Hi Persuader,

While the concept of 'energy' may seem new-agey, I personally find it integral to the understanding of self, which is the first step in understanding persuasion.

At a recent seminar I had in Tucson I really got deep into core drives which we can use to put our persuasion fingers on our clientele's triggers. These triggers are universal.

The Ancient Indian concept of Chakras are definitely considered 'woo woo' by a great many people, but are an excellent metaphor, if nothing else, for the core values and drive within each of us. Chakras are energy vortices along the body, each corresponding to a need.

Irregardless of our spiritual or religious affiliations, these energy centers are interrelated with the notion of self mastery which is in turn interrelated, in my view, with persuasion. Simply, we, as persuaders, have the ability to pick and choose from the abundance of life, spirituality, business, economics, literature, politics, popular culture, history, or anything at all, and take what is valuable and shape our world out of what we've gleaned.

I also have a personal belief that there's a certain reality to the different kinds of energy flows in our bodies. Chinese medicine practitioners would refer to that as Qi (pronounced Chi) and they can trace those energetic flows throughout our bodies in energy rivers called meridians. Meridians control different things in our body, corresponding to different organs, and to the extent that we have some awareness of this, we can use it to help ourselves. So call it DNA or Qi or Chakras or meridians. . . it's all power.

In that spirit, how can we absorb value from chakras, as one of my students suggested, even simply as a metaphor?

The base chakra is concerned with security in the same way as core values of continuing on, fight and flight. The second chakra is about sexual reproduction as is the fourth core value which I've discussed. The third chakra is about power-very similar to the third core value of fight.

As we get higher on the chakras, we also get higher in Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. Maslow was an American psychologist in the mid 1900s who created a scale in the form of a pyramid that explained human needs. If the bottom levels of needs aren't being met, nothing else matters.

At the bottom of the pyramid are two of the four core values in addition to biological functions. The physiological basis for physical human existence-food, water, air, sleep, sex, excretion and homeostasis (internal balance)-has extreme power where persuasion is concerned. Obviously, we're not really able to utilize air or sleep (unless you're selling mattresses) or excretion or homeostasis (unless you're a doctor).

The next level up for Maslow pertains to security-the fight and flight core values-and also corresponds to the third chakra of power.

Also for purposes of persuasion, there are imperative psychological needs that are represented at the top of the pyramid including: the need to be needed, the need to feel hope, the need to believe problems are a result of something outside ourselves, the need to be noticed and understood, the 'law of being right', and the principle of giving people a sense of power. These fit in with the rest of the chakras-the fourth one representing love and energy, the fifth one representing communication, the sixth one requiring an inner sense of knowingness, and finally that higher spiritual plane which is represented by union, bliss, God.

When we elicit criteria and gain rapport correctly and thoroughly, we tap into these needs. When you're really in deep rapport with someone, they feel noticed, they feel necessary, they feel listened to, and within that, we can really hone in on the core values of safety, security, reproduction and sustenance.

Until Next Time,

Kenrick E. Cleveland

Hi Persuader,

I'm often asked to listen to speeches or presentations or interactions between my students and their prospects to give comment on what more can be brought to their individual persuasion skills. The sad fact is, I haven't figured out a way to extend my days. I've only got 24 hours, as do all of us, and I simply don't have time to help in this way.

The up side is, if you're in my Elite Coaching Club, you are either fully capable of critiquing yourself, or you're on your way to being there. My suggestion is that you record yourself doing your presentations or speeches or calls or interviews and listen to them. I guaranty you will find this valuable.

All you have to do is listen to your presentation with the following in mind: Do I have rapport? Listen to it again and ask: Am I using the presuppositions affectively? Listen to it again to determine: Am I using their criteria affectively? How about when they objected, where could I have heard that earlier on?

What follows are some frames within which to listen to your presentations.

What's the level of rapport that you're hearing taking place? Is it strong? Could it be stronger? What would you have to do to make that stronger?

What is the overall frame you've set from the minute you begin interacting with those people? With your prospect? What's the overall frame you're setting? Is it one of authority? Is it one of one down and they're one up? Are you one up and they're one down? Are you equal? How do you come across in terms of the overall frame you're setting?

