weights of Monopolist and financial industrial groups, consent to the meeting will be given, but interest will be cautious, perhaps skeptical.

Let's analyze the available information (Table 12).

Table 12

Analysis of the situation

Negotiation objectives

1. Establish contact: “ Even if we don't agree on anything, we will know each other».

2. Demonstration of readiness to explore development opportunities for this asset: “ I have been sent to the region to decide how the financial industrial group should deal with this asset correctly. Naturally, such a definition also depends on your position, which I would like to familiarize myself with».

3. Receive from your partner an assessment of the experience of working with Remstroy: “ Can we first hear your opinion about the work of Remstroi from the moment it ceased to be a structural division of the Holding?» As a result, if possible, involve your partner in a joint study (discussion) of options for developing the situation:

– in case of a positive assessment and identification of cooperation opportunities – “ i.e. you would be happy for the plant to operate at least as before» – raise the issue of debt in the context of maintaining a positive tone in the work of the plant;

– in case of a negative assessment – ​​“ i.e. you would be interested in exploring possibilities for improving the current state of affairs» – raise the issue of debt in the context of possible solutions to problems.

4. Hidden, indirect presentation of the capabilities of the financial industrial group and its representative for the promising interests of the commercial director: “ I must say that interest in this issue was expressed at a meeting of directors of financial industrial groups, so I was sent here with fairly broad powers that are not limited to the activities of Remstroi.».

SUMMARY Having analyzed the available information and collected the missing information, we can obtain the semantic field of belief and understand how it will need to be presented (read “sold”). We'll talk about this later, but for now...

Additional material. Working with information

We receive 99% of information for free, it is “blurred” in the world around us, it is a kind of air of communication. Sometimes the ideas, arguments, and informational prerequisites for belief that we need are simply “hanging in the air,” sometimes they are given by other people. Sometimes we have to make a conscious effort to gather the information we need.

Reliable information – in negotiations, in persuasive communication – is a universal tool and a universal product. This is an important foundation, a springboard for entering “the territory of another person’s consciousness.”

Effects of information:

1. Information is one of the main resources, comparable to the resources of power and money.

2. Information is useless without the ability to structure and apply it.

3. Information to enter a person’s consciousness must comply with the previously mentioned rule of an empty vessel: “ Before filling the vessel, make sure it is empty».

4. The value of information is realized after you could have received it.

5. The information you have is not what you want.

6. The information you would like to receive is not what you actually need.

7. The information you really need is not available to you.

8. The information that is generally available to you is worth more than you can pay for it.

9. Information is obtained more easily the less interest you show outwardly.

How to accumulate valuable information?

With the correct organization of dialogue, any contact will work for you, since it allows accumulate valuable information. Information is never superfluous, it may not be relevant, but, as they say, time will tell. To accumulate information, proceed as follows:

Suggest a topic of conversation based on the partner’s interest;

Encourage and encourage the expression of ideas;

Manage the conversation, directing it in the right direction with the help of clarifying questions;

Emotionally empathize with the speaker’s story;

Avoid value judgments;

Do not rush to express your opinion;

Tell purely personal details about yourself in anticipation of trust and disclosure on the part of the interlocutor;

Be willing to talk about your own problems and be open to receiving advice;

Be able to convey to others your enthusiasm for the opportunity to solve a problem;

Be able to force a person to defend their position without conflict, while usually in the heat of the moment people give up much more information;

If possible, compare a person’s statement with a thought he expressed earlier;

Ask for commentary on significant facts, citing the authority of the interlocutor;

Be able to sometimes stun a person - in this case you can get quite unexpected reactions and information;

Create the impression that you know much more than the interlocutor, then he himself will tell everything he knows; this is the other side of the work of psychological defense, a person thus, demonstrating his competence, tries to protect self-esteem in contact;

Delve into the real meaning of emotional words and expressions, and not into the design features; Here, the skill of summarizing the interlocutor’s statements and translating them into a rational plan is very important.

