Persuasion Scripts Blog

Burger King is running a funny and successful new ad campaign, the Whopper freakout. You’ve probably seen the ads on TV. They show real-life customers at a Burger King restaurant being told that Whopper’s are no longer on the menu. What follows is a classic rendition of Reactance. The customers react with shock and outrage that is clearly unfaked. These folks are really disappointed. They want their Whopper and they can’t believe it’s been taken away from them.

In other words, they show the reactance response. Whenever people perceive an unfair restriction on their choice and action, they react (hence the name) with umbrage. The persuasion news in this obvious element of human nature is that you can use this natural response to your own devices or in our case, your own persuasion script.

Burger King capitalized on this fact of persuasion to create a clever, attention getting ad campaign that appears to work. Morningstar noted,

Unlike archrival McDonald’s Corp. (MCD), which last week said its U.S. comparable sales were flat in December, Burger King reported Thursday that sales in the U.S. and Canada rose 4.2% last month. January’s performance remains on that track. “We have not and are not seeing a slowdown,” Chief Executive

John Chidsey said on a conference call, after the world’s second-largest hamburger chain reported fiscal second-quarter earnings that beat Wall Street expectations. Shares of Burger King were trading recently up $1.39, or 5.8%, to $25.55 at about three times the normal volume.

Sales got a boost from promotion of the 50th anniversary of its flagship Whopper sandwich. Its comparable sales were up double-digit, in part, the company said, because of what it labeled its “freakout” TV commercial showing customers’ shocked responses when told the Burger King they were visiting wasn’t selling Whoppers any longer. (One restaurant actually did that temporarily while hidden cameras recorded reactions.)

That last parenthetical comment illustrates the persuasion scriptyness of the Burger King effort. They knew they’d get a response (although they may not use persuasion mumbo-jumbo terminology). And they knew if they could capture it on video, that it would move viewers in a positive way.

See, you can take dry persuasion theory and make it work for you.

I’ve created an idea called, “persuasion scripts,” that converts persuasion theory and research into practical action plans. A well written and properly implemented persuasion script should produce desired changes in the way other people think, feel, and behave.

“Persuasion scripts” as a term, however, is not unique with me. A web search conducted before PersuasionScripts.com launched found several existing web pages (although fewer than 20 which is surprising to me) that employ the label. In my reading of them, my sense of “persuasion scripts” swerves away from these other uses in a way that makes my idea different, independent, unique, (peculiar?). Of course, your opinion matters more than mine here and you might want to review those older pages for yourself.

Here is another example of how you can find the same label, “persuasion scripts,” but find a different product. Once again we’re in the realm of politics where organizations are using their “persuasion scripts” to affect elections. One is from a consulting group, the Campaign Concierge, and the other from an advocacy association, the International Association of Fire Fighters. (Full disclosure alert: I collaborated with the IAFF during my tenure as a scientific administrator at NIOSH on a fire fighter safety project from a Congressionally mandated initiative. As part of the project research for the communication element in the initiative, I recall that we paid the IAFF for assistance with focus groups and surveys through regular Federal contract procedures. I have no idea who runs Campaign Concierge.)

The “persuasion scripts” that both groups provide are remarkably similar. They are telephone based scripts that only have the caller ask the respondent questions about whether the respondent is going to vote for or against a candidate or issue. It is essentially a polling script. Both scripts look fine to me and would be effective in field use for collecting poll (for me or agin me) information.

My quibble is with the label. Where’s the “persuasion” in voter position? How are you trying to change, influence, sway, motivate, manipulate, swerve, bend, alter, whatever your synonym for perusasion, anybody with a polling script?

Okay, so these are not really “persuasion” scripts. There are polling scripts and we call them “persuasion scripts” because somebody typed that label on the first Word doc file. What’s the big deal?

You mislead yourself when you mislabel. If you call a “polling script” a “persuasion script” then sometime later when somebody asks, “Hey, are we doing anything to influence or persuade voters?” then you’ve got an answer. “Yeah, sure. We’ve got persuasion scripts, so we’re okay on that one.”

Except you’re not okay on that one. You are polling and you are not persuading. And you’ve lost not only the opportunity to change the world, but you’ve also fooled yourself into thinking you’ve already got that covered when you don’t.

