« Rite of Passage | Main | Pam Talbot and the Development of Modern Public Relations »
February 28, 2008
So You Are Not Perfect
I have been on the road this week, presenting key findings from our 2008 Trust Barometer in Seattle, San Francisco, Silicon Valley and Los Angeles. I was fortunate to team with top thinkers in politics, media and communications theory, including Jeff Berman of MySpace, Chris Kelly of Facebook, Katie Hafner of the New York Times, author Bob Cialdini, as well as Dan Schnur and Tony Blankley of Edelman. One of the interesting conversation threads during the last three days was how to achieve trustworthiness by admitting imperfection.
Bob Cialdini said that an effective communicator uses the technique of mentioning a drawback in his/her position before delivering the strongest argument in the debate. “You establish credibility by admitting weakness. You gain a moment of persuasive power that opens the listener to really hear the best feature of your argument.” He used Avis car rental’s tag line, “We’re #2 but we try harder” as the classic example of this theory. He went on to say that trust is premised upon a combination of knowledge/expertise linked to the perception that the information is being delivered in an honest way.
Tony Blankley observed that during a recent debate among Democratic candidates John Edwards, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, a question was asked, “What is your worst personality trait?” Edwards and Clinton gave the tired responses of “I care too much” or “I work too hard “, Obama, by contrast, said, “I lose my work papers.” Blankley noted that with that totally human response, Obama might have risked more, but “in giving something away, he sets the viewer up for his major point of difference, his ability to relate.”
Chris Kelly noted the trend toward use of real names in social networks, replacing the screen names of the early days. “You cannot build trusted relationships on Facebook without your real identity out there,” he said. “Why should you accept an invitation to be a friend unless you can trust the other person?” Berman of MySpace noted that, “Everybody is with us for 15 people, not the 15 minutes of Andy Warhol fame. But some of us are more willing to share in a public manner.” He also pointed that the Obama campaign’s approach to phone banks is more authentic-- “young Obama supporters are asked to call up their friends and tell them why they are supporting the candidate; no more cold calls or taped robo-calls.”
Katie Hafner of the NY Times ended our panel at the Churchill Club in Silicon Valley on Tuesday night with the big question, “Are companies really committed to transparency?” I believe the answer is increasingly they are because it is both smart and necessary. Back in 8th grade after I threw an interception that was run back for a touchdown, my football coach told me “Get back out there and throw another pass. But don’t look at your receiver the whole time so everybody on the other team knows what’s coming.” Trust is achieved by honest behavior over the long run; if you make a mistake, admit it and get back in the game with a better plan.
Posted by Edelman at February 28, 2008 5:42 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.edelman.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/464
Comments
Richard,
Great program in Los Angeles this week. The political action at the end of the event was particularly good -- I think Tony Blankley is about the only fellow I know who can draw in pre-Civil War presidential references and make them relevant and interesting to what we're going through now in this election cycle. Again, thanks for the invite and I look forward to the next one. Daniel Weidman (Edelman, '94-'98).
Posted by: Daniel Weidman at February 29, 2008 7:30 PM
Richard,
the discussion in Silicon Valley was great. I was intrigued by Robert Cialdini’s analysis. If I remember correctly, he said we decide who we trust based on two factors: expertise and absence of self interest. The latter takes time to establish but the sort-cut is by admitting a weakness. To increase your persuasion power, it’s best to mention a drawback right before making your strongest argument because that’s the moment of highest credibility.
In my humble opinion this technique gives the illusion of honesty and transparency and has therefore limited shelf life. I believe that the more marketers will use this as a trick, the quicker it will loose its power as people will start to see through it. Honesty last longest, my mom used to say…
Posted by: Christel van der Boom at March 4, 2008 1:49 AM
Thank you for connecting the Avis case, Obama, and the idea that true candor is a powerful persuasion tool. Korean interview books say to admit perfectionist tendencies when asked about personal flaws, but it is a tired cliche. When preparing a friend for an interview yesterday, she had questions about this very situation. Happy to see I gave her good advice.
Posted by: Jason Allenberg at March 4, 2008 2:58 AM
Cialdini's work is fascinating, and from all accounts, effective. After seeing him speak at the PRSA Counselors Academy conference several years ago, I am surprised he has not been mentioned more often in the realm of public relations/communications.
Posted by: Steve Shannon at March 4, 2008 3:50 PM
I share Christel van der Boom's concern that there is real danger of regarding admission of weakness as no more than a tactic in effective communication.
It has to be an authentic admission, rather than oratorical sleight of hand. If it's not, it'll stop working (and that would be a great pity - because I know it works exceedingly well as a way to establish bona fides and openness, especially with distrusting audiences).
Posted by: Pattrick Smellie at April 1, 2008 8:44 PM