What communication effects should be taken into account:

The meaning of phrases composed of more than 13 words (according to other sources, 7 words) can be greatly distorted by the consciousness of the perceiver;

Speech can only be understood at a speed not exceeding 2.5 words per second; the person who perceives is in a slower time flow in relation to the speaker - he still has to work with understanding the meaning of the statement;

A phrase longer than 5–6 seconds, pronounced without pauses, ceases to be conscious;

On average, a person listens to others attentively for 10–15 seconds, and then begins to think about what he could add to the subject of conversation;

The effect of a broken gestalt: actions interrupted for one reason or another are remembered twice as well as completed ones;

Too much information presented confuses the interlocutor’s perception; after the second comma in the spoken sentence, he begins to lose its meaning;

With an impulsive emotional response, no more than a third of the perceived information is usually understood, since the stress that arises prepares the body for an active response (by releasing adrenaline into the blood, activating breathing and pulse, using reserves of sugar and fat...), blocking “unnecessary” brain work.

Morals, logical argumentation

Look at it differently.

You have been entrusted with this, which means it is your problem.

At your age I didn’t have anything like this.

Clarification, interrogation

Who gave you the idea?

What will you do next time?

Why did you do this?

Avoiding a problem, distracting attention, making a joke

Why don't you get it out of your head?

Let's talk about something else

What if every time something doesn’t work out, you quit doing it?

Warning, threat, promise

It happens again and it’s all over with you.

Calm down, and I will be happy to listen to you.

You will regret it if you do this.

All this, as well as refusal in an aggressive form, creates barriers to communication. People react to these and other forms of difficult communication very emotionally, and the emotions are negative.

Now we suggest performing the following exercise /35/. After getting acquainted with the situation, you will need to write down on pieces of paper or in notebooks the first phrases that come to mind that you could utter in this situation.

So, your good friend lost her job a long time ago, and her family doesn’t have enough money. And in the organization where you work, a suitable vacancy has appeared. You talked with your boss and recommended your friend as a conscientious, efficient woman. The boss invited you for an interview at 12 o'clock.

At 12 o'clock the girlfriend was not at the door of the boss's office. She didn't even arrive at 15 minutes past midnight. At half past twelve a friend appears and you tell her...

Now put down your notes. Now we will offer a speech that would be effective (competent) in this situation. To do this, let's name in the first person the feelings that the heroine might experience in such a situation, simply list them in order, and then express her alleged desires.

“Yesterday we agreed to meet with you at 12 o’clock. Now my watch shows half past twelve. Having agreed on this job for you, I was very glad and I 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 that some kind of misfortune had happened. Now the only thing is I feel tired and I’m very worried about what my boss will think of me in connection with this recommendation of mine. That's why I would like to“So that you yourself explain to your boss the reason for your lateness, and if he still hires you, from now on you will be very punctual at our work.”

This first-person text simply names feelings and communicates desires, but all this using the pronoun “I” and openly.

Now review your answers to understand how many barriers there were and what kind. We will also trace how many open expressions of feelings and desires there were.

The question arises as to why barriers come to mind first, even though feelings are easier to understand when they are expressed in an overt rather than hidden form.

In this situation, barriers such as questions, orders and generalizations are most often used. What kind of response will we get? The first response to questions for any person is detailed answers and explanations (“at first I was carried there, then there, etc.), the first response to orders is resistance (who are you to order me? ), the first response to generalizations is protest and proof of the opposite (aren’t you ever late? “Yes, this is the first time this happened to me”).

What do they usually hear in response to questions, orders and generalizations (not to mention insults)? They hear something like this: “I wasn’t getting anywhere. There was just no transport for a long time. And in general, I’m almost never late. It’s your own fault - you should have negotiated more accurately. And if you scream, I’ll leave altogether.” What is the result? The relationship will inevitably deteriorate, the mood will be completely ruined - for both of them.