Please realize that I am not criticizing the content of these scripts and saying that they are bad or stupid. The Campaign Concierge looks like a useful website and the folks at IAFF are a fine bunch of people dealing with a dangerous occupation. My concern here is that there’s more to the word “persuasion” than these scripts use and if you open the word to its wider meaning, there is a large world of potential good for you.

Melanie and I like good food. One of the great delights of my life and marriage is the continuing conversation we have over white linen or chipped formica as we wolf down haut cuisine or Al’s beefs.

What’s this got to do with persuasion scripts? Quite a bit, actually.

Last night I accompanied Melanie on a business dinner. Her department is interviewing candidates for a professor position and she took the current candidate out to dinner last night. She also dragged me along as the chaffeur and tag-along go-fer. (The candidate was a fine guy who’s got a great career ahead of him. My best wishes to you, Josh, in your search!)

We ate at a new place in Morgantown, Sargasso’s. (Real quick: good food, attractive room, good prices, but weak, poorly trained service. More on that later.) Inevitably, when I’m in a restaurant, I evaluate the place because I really like food and good eats. One place that Melanie and I both enjoy is Emeril’s in New Orleans. Not only is the food great and the room beautiful and the service outstanding, but the entire dining experience is clearly designed, planned, and choreographed to produce delight in the customer. Part of that planning is based in persuasion scripts.

One time, many years ago, Melanie and I made reservations at Emeril’s (at the Food Bar - you’ve got to do that if you really like food). We made the reservations for the first seating, 5:30pm, I think. And, because we’re always hungry, we arrived early. Somebody let us in even though the place was not officially open. As we stood in the bar area just outside of the main dining room and Food Bar, we could see and hear the staff finishing up a meeting. The person running the staff meeting had either read the Primer or else trained by somebody who’d read it. The leader ran a spirited, energetic presentation that described the evening’s specials with a focus on key terms to be used when offering the dish. The key terms were not simply a list of ingredients with jazzy modifiers, but rather were aimed at making the listener happy and interested. The key terms including “what’s new and different” and “why you would like this” ideas. Through it all the leader maintained that high energy and encouraged a similar feeling in the staff. The leader then concluded the meeting with what must be the Emeril’s cheer. (I couldn’t make it out because I’d just gotten my Martini at the bar - I just heard the staff roar during my first sip and knew that dinner was on.)

For the remainder of the evening I was struck by the repetition of key terms and energy from that meeting with the various servers and staff people that worked the room. I could overhear snippets from the servers as they described various dishes with those “new and different” and “why you’ll like it” suggestions. I could see the controlled bustle of every staff person whether out front serving or in the kitchen preparing (the Food Bar sits right on the kitchen and has an open view of the space).

And every time we’ve gone back to Emeril’s in New Orleans, we’ve had that same kind of experience even though we haven’t caught the staff rah-rah meeting that precedes service.

My claim is that the staff meeting is based in part on a persuasion script orientation. All of the staff completes a serious training session at a place like Emeril’s where the basics of the ingredients, preparation, and service are drilled. But, Emeril goes a step farther and also focuses upon the customer response to the experience and builds in ways of enhancing pleasure and satifisfaction. That’s where the script comes in. The staff meeting that precedes the evening provides some structure and a lot of content for everyone’s script that night. I suspect that if there have been problems with past specials (too spicy, too rich, too small, too large), the new script includes tactics to address those problems in a positive manner.

Now, back to my experience at Sargasso’s in Morgantown. There’s no reason why everyone in the restaurant business cannot deliver an experience similar to Emeril’s. Sure, Emeril has a particular and unique genius that is his alone, but that genius is not the key point here. His genius plus persuasion scripts (and other elements that go past our interest here) make for his success. Why can’t all servers be well trained in the basics of the business and also have persuasion scripts that enhance customer pleasure and satisfaction?

Our server last night clearly knew the business of serving at a good restaurant (although she was shaky on some of the techniques and styles of food and cooking). But she was only perfunctory, providing a bare bones attention to the most basic elements of service (what do you want, here it is, is it okay, anything else, here’s the check). As I scanned the room and listened to other staff people, the same kind of bare bones behavior was evident. Nice folks doing their minimum (for minimum wages?). No energy. No fun. No new thing. No excitement.

Persuasion scripts allow you to design communication that should produce desired outcomes in clients. With scripts you can change the way they think, feel, and act. And with scripts you get all the advantages that planning, control, and structure bring. You can train to criterion. You can measure. You can provide great, accurate feedback with a minimum need for punishment. You can see what works and what doesn’t, have a sense of why the success or failure occurred, and make specific, targeted changes. That’s the beauty of planning, control, and structure.

