Hi Persuader,

Since we're on the topic of beginning... How do we begin a presentation? If you were sitting down right now to talk to somebody, how would you start your presentation?

What is the frame that you set? Is it a frame of cooperation? Is it a frame of 'I'm right'? Is it a frame of 'you need me'? Is it a frame of 'you're going to do this'? Or is it a frame of 'I'm going to help figure out what you need and give it to you'?

Take just a moment and identify the frame that you're starting with. Not the frame you think you should be starting but what you have been starting with?

Here are two frames students of mine came up with.

"I'm here to help you get what you want."

And, "I want to find out what you need.'

Let me give you some insight into these two frames.

In the frame that says, 'I'm here to help you get what you want', I am in the picture. In the frame that says, 'I want to find out what you need', I'm finding out, it's information, but it's not action and I am not in the frame.

You also must insert yourself into the buyer's mind such that you are an intricate part of the answer.

Life without action isn't much of a life. You must be taking action. One of the best ways to take action is by setting your frame in the beginning right out of the gate. That frame is: I'm going to help you get what you want.

Now maybe what they want is not to do business with you because you're not a good fit. Fine, I'll help you not do business with me. I'll help say goodbye and part friends. Nice. No problem. I appreciate you not wasting my time.

But if you don't insert yourself right into the frame to begin with, then you end up running the risk of having a bigger issue. And that bigger issue is that you're not seen as a person that they are going to take action with.

We're dealing with subtleties here but the subtleties count in a huge way. Remember, the person who sets the frame is going to win. You have to really consider what the frame is that you're attempting to set, and that it is in your mind when you enter into the situation that you're entering into.

If you're out of the frame, your prospect will see you as out of the frame too and they'll thank you for your information and leave.

There's nothing manipulative in my opinion about inserting yourself into the frame. After all, they came to see you, or you came to see them and they let you in. What would be manipulative is if you tried to give them something they don't need or they don't want and that I have a real problem with it.

As the saying goes, 'You never get a second chance to make a first impression.' I'd go even further and say, 'You never get a second chance to powerfully, persuasively, positively set that first frame with yourself as the solution to your prospect's needs and wants.'

Before you even begin, have this be your intention.

Until Next Time,

Kenrick E. Cleveland

Hi Persuader,

So now we have some framing basics. By no means can framing be summed up in three little articles, but in that, there's a beginning foundation from which to build our persuasion arsenals.

Now that we have frames in mind, it's time to examine our lenses. When you wear glasses, you don't walk around with just the frames on, you have lenses that fit your particular prescription.

Some lenses are distorted. The frame an alcoholic or drug addict has is: how can I get more of what I'm addicted to? The lens they're looking through is highly distorted and fraught with denial.

Are all of our specific issues lenses? If these issues are strong enough to warp and distort reality, then I'd say, yes. My whole life I was using a really strong lens when it came to food. I'd think about my next meal as I was eating. My blood sugar was so out of whack that I craved more and more sugar or simple carbohydrates after finishing and filling up on an entire meal. The lens I was looking through was overpoweringly focused on unhealthy foods and fear of scarcity. But by adjusting this view, things have changed dramatically.

On the opposite end of things, consider an anorexic who looks in the mirror and sees themselves as fat when they actually have little or no body fat whatsoever. Distortion.

Some social issues can also be thought of as lenses. I read about a summer camp in Northern California where the campers would go to the camp to 'unlearn' issues of racism, sexism, anti-Semitism. The presupposition of the facilitators of the camp was that if we grew up in the US, we've all been indoctrinated into a racist, sexist society, either subtly or overtly and the only way social change and equality can be achieved is to examine the lenses we've been looking through to view the world.

Now, whether or not you believe this, it's a very strong frame and by 'unlearning' these 'isms', they believed the distortion of the lens is lessened.

What are some other distortions that prevent us from seeing the real picture? How about religious fanaticism? How scratched, cracked and myopic is a suicide bomber's lens on the world? VERY. Their views go WAY beyond framing.

As I mentioned before, addicts have distortions, as do violent criminals, people with mental illnesses, the Klan/Aryan brotherhood. . .they're extreme and often view the world literally in terms of 'black and white'.

What are your extremes? Where do you find your lens distorted? One of the first steps in persuasion excellence is the ability to persuade yourself. I'm not suggesting that we eliminate everything about ourselves that make us who we are, not by any stretch, but I'm just looking to examine where we might have some blockages and/or weaknesses and/or blind spots in relation to ourselves and our outlook on the world. Remember, for all of our beliefs, there's an equally strong opposing belief in someone else.

I'll tell you a little secret. My lens is powerfully, intensely, vigorously focused on persuasion. Some might think to the extreme. Okay, maybe that's not a secret. But it's definitely my lens to the world and I'm thrilled to share it with you.