Just like an aggressive hidden expression of feelings, also belittling one’s feelings, refusal to solve a problem (“Well, okay, okay, nothing, nothing, let’s go quickly, we’re already late...) is not socially competent behavior. Such refusal does not lead to to eliminate negative feelings towards the partner. Even if everything is resolved successfully for the boss, the unpleasant feelings will still remain in the soul and 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 for ourselves, our feelings and desires to be understood and reflected, so that we finally hear: “I’m late and I understand your irritation very well. Now I’ll try everything myself settle." And this is much easier to achieve if you talk about feelings and desires directly and openly.

People quite rarely purposefully use communication barriers in order to hinder mutual understanding and stop communication. More often they do this involuntarily and unconsciously. At the same time, they think that the partner understands perfectly what is at stake. They say to themselves: “It’s already clear.” 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 incorrect. Misunderstanding of “simple words” is very annoying, forcing you to use more and more strong expressions, speak louder and louder, get angry and fume. If this process increases on both sides, then one should not expect accurate communication.

What to do when communication barriers prevent you from achieving clarity in communication and destroy relationships? There is always a way out, and even several ways out of the situation.

First of all, you need to learn to monitor the appeal to barriers that disrupt interpersonal communication in your speech behavior. Having learned to notice your own readiness to resort to barriers, develop the skill of prohibiting 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 you can ignore interfering behavior, as if jumping over a barrier, you can prohibit it (the most ineffective form of behavior in this series), you can destroy it.

Ignoring The barrier that arises is allowing the partner to become angry, express themselves inaccurately, and use barriers. It is important for yourself to remain calm and speak to him in a friendly and calm manner, in a confident manner. It is necessary to ignore unflattering remarks and behave as correctly and with restraint as possible.

It is very important to try not to reject what the interlocutor says, to create in him a feeling of understanding and cooperation. We must start with agreement - “yes”, “agree”, “true”, “correct”.

Of course, it can be difficult to remain calm, especially when you hear offensive and clearly untrue assessments. But even in this case, there is always the opportunity to agree with what we can agree with, to emphasize what leads to mutual understanding, to note the points at which our opinions coincide with our partner.

Trying to stay “above the barriers,” one should not, of course, refuse to express one’s own opinion and attitude to the problem (otherwise this would be very reminiscent of 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 gain his attention.

Agreement on what can be agreed upon allows you to win your partner’s attention and provide access to his attention “above barriers.”

For example, /35/, after her daughter’s noisy birthday party, when there were mountains of dirty dishes, dirt on the floor, the smell of tobacco smoke, the mother was irritated and said: “Does the godfather need these noisy celebrations? Was it really impossible to invite a couple of your closest friends, or even better - I would make a friend for myself. After all, I’m 25 years old, and you only have these fools as girlfriends. So, take it all yourself and mine after your friends.

Barrier On top of barriers I invite whoever I want. 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 had accumulated. But we had a lot of fun and I'm very pleased with the evening. If we work together in unison, we will quickly cope with all this.

Mother: And the girls are all already married. You're the only one who's bothering me. Look how much money they wasted on food and drink. It would be better if they bought you a new dress. Otherwise you walk around like a ragamuffin.

BarrierAbove barriersMy money - I buy what I want. And in general - leave me alone. So you're trying to ruin my holiday. Go away, don’t stand in front of your soul! Yes, a lot of money was spent. But I didn’t want to skimp on my anniversary. The main thing is that everything turned out so well.

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 very strong emotional arousal

Ignoring barriers, although it does not lead to an increase in tension, does not reduce the partner’s willingness 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 gain direct access to it by breaking the barrier.

You can think about the benefits of using the pronoun “I” and say something like this:

To me Your reproaches on my birthday are unpleasant.

I I don’t want to argue with you now, and it would be more pleasant for me to talk in a calmer manner.

I I consider myself an adult and I want to be spoken to with great respect.

In this case, there will be a greater chance of 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. The most effective means of breaking down barriers is reflecting your partner's feelings. Let's take the same example and see how it works:

The mother, in irritation, says: “Does your godfather need these noisy celebrations? Couldn’t you have invited a couple of your closest friends, or even better, made a friend for yourself. After all, it’s 25 years old, and you only have these fools as girlfriends. Take it all.” myself and mine after my friends.