This is shooting fish in a barrel. You can do this. It’s easy. You’ll have fun doing it. More people will like what you do.

Write your own persuasion script!

Consider again the current use of “persuasion scripts” this time in a politics context (although the point goes beyond politics and into any situation where you’re using communication to persuade others). This example is from the Rudy and Sheila Wellstone foundation aimed at training and development for progressive politics. Here’s a snippet of their “persuasion script”:

Sample Persuasion Script:

“Hi, my name is (give first name), and I’m here tonight in regard to the upcoming presidential election. Do you have a quick minute?”

(Pause for a reply, and if the person says they are busy, tell them you have only two questions)

“Does it concern you that President Bush’s tax cuts went primarily to Americans earning more than $150,000 a year, yet they created record budget deficits that will take decades for our children to pay back?”

(Wait for an answer. If “yes”, go to Option A. If “no”, go to Option B.)

Option A: “It bothers me, too, especially since those deficits have also forced states to cut eligibility requirements for health insurance and raise co-payments and cut funding for schools - all of which benefit average middle-class families. Do you think this is right?”

(Wait for an answer and acknowlege it, engaging in a brief conversation, but do not get into a debate.)

“Okay, one last question: if the election were held today, who would you most likely vote for: John Kerry, George Bush, or Ralph Nader?”

(Let them volunteer “undecided”)

“Thank you very much for your time today”

Option B: “Okay, thanks. Does it concern you that these deficits have forced states to cut eligibility requirements for health insurance and raise co-payments and cut funding for schools - all of which benefit average middle-class families?”

(Wait for an answer and acknowledge it, engaging in a brief conversation, but do not get into a debate.)

“Okay, one last question: if the election were held today, who would you most likely vote for: John Kerry, George Bush, or Ralph Nader?”

(Let them volunteer “undecided”)

“Thank you vey much for your time today”

We can immediately note the obvious similarity to the Howard Dean script posted about earlier here. This is clearly a debate script aimed at direct argumentation with issues, stands, evidence, and reasoning. No doubt this can be persuasive and lead to changing the way someone thinks, feels, or behaves, but I suspect that such scripts are more likely to fail and in some case more likely to produce boomerang outcomes that serve to make things worse.

Realize that such an approach immediately triggers a high WATT, biased processor - someone who is actively involved, but responding defensively, knowing that someone is going to argue with them and against them. The Wellstone script here immediately forewarns receivers that they are in a debate even before the specific issues, positions, and arguments are made. This is certainly a sincere and authentic approach, but not likely to be effective.

The script in no way instructs or plans for the source to get any kind of “audience analysis” before launching into the debate. Note that the script doesn’t adivse to look at the house, the neighborhood, the people on the street to get a sense of what kind of people live here and how they might already be thinking, feeling, or behaving. There is certainly nothing in the script that guides the source in sizing up the person who answers the door. What’s their mood? Are they attentive or distracted? How are they dressed? How quickly do they respond to your questions? Nothing in the script assess the immediate mental state of the receiver at the door. Just bang away with the arguments and “if they say X, then you say Y.”

It is also worth noting that both “debate scripts” I’ve posted on have been connected with sources (Paul Wellstone and Howard Dean) who are associated with high intensity, in-your-face communication styles. (The fact that both are progressive Democrats is less relevant. I suspect that one day I’ll find Republican examples of such scripts and those sources will probably be just as intense and aggressive. It’s not the content of the politics, it’s the style of the politician that’s the point.)

I suspect that people using these debate scripts are more likely to find kindred spirits rather than actually changing anyone’s thoughts, feelings, or behaviors in a positive direction. Certainly, there’s nothing wrong with attracting those who are attracted to you, but you’ve got to realize that attraction is not persuasion. And when you use debate scripts that attract those attracted to you and then label it an exercise in persuasion, you are misleading yourself about what you are doing, the impact it is having, and why things are occurring the way they are occurring. In other words, under the surface of your current success courses a deeper tide running toward failure.

Do you really want to change the world?

