Learn the One Argument People Find Most Persuasive

What argument or viewpoint do people find most persuasive?

Go ahead and think about it for a moment.

Ready for the answer?

In any discussion, negotiation, or conflict, the argument that people find most persuasive is…

(drum roll…)

Their own.

Sooner or later, we all find ourselves in the position of wanting to persuade someone about something, and if you want to get better at it you need to understand this principle and learn to work with it.

The Preference for Consistency

In my first blog post I discussed Cialdini’s principles of persuasion. Today we’re going to focus on one of Cialdini’s seven principles, the principle of consistency, which holds that most people generally prefer to be consistent with their viewpoints and beliefs. Tapping into this preference, which Cialdini calls the preference for consistency, is an effective method of persuasion.

There’s a reason that people have this preference for consistency, and it can be found in the history of psychology. In a 1956 book titled When Prophecy Fails, social psychologist Leon Festinger and his colleagues described how a doomsday cult’s end-of-times prediction ended up being wrong, but instead of revising their beliefs, the members just clung to their beliefs even more. This led Festinger to come up with the concept of cognitive dissonance, or the discomfort that comes from one of two situations: (A) when reality or information conflicts with one’s beliefs and opinions, or (B) when one’s own actions conflict with one’s beliefs and opinions. In the case of situation A, people reduce cognitive dissonance by filtering out conflicting info. In the case of situation B, they reduce cognitive dissonance by trying to make their actions conform to their beliefs and opinions.

Active Listening is the Key

The reason you need to understand this is so you can persuade people using the very thing that makes it hard to persuade them. How? By using active listening to figure out what their deepest viewpoints, beliefs, and opinions are.

Most of the time, when people are trying to persuade someone, they’re focused on pushing forth their own viewpoint. Instead of listening, they’re busy thinking about what they’re going to say. This is understandable, but the mantra for effective communication from my last post is: "Don’t say or do what you feel like saying or doing. Say or do what’s effective."

Endlessly repeating your own beliefs and opinions is what you will feel like doing. Don’t do it. It’s not effective. What’s effective is asking questions and listening— really listening—to their answers.

The Wisdom of Pascal

Once you feel like you understand the other person’s viewpoint, beliefs, or values, acknowledge whatever merit you can find in what they’re saying. If they say something that may be factually inaccurate but not necessarily consequential, do not dwell there. Instead, focus on what it is about their viewpoint that may be valid or understandable. Don’t just blandly say it either. Explain why you think their viewpoint has merit to demonstrate your apparent sincerity.

Next, try to enact one of two following scenarios: (1) if it’s possible, show people that their viewpoint is essentially the same as your viewpoint, or (2) present the issue in a way that shows them that they’d actually be compromising their deepest beliefs or values if they don’t change their mind on the issue.

Both scenarios require explaining so I’ll provide examples. For the first scenario, imagine you’re a car salesperson. After asking questions and actively listening to a customer, let’s say you’ve been able to identify that the single most important feature to them is safety. You also know that your cars are highly rated for safety. This is the easiest kind of situation. You simply agree with the customer’s wisdom in prioritizing safety, and you show them exactly why your car is the perfect choice for this reason. In other words, you can directly point out how their viewpoint is your viewpoint.

The second scenario is more complex. Let’s say you’ve listened to the customer and have addressed their concerns, but for whatever reason they still don’t want to buy your car today. Maybe, before coming onto your lot, they decided in advance that they were only going to look and not buy anything. Since they already committed to that decision, the act of buying your car today would be inconsistent with their previous commitment and it would cause cognitive dissonance. Hence, the challenge is to show them how not buying your car today would actually be even more inconsistent in a bigger way.

This can be a difficult idea to understand so I’ll explain by example. For instance, you could say, “Would you share with me all of your remaining reservations?” They might then talk about the price, the safety features, fuel efficiency, and whatever else. Even if you’ve already addressed those concerns, do it again in a way that shows that buying the car is the most consistent thing to do. You go down the list, one by one, and explain how your car excels in all of those areas (as long as that’s the truth). You then say, “You have these three very legitimate concerns, and it looks like this car’s an ideal solution for all of them.”

Persuasion Essential Reads

How to Talk So That People Want to Listen

Sensory Primes for Sustainable Eating

What this does is show the customer that for their own reasons, which they themselves stated, if they do not buy the car, they’re being inconsistent. Sure, buying the car would be inconsistent with their earlier decision not to buy, but not buying the car would be inconsistent with their values. That’s a deeper, more serious kind of inconsistency. But instead of being pushy, simply explain how the car is consistent with their values and give the customer a chance to arrive at this realization themselves. This makes changing their minds feel less threatening because it feels like they reached this new conclusion “on their own.” As the French philosopher Blaise Pascal wrote in Pensées, “People are generally better persuaded by the reasons which they have themselves discovered than by those which have come into the mind of others.”

In other words, you are using your framing power to reframe the discussion in a more persuasive way.

Now, notice I didn’t say that this is a way to persuade everyone about everything every single time. (Remember, you can’t win all your battles so be gracious in defeat.) If such a perfect method of persuasion even existed, I don’t see how it could be ethical. For example, if the customer stated that safety was the most important feature to them, and you know that your car is strong in the power department but weak in the safety department, even if you could persuade the customer to buy the car anyway, that wouldn’t be ethical. Be willing to sometimes lose the sale, the negotiation, or the argument. The principles that I write about in this blog work, but they are meant to work when ethics are on your side. Because the problem isn’t that dishonest people aren’t persuasive enough. The problem is that too many honest people aren’t persuasive enough. So, keep being honest. Just be more persuasive.

Craig Barkacs, professor of business law and ethics in the Master’s in Executive Leadership and MBA Programs at the University of San Diego School of Business.