Over the barriers Break the barrier Yes, indeed, there were a lot of people, and a lot of dishes had accumulated. But we had a lot of fun and I'm very pleased with the evening. If we work together together, we will quickly cope with all this. I see, mom, that you are very tired and want to rest. I understand that you wish me happiness. The more I visit different companies, the easier it will be for me to find a real person. But in order for people to invite me to their place, I have to organize parties myself. If you're very tired, I can handle the dishes myself.

Mother: And the girls are all already married. You're the only one who's bothering me. Why are their family gatherings necessary? Look how much money they wasted on food and drink. It would be better if they bought you a new dress. Otherwise you walk around like a ragamuffin.

Over the barriersBreak the barrierYes, a lot of money was spent. But I didn’t want to skimp on my anniversary. The main thing is that everything turned out so well. That is, mom, do you think that the choice of guests was unsuccessful? But I wanted to celebrate my birthday with people I liked. There is no particular need to specifically say that breaking down barriers requires more effort than ignoring them. But the benefits that come from breaking down barriers in interpersonal relationships easily compensate for all the mental costs. As the relationship strengthens, you will have to spend less and less effort and energy on this.

In order to understand in what situations barriers can be tolerated, ignored and destroyed, V.G. Romek introduces two criteria. Firstly, in what area does the problem lie (outside the sphere of your relationship with your partner or concerns your relationship), secondly, whose problem is more significant, yours or your partner

The problem that concerns you is much more significant than the problem of your partner. The problem of your partner is greater than your own. The problem lies outside the scope of your relationship. with a partner3) you can limit yourself to ignoring barriers and openly expressing your feelings and desires4) It is necessary to break down barriers by reflecting your partner’s feelings and retelling his problems

Real communication looks like this:

Quadrant 1: Your own non-relationship problem

At work, you are unfairly 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: Partner's non-relationship problem

Your partner at work is unfairly criticized by your boss. He comes to you and attacks you with reproaches and accusations. You try to find out what brought your partner into such a state, and, if the problem lies outside the sphere of relationships, you help him find a way out of the difficult situation.

Quadrant 3: your own problem in the area of ​​relationships with your partner:

In the presence of other people, your partner often begins to be sarcastic and make fun of you, which really hurts you. When you are alone, you tell your partner about this several times, not paying attention to his jabs and ridicule.

Square 4: your partner has a problem in the area of ​​your relationship:

Your partner is upset with you for your behavior. You communicate that you understand his feelings and are ready to improve the relationship and help him.

If you have managed to familiarize yourself with this site, then you probably know that the main secret of building a large Internet business is TEXT. And not just text, but SELLING TEXT.

The text on the website should play the role of a good sales manager:

• answer ALL visitor questions
• focus on the strengths of the product (service)
• argue for the benefits that the client receives from working with you
• convince and stimulate to take the action that you need

To create an effective sales text, it is not enough just to write competently and beautifully. You need to write CONVINCINGLY.

The question of how to persuade correctly did not arise today. The first fundamental study on the art of persuasion appeared about 2500 years ago in the 4th century BC and belongs to Aristotle. Ancient Greece showed the world a galaxy of brilliant speakers. Judicial and political speeches were considered the highest form of oratory. Aristotle proposed a simple but effective formula that helped speakers achieve their main goal - to persuade their audience. This is what she looked like →

1. Exordium (intro) . Start with an intriguing statement that will grab the attention of your target audience.

1. Narratio (presentation). Voice a problem that readers have and that your product can solve.

1. Confirmatio (statement). Promise a solution, backing your promise with compelling evidence.

1. Peroratio (conclusion). State the benefits that a person who takes advantage of your offer will receive and call to action.