About a year ago I began a persuasion seminar with 14 smart and interesting people in Charleston, WV for a WVU Corporate Communication program. During our discussion of CLARCCS cues, one participant, John, shared an interesting observation he’d made on a shopping trip that, at the time, didn’t seem quite that meaningful, but upon learning about the cues, he realized he’d discovered a very powerful persuasion tactic.

See, John was shopping for a new computer at one of those large office and equipment chain stores. During checkout, the sales clerk left John alone and while John was waiting, he noticed a small printed sign taped to the cash register that had several typed lines of instruction in sequence. Being curious and left alone, John read the page. In essence, the sign describe a team approach to persuading customers.

When a customer entered the store, Employee1 would make a friendly greeting and unless there was an immediate request, the Employee1 would walk away. Shortly thereafter, Employee2 was directed to contact the customer and point out current sales and again unless there was an immediate request, Employee2 would then walk away. Employee3 would then enter the scene with a “how may I help you?” approach. Employee3 would then work with the customer to connect her or him to the needed product or service and then direct the customer to Employee4 who would complete the transaction at the register.

Now, the pattern of Employee behavior looks like normal business behavior. The novel, interesting, and useful persuasion tactic, however, comes from the deliberate sequencing of steps through different employees. By assigning different specific communication tasks to each role in this play, the business makes it more likely that each customer will “get” all the information the business wants out there. Furthermore, by distributing each message across multiple sources, it becomes less likely that the customer will feel like a persuasion target and more like someone shopping in a store with a lot of helpful agents.

This team persuasion tactic is a brilliant application of the principles of persuasion. It provides a formal and ongoing structure for the business to deliver persuasion (that typed sign on the register). It hides the persuasion attempt across multiple sources. It has got to be great for team morale as each person on the team will play different parts in the scene. You can imagine the signaling they invent and use, just like a baseball coach on third base giving signs. And, I’ve got to believe that team persuasion goes right to the bottom line with increased sales and customer satisfaction with the greatest benefit of all: No one even knows it’s happening. An excellent application of the Rules.

A “persuasion script” is a planned sequence of messages aimed at changing the way the receiver thinks, feels, or behaves. It operationalizes well established persuasion principles in specific words and actions. The key element in the script is that “persuasion principle.” I contend that most communicators have an extremely simplistic theory of persuasion principles that limits their effectiveness, but not their persistence, always the mark of a missionary which is a special case of persuasion, and certainly not the only case. Let me demonstrate this contrast with a Presidential example from 2004 and not from current times. Usually past examples are better than current ones because you can think a little more clearly about the past than the uncompleted present.

Here’s an extended quote from a story about Howard Dean’s primary run in 2004. The author is Ryan Lizza.

The script calls for the volunteer to deliver a tough version of the Dean stump speech:

“Governor Dean is running for president to stand up to George Bush and take back our country. His opponents are going after him with negative attacks designed to confuse people. All they can do is attack, because, while Governor Dean was standing up to George Bush, they were surrendering to him in Washington. They surrendered when they gave George Bush a blank check in Iraq and when they passed his No Child Left Behind Act. And, while Governor Dean was ensuring health care for every child in Vermont, his opponents were spinning their wheels in Washington.”

If this still doesn’t persuade the Iowan on the other end of the line, the script offers a section titled “Tips” to strengthen the message. “People are sick of hearing about the caucus,” it notes. “Empathize. Share your frustration. Tell them your story. Tell them why you dropped everything and are sleeping on a floor in Iowa to make Howard Dean president.” Of course, empathy doesn’t always work. Sometimes you need to be a little tougher. That’s when you move on to the script under the heading: “If they get pissed and try to cut you off or hang-up.” The way to deal with a pissed-off Iowan is to push back. “Assertively tell your story,” the persuasion script counsels.

Let’s pull out the key elements of this script. First, the script calls for direct argumentation or what I’ll call a debate script. It provides specific issues, a stand on those issues, reasons to support the issue, attacks on other stands, and reasons to support those attacks. This is an obvious demonstration of a central route persuasion approach where you first get a high WATT thinker, then provide strong arguments. Second, the script calls for emotional awareness of the receiver advising to look for either burnout (sick and tired of the primaries and all the shouting) or anger (dislike your candidate and here’s why) and then provide more arguments for handling a high WATT thinker who is either weary or annoyed.

These debate scripts appear to be the most common approach for folks wanting any structure to their persuasion efforts. I’ll commend them for at least having enough foresight to realize that planning beats spontaneity when it comes to persuasion. (Or as the Rules state, “All bad persuasion is sincere.”) A prepared persuader is much more dangerous.