What are the presuppositions that you can identify quickly that you're using throughout your presentation? Are you using them well? Are you using them a lot?

What are you using? What are you using well? What could be used better?

Where are you getting objections? Where could you have become aware of the objection much earlier on in the presentation?

So let's say you have an hour presentation, you're listening to it, and you know that at the end, there's an objection. Where could you have heard that earlier on? How could you have become aware earlier on of what happened and how could you have framed against it earlier on maybe even at the point of the criteria elicitation? How could you have heard what was going to come out and then framed against it?

Re-listen again and ask yourself: Did you get and use their criteria? And did you continue to reference it throughout the presentation?

And again listen to it and determine: How do you feel about the length of time you were there? Were you there too long? Were you not focused on your outcome well enough or were you focused on your outcome well enough? How long were you there? How much time did it take and is that justifiable time?

If you've been studying with me for any amount of time or have been involved with my work in the least, you will begin to understand the frames I'm using to listen to you and you will be able to hear yourself with my ears in that respect.

For those of you that don't know what I'm talking about, and if you're signed up for the Persuasion Factor or in my Elite Coaching Club, you will shortly know exactly what I'm talking about.

Until Next Time,

Kenrick E. Cleveland

Hi Persuader,

Binds are a fascinating strategy in persuasion which should be used sparingly, a little ‘persuasion seasoning’ so to speak.

Binds are language patterns and like all language patterns there’s a formula.

For single binds there are two formulas: the first is, ‘if X, Y’ and the second is ‘the more you X, the more you Y.’

As a general rule, the X will be a pace (something that is verifiably true) but it can also include a suggestion or a challenge, and the Y will be a lead, how you want them to think or respond but they’re not currently doing, necessarily. (For more on pacing and leading, stay tuned.)

In other words, you can think of X as the set up, and Y is the punch line.

‘If you develop a deep understanding of the power of binds, you’ll feel compelled to sign up for The Persuasion Factor.’

Okay. . .that’s a pretty obvious example. Very transparent, I know, but you see that the first part of the sentence ‘if you develop a deep understanding of the power of binds’ is a suggestion or challenge, and ‘you’ll feel compelled to sign up for The Persuasion Factor’ is the lead, what I want you to do which you may not currently be doing.

Here’s another example: ‘The more you read what I’m explaining, the more you’ll understand the power of using it.’

Let’s break that down a little. The more you read about something, i.e. the more you read about using binds, the more you will understand how powerful they are to use. Is this true? Possibly. I think it is. But it’s more of a presupposition than it is solid, hard, cold fact.

Binds do not have to in any way make sense or be logical.

For example: ‘The more you hear about this piece of property, the more you will be compelled to buy it.’

Is that logical? Not necessarily. In other words, hearing a lot about something doesn’t compel people to buy. Hearing the right things about something might compel someone to buy, but the suggestion here is that that there is a logical link between hearing about the property and being compelled to buy it. You’re creating that link, you’re creating the truth, and you’re making it so in their minds.

Here’s where we start to get into some really interesting ways of using this. ‘The more you try and object, the more you will find yourself going along with these ideas.’

What are we really doing here? We’re issuing a challenge. The more you try and do something we don’t want you to do, the more you’ll find yourself doing what we want you to do.

Here’s another one: ‘The more you want to feel good about yourself, the more you’ll need to act now on this proposal.’

You might say, ‘Kenrick, you can’t just say that to people.’ Well, yes I can. And I do. And it works great.

My advice: write some samples out before you try using this technique. It is something that needs to be delivered smoothly or you will get an odd reaction.

Until Next Time,

Kenrick E. Cleveland

"If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail."
-- Abraham H. Maslow

Hi Persuader,

In school, unless we had an alternative education, we were taught history through the eyes of the powerful and elite. We learned about Columbus' voyage to discover the new world and what he encountered there. We learned all about the founding fathers and the Declaration of Independence. We learned that Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves.