If you look closely, Aristotle’s formula is not too different from the classic AIDA advertising formula →

Aintention -Iinterested -Desire -Action

or as it will be in Russian →

Attention – Interest – Desire – Action

When writing, you can use any examples of selling texts from the above, but the closest to me is the equation proposed by the legendary American copywriter Gary Bencivenga. Here it is →

Problem + Promise + Arguments + Solution = Persuasion

Anyone can write a sales text using this equation. Anyway, try. Experience will come with time. To make it easier for you to create your own example of a selling text, I will share some subtleties.

Problem

To attract the reader's attention, it is necessary to carefully consider the TITLE and the entry into the text. The abundance of information and lack of time makes a person very selective. He will not waste time reading a text that did not interest him from the first sentence.

A good headline contains:

• intrigue
• target audience boundaries
• benefit

For clarity, here is an example of a sales text title:

How to improve your efficiency with FOREX by 256%?

A headline containing a question is already intriguing, the mention of the FOREX market highlights the target audience, the promise of a 256% increase in profits is a profitable component.

This should be followed by a powerful introduction to the text. This can be one sentence or several paragraphs. Doesn't matter. The main thing at this stage is to capture the attention of the reader, who is already interested in the title and begins to read the text. Typically, this part identifies a problem that the customer has that your product can solve.

It has long been established that pain and pleasure, carrots and sticks, best motivate action. Pain motivates much more strongly, but in a selling text it is important not to scare the reader, but to detail the problem and paint a picture of a happy outcome. It is necessary to speak with the reader in the same language and in such a way that in your narrative he mentally recognizes himself and agrees with you.

Promise

Once the reader has agreed that there is a problem, promise him a solution. Moreover, the key word in this section is not PROMISE, but SOLUTION. Show that the problem is temporary, that similar situations happen to many people, give examples of successful overcoming difficulties, etc.

In this part you can provide reviews from those who have already used the product and received the promised effect. The main thing is that the reviews are truthful and specific, and not enthusiastic about anything.

Proof

Having infected the reader with a picture of a happy future, proceed to the evidence. It is important to avoid idle talk here. Words just don't mean anything for a long time. There are many ways and examples to increase the persuasiveness of selling texts. Here are just a few of them:

• Figures and facts . Numbers convey specific information. Avoid the phrases “many years of experience”, “rich product range”, “cheap service”. By constructing a phrase in this way: “14 years of work in the market”, “the company’s range includes more than 1,500 units of products”, “monthly subscription service will cost only 800 rubles” you do not leave the slightest chance for doubt.
• Calculations . Do not limit yourself to indicating the size of the discount as a percentage; immediately indicate the amount of savings.
• Opinion of experts, professionals. The first example that comes to mind is an advertisement for toothpaste with recommendations from famous dentists.
• Listing of merits, achievements and awards.
• List of famous clients who used the product.
• Quality guarantees, money back etc.
• Bonuses and free apps (consultation, gift, warranty service).

Solution

No matter how good your product is, it costs money that the client will have to part with. He has already appreciated the benefits of your proposal, since he did not stop reading until this moment. All that remains is to sell him the PRICE of the goods. Not to name, but to sell.

Each seller wants to sell a product at a higher price, and the buyer wants to buy it at a lower price. The selling text is deprived of the possibility of “live bargaining”, however, there are a number of effective tactics that help sell the price:

• Price splitting (indicate not the total amount of overpayment on the loan for the year - 3650 rubles, but the amount of daily payment - only 10 rubles per day)
• Price comparison (show me what you can buy for the same money)
• Old and new price (indicate the regular price, and offer a new one next to it)
• Breaking down the price into components (when selling a furniture set, indicate the price of each table-chair, and not the set as a whole)
• Offering multiple product versions according to the principle, the cooler, the more expensive, etc.

Finally, encourage the reader to take action. A high-quality kick is ensured by the following techniques:

• limited quantity of goods
• short duration of the offer
• price increase in the near future
• possibility of pre-order at the best price

And also, use verbs in the imperative mood: Buy! Book now! Order!

P.S. High-quality examples of selling texts are presented on the website in the “Latest Works” section. Read. GO FOR IT!