However, the planning here is so earnest, sincere, and authentic as to render it useless in most instances and counterproductive in some. This script is designed to elicit a prepared defensive response from almost all receivers even before the arguments are presented. The script immediately warns the receiver that they are entering into a debate and that they are going to get arguments. Such warnings have the unfortunate effect of producing biased high WATT thinkers rather than objective high WATT thinkers.

In other words, the debate script puts people in a frame of mind where they think they have to defend themselves rather than to listen with an “open mind” or what in theory parlance I’d call “objective processing.” (”Biased processing” is also sensitive to arguments, it just tries to make the arguments fit a position rather than using the arguments to arrive a the “true” position as is the case with objective processing.) Thus, by design this debate script debilitates its chances for success from the beginning.

Worse still is the effect of a debate script when it fails. Whenever a high WATT processor is confronted with contrary arguments, considers those arguments, and then rejects them, their position has become stronger. Now, if the Deaniacs wanted voters to be even stronger in their dislike of Howard Dean, the script makes sense. Start a fight with a voters, make them think real hard, make them actively fight you off, and what do you get? A stronger enemy, not a weaker enemy.

I think that this debate script explains in part the spectacular failure of Howard Dean in the primaries of 2004. You’ll recall that he was a monumental favorite with all the flash of the shooting star rising in the heavens only to crash after the first votes were cast in the first primary, Iowa. What happened? Certainly there are many factors in a vote, but this script approach illustrates in small the larger strategy Dean employed and clearly it did not work.

A persuasion script in contrast to a debate script is open to a wide variety of psychological elements that drive voting decisions. Attributions of causality and responsibilty, perceptions of unfair restrictions, negative consequences from planned actions, cue based associations of liking, credibility, comparison, scarcity, reciprocity, and public commitments, and even simple rewards all can determine how people vote. A persuasion script is open to all of these elements and can move flexibly depending upon the characteristics of the voter in the here and now.

A debate script is the mark of an advocate and is much more concerned with looking good than with getting the desired outcome.

I will be releasing my new website, PersuasionScripts.com, in January 2008. One success indicator I’ll be tracking will be how often the term, “persuasion scripts,” appears on the Internet. To that end, on January 21, 2008 I conducted a Google search on “persuasion scripts” to discover how many times this phrase had been used on the Internet. That search produced 17 different URLs. (You’ll find the descriptions and addresses at the Blog Page, “Pretest of Terms” on the home page of the blog.) If my idea begins to spread, I hope to see an increase in usage.

Most importantly, I was surprised to find only 17 uses of the quoted term. (If you do an unquoted search, you’ll get a ton of listings that mainly include Ms. Jane Austen’s novel. It’s one of the occupational hazards of persuasion work.) I had expected to find at least hundreds of hits, if not thousands because the phrase seems so common sensical. But, as with so many other examples in my past, I was wrong.

If you visit the websites or just read the description here, you’ll see that most of them use persuasion scripts in political and sales contexts. Furthermore, the scripts appear to be used as both a persuasion tactic and as an organizational control function. In the political context, a persuasion script is somewhat similar to the notion of “talking points” which is a collection of key messages everyone in a campaign should use that day, every day, or in specified settings. However, most of these uses veer away from the meaning I prefer for the term “persuasion scripts” as a structured sequence of messages aimed at changing thoughts, feelings, or behaviors.

Interestingly enough I found one academic source, The Psychology of Tactical Communication, an edited volume by Cody and McLaughlin that includes the notion of “persuasion scripts” within interpersonal relationships as described by Bisanz and Rule. This work focuses upon the conceptual development of scripts and schemas as elements cognitive psychological theorizing. Here the emphasis is upon script as theory versus the script as practical tool.

After visiting these sites, I think my perspective on persuasion scripts has its own little niche, a private universe of meaning that swerves just enough to be different in focus and application. This isn’t a copyright concern, but rather a belief that if the idea isn’t different, independent, and unique, then why would anyone be interested?

Of course, my opinion is considerably less important than, say, yours. Please check out the websites at Pretest and let me know what you think. Post up a comment.