This is clearly an overly simplified description of a narrow overview, but I use these examples just to make a point. If we're viewing history from the perspective of those in power, we're not really viewing history, are we.

The frame that education uses, the frame mandated for public educational institutions, (funded by public money and which curriculum is determined by the "powers that be"), is a positive one, for the most part. Revising history is a work of fiction, '1984', and couldn't possibly happen. But if you think about it, all history is revision.

I came across "The People's History of the United States". It's a book that has been around for almost thirty years and continues to be updated as history continues to be move forward.

This book is a classic reframe and whether or not we can agree that the perspective is valid, or "Marxist" or "socialist", we have to agree that it is an entirely different frame from what we're used to.

Look at Columbus' "discovery" from the perspective of the people who were already there: genocide and blankets with small pox.

And how about those cute Thanksgiving pilgrims that we regard as fleeing religious persecution and bravely venturing onto the New World. The natives might see this as more of a violent colonization by early English settlers.

There's a fascinating reframe at the end of the most recent edition regarding the "War on Terror". Instead of accepting the perspective, the frame that Arab terrorists attacked us on 9/11 because they hate our freedom, think about this: they were fed up with our foreign policy, our "stationing of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia... sanctions against Iraq which... had resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of children; [and] the continued U.S. support of Israel's occupation of Palestinian land."

Huh? That's not what the news tells us. Why hasn't this perspective been reported?

Frames are complicated, just as reality is complicated, just as life is complicated, but if we can see the frames for what they are, then we can control them.

Until Next Time,

Kenrick E. Cleveland

Hi Persuader,

Has this ever happened to you? You're driving down the freeway, maybe a little too fast, maybe not, and those red and blue lights begin to flash in your rearview mirror. So you pull over and prepare your papers. . . license, registration, proof of insurance. And the law enforcement officer makes his way to your window, quickly so as to not waste your time, and politely says, 'Hi. . .I'm just wondering if you . . .I'm so sorry to bother you. But would you mind showing me your license and registration? I think there might have been a slight infraction of the law and I'd really like to clear it up if you don't mind. I'm so sorry for the inconvenience.'

Umm. . . No, that hasn't happened to you. And it will never happen to you. Why? Law enforcement officers don't care about your convenience or worry about offending you. It's not the frame within which they are operating. Their frame is, 'I'm in charge. You do what I tell you to do. I have all the power in this interaction and I have absolutely no problem using this power in any way I see fit.'

Maybe not all officers are that extreme but I'm exaggerating a little to make my point.

The frames we set for ourselves and our exchanges with others are what color every business transaction and every romantic or personal interaction we have. Whoever sets the stronger frame, wins.

This doesn't mean we have to pull power trips on people. Absolutely not. This simply means that when we come to the table, we have to have our resolve strong and our place in the negotiations set. I'm not going to approach a potential new student with, 'Well, I'm pretty sure I'll be able to give you a little advice to help learn persuasion and how to increase sales. . .' Heck no! First of all, I know full and well that I'm absolutely certain I can teach anyone to increase sales through persuasion. There's no beating around the bush. I'm not shy about these things. How good a persuader would I be if I were shy about my ability to help people?

Framing is what we use to control everything. If we extend that and look at what that means, in any area of our life, there are frames that are operating and those frames are dictating our behavior, our responses and the way in which the interaction takes place.

We have the frame of the sales person and the perspective client. One frame that operates is, 'Prove to me why I need you or why I should use you.' That might be a frame that the client is coming from. A frame that the advisor might adopt might be, 'I am the expert in this field and so I work with people who understand that and can take advantage of what I tell them.'

But supposing you came from the frame of, 'I'm really not anybody. I'm just kind of trying to survive here. I don't know a whole lot, really. I just sort of represent a couple of companies that years ago, I guess I somehow lucked into my license and I represent a couple of companies that have a few things available and maybe there's something you want.'

Am I going to sign up with that guy? No. No one is.

Before your next meeting take some time to think about the framework you're using to work with the people around you.

Until Next Time,

Kenrick E. Cleveland