 

 

I’ve coined up a phrase, “persuasion engines,” to describe a systematic approach to applying persuasion. A persuasion engine is the motor of change that drives behavior. It has moving parts, requires energy, and when placed in a chassis, it can move things. If you know what you are doing, you can create an assembly line that mass produces persuasion engines or you can custom build these motors for specific applications. Thus, you can build a Ford or a Ferrari.

Do you catch the metaphor?

A simplified version of a persuasion engine is a persuasion script. A persuasion script means very much what the term, “script,” says. A script is a sequence of dialog and action that plays out in a standardized, routine way. If you’ve ever had a fast food job at the counter, you know about scripts. If you’ve done telephone sales, you know about scripts. If you have contact with clients that is stereotyped, predictable, and stable, then you can profitably use scripts.

Many people hate scripts, find them insulting and demeaning, and believe that scripts are not nearly as effective as the performance a person left alone and to their own devices could deliver. If you are in the category of a script hater, you need to do more reading and thinking about it. Most people are lousy in scripty situations precisely because those situations are so routine, predictable, and stereotyped. You get bored out of your gourd always doing the same damn thing, so you start to wing it or worse still, just get through it. And, sad to say, most people are not nearly as good at persuasion and communication as they think they are and if you put them in a script, you get a much better average performance. Big business is into scripts in a big way precisely because the whole point of big business is to create a fundamental routine that everyone can do profitably. All this “I gotta be me” is nice if you’re an entertainer or a rebellious youth, but it don’t make the dime day in and day out.

Let me put it another way. If you want to excel, find all of the tasks in your work life that are routine, then build good scripts, and DO THEM EVERY TIME. Save your Special Sauce for places where it is really needed.

So, here’s a standard script for routine contact with customers or clients (i.e. people with whom you do business who are not family, friends, or colleagues). Let’s first look at the functions.

An introduction.
A welcome.
An orientation.
A persuasion setup.
A product or service offer.
A persuasion tactic.
A transition.

An introduction provides the basic, “name, rank, and serial number” of the persuasion agent. A smile should accompany this information.

A welcome details the source. This is the name of the company, your logo, and your mission.

An orientation gives the receiver a map of “where you are standing” so the receiver understands the situation from the source’s point of view of course. This is the products or services available here.

A persuasion setup lays the groundwork for a quickly following persuasion tactic. It may be a question posed by the source to get the receiver thinking along a certain line. It may be information provided that gives something of value to the receiver without this actually costing the source anything (like those “free” appetizers you get at fancy restaurants before they give you the menu). It may be a whiz bang tactic right out of the Primer. Your choice and you can vary it from day to day.

A product or service offer is the source’s primary reason for the contact. It is the McGuffin, the main point, the raison d’etre for the source to talk to the receiver. It tells the receiver that the source can do something and that the receiver can act on it now.

A persuasion tactic is a deliberately source move to change the receiver here and now. The receiver came in for one thing, but now the source is trying to move them to another thing. The tactic should not interfere with anything related to the actions from the service offer at the prior step. You must deliver the service the receiver expected or you will not get another contact with them. Don’t goof this up with a clever persuasion move.

A transition moves the receiver from this source to another source. You’ve made a good impression on the receiver, you delivered the service, and you executed the persuasion tactic. Now, send the receiver to the next organization source who will repeat the script, but will provide a new service and perhaps a new persuasion tactic.

Let’s work an example.

An introduction.
A welcome.
An orientation.
A persuasion setup.
A product or service offer.
A persuasion tactic.
A transition.

Hi, how are you doing today? My name is Steve and I’m the receptionist.

The Mountaineer Health Clinic wants to be there for you and provide the best care at the best price in our state.

I’ll get your name and appointment information and make sure you get to the people you need to see.

By the way, I hope you like our new waiting area. We asked our clients what we could do to improve it and they suggested we make more space for children and also make the room a little brighter looking. We recently remodeled it and we hope that you find it more comfortable.

May I take your name and the name of the physician you’re here to see today . . . okay, do you have any questions about the appointment or insurance or anything else I might be able to help you with?

Please take a seat anywhere. You might like to look at our information kiosk in the new waiting room. It has a lot of helpful free information.

A nurse will come into the waiting room and call your name when they are ready for you. The nurse’s name is Mary.

How about in a tire store.

Hi, how are you doing today? My name is Steve and I’m a sales agent.

The Mountaineer Tire Store puts tires where you go and aims to make your driving safe.

If you can tell me your driving requirements, either I can help you right away or get the expert you need to see.

By the way, I hope you noticed our new garage. We’ve expanded the number of bays and hired three more experienced mechanics.

What kind of vehicle do your drive and what kind of driving do you do?

I’ve got three options for you. I’ll show those to you, but you also might want to think about doing a tire balance and rotation, too. With our expanded garage we can get this done faster so you don’t have to wait as long.

I’m gonna send you to Bob on this one. He knows more about SUV tires than anyone else and he can give you the rundown on the best options.

If you get my drift with this, I have three questions for you. How can you afford to NOT use scripts? How can there possibly be any serious cost, barrier, or risk with a well designed, properly executed script? Do you really think that the spontaneous, off-the-cuff, just-wing-it performance of all of your people will beat a good script day in and day out?

This is an absolute no-brainer.

When you have routine, stereotyped, and predictable contacts with clients you’ve simply got to design, train, and implement scripts. Let’s go TpB on this: Scripts are easy, fun, and popular.

Easy? Come on. You’ve got the basic outline for a generic script right here. If you’re still surviving in your business you’re smart enough to customize them to your own situation. Hey, you do your taxes every year and you’re not in jail yet. You can easily do this, too.

Fun? Of course, it’s fun. Think about plotting and planning and scheming with your crew to develop these things and use them. It will be a good laugh doing this because everyone sees the advantage, it’s easy to implement and no one’s job is going to get downsized. Building and doing scripts gets everyone involved.

Popular? You don’t think your competition’s doing this? Hey, look around. Join the 21st century. Lots of people are doing this. They’re called winners.

Persuasion scripts are the way to go. Look, they focus your people on the main point of the work and their jobs. It gets everyone in the same boat and pulling in the same direction. Scripts provide great work markers (if you’re in the script, keep doing it, if you’re not in the script, wake up). They give you a flexible structure for delivering a consistent message. You can vary the persuasion games by day or week. You can train your people to work cooperatively in a Team Persuasion approach, so that you’ve got interlocking scripts. Then people can train in each script and move dynamically from part to part with the work flow. In other words, one person doesn’t always have to be the Receptionist or the SUV expert, but rather everyone can rotate through these roles.

Is this not cool beans, the cat’s meow, the bee’s knees, and kisses sweeter than wine?

Why am I giving this away for free? Why don’t I at least put it in a book or a seminar and charge you for the information that way? Why don’t I have some kind of tease that requires you to pay me a consulting fee to fill in the blanks?

Here’s my angle. Even if you get this idea, it will probably be hard to get it going in your organization because your organization doesn’t think and operate like this. If you want to make something like persuasion scripts or Team Persuasion function, you’re going to have to Do Something Different. That means making a clear, obvious, and concrete commitment to change. Showing up on Monday with a printout of this page and a little enthusiasm is not sufficient commitment. You need to hire a consultant like me, somebody from Mitch and Murray, to show your organization you’re serious.

 

 

My motivation goes beyond profit and into a deeper form of self benefit. Every day I encounter incompetent interactions with various commercial and nonprofit groups. I’m sure you experience the same thing. You call a business about an immediate need you have (for example, our dishwasher just dropped dead and I want a new one while Melanie really needs it) and the interaction with various repair and sales folks has been clumsy, inept, and silly. The person who answers the phone isn’t the one you need. The one you need isn’t here. Or is here, but when they pick up the phone you can tell they are distracted with another task. I can think of many instances where I was literally trying to give my money away for some product or service and I made that clear, yet the people I was talking with couldn’t figure it out and lost the sale. This can happen over the phone or over the Internet or face to face. People are generally lousy at communication, particularly persuasive communication.

Scripts would help a bit. If everyone had a good basic script for standard encounters (initial contact, maintanence, growth, conflict, termination, etc.) and always used them, sales, service, and satisfaction would improve faster than the addition of computers caused. If you think about it, a persuasion script is a bit like using computers for your work. A computer requires a kind of script before it can be effectively employed. But once you understand that computer script and use it, you accrue serious advantages. With a computer in the system you can bring inventory control to the cash register. With a computer you bring accounting to the cash register. With a computer you bring your catalog to the telephone marketer. A persuasion script provides the same kind of connection and efficiency.

Okay, so if everyone used my persuasion scripts I can make some money and better still, I might get better service in my commercial and noncommercial interactions. So if I sell scripts I get a lot of benefits besides the obvious one.