Need more? Look over our programs that can help focus your lens, or Call Kim about ways to turn up your persuasion power.

Until Next Time,

Kenrick E. Cleveland

Dear Persuader,

I thought this an appropriate subject to discuss on Halloween...

When a person sneezes, we say ‘God bless you’. That’s a superstition. It started in the Middle Ages when it was thought that the devil could enter a person when unguarded, such as in the midst of a sneeze. If someone said the magic words, ‘God bless you’, immediately after the sneeze, then this unfortunate demonic possession could be avoided.

In many high rise buildings, you can take the stairs one flight up from the twelfth floor to the fourteen floor. What happened to the thirteenth floor? It’s called triskaidekaphobia, and in Western cultures, it’s a fear of the number 13. (Eastern cultures have a superstition about the number 4 called tetraphobia.)

As our world becomes more unstable, the more we look for stability and for explanation. In a moment I'm going to tell you how to use this fact to your advantage in persuasion.

What about something as innocuous as walking under a ladder? This dates back to early Christianity as the sides of the ladder and the ground form a triangle, the symbol of Holy Trinity.

It was thought that when one walked through it, it violated the trinity and put you on the same level as the devil. Nowadays, no one really knows where this superstition came from and yet, people avoid walking under ladders without reason. Maybe it’s wise to avoid walking under ladders simply because you might end up with a bucket of paint on your head, but to believe bad luck will befall you? It’s kind of a stretch.

I have an acquaintance who believes all religion and spirituality is superstition. I happen to think he’s wrong, but I appreciate the perspective in that it’s just another example of how framing is a powerful tool for looking at the world around us.

Superstition is defined as ‘an irrational belief that an object, action, or circumstance not logically related to a course of events influences its outcome.’

Even Helen Keller’s assertion that, “Security is mostly a superstition. It does not exist in nature.... Life is either a daring adventure or nothing,” is an example of how diverse we all are, and yet, we all believe in something irrational.

With that said, how can we use the fact that we all believe in something (which may actually be an ‘irrational belief’) to persuade?

The more our world becomes unstable, the more people look for stability and look for ways to explain things. As a persuader, you have the ability to offer explanations, just the same way that they do to make sense out of their life.

So in the same way that people look for supporting reasons, even nonsensical ones, to explain their reality, and they look to assign blame, we can do the same.

‘There are no accidents’ is a great phrase born of superstition, that we can use to persuade our affluent clientele. Especially if our prospects have had problems in the past, we can use this term to indicate that, ‘Yes, you’ve had problems in the past (with your agent, advisor, etc.), but those problems are over now and we live in an infinitely wise universe where there are no accidents. You ended up with me for a reason.’

Is this true and verifiable? No. Absolutely not. But will you be called on it? Unless you’re trying to sell my acquaintance, the cynic, who views the world through the frame that everyone is superstitious except him, I seriously doubt it.

For more language patterns and ideas on how to layer them for maximum persuasion, check out my Persuasion Factor monthly at-home program. For more intensive learning, for those of you who reach or wish to reach a truly affluent clientele, consider my Elite Coaching Club. You will find yourself becoming less superstitious as you take control of your universe and begin hitting your targets.

Happy Halloween!

Kenrick E. Cleveland

"Use An Old Dog's Old Tricks"

Dear Persuader,

The definition of Revivification is: 1. Renewal of life; restoration of life; the act of recalling, or the state of being recalled, to life. 2. Bringing again into activity and prominence.

I want to walk you through an exercise using Revivification as a technique for persuading your most affluent prospects. Read through, maybe a few times, practice, and try this in your next Persuasion situation...

First, I’d like you to remember a time when you made a really big purchase. Maybe a house, maybe a car, maybe a piece of jewelry. Think about how you felt at the moment of ownership. It’s all yours now. That little piece of security or freedom or luxury is all yours. Does it feel good?

By revivifying this moment in your life, I’ve just reminded you of a groove, a path that you’ve already traveled, a warm, fuzzy feeling that you already know.

Remember when you use these persuasion techniques that they've been created so that you can easily persuade any affluent prospect, and do it in such a way that is unique to that person. You need not use any sales scripts, complicated sales tactics, or manipulation. You simply use these skills to help guide your prospect to the right decision for them.

In revivifying our prospects' well-tread paths and grooves, we’ve set the groundwork for persuasion. We can assist the process of persuading the affluent by directing our prospects to remember times they did the kind of thing we want them to do.

Revivifying a past experience cuts by an enormous percentage the difficulty of getting the affluent to do what we want. Why try to teach an old dog new tricks when you can simply use a trick the dog already knows to get it to do what you want it to do?

Here we have an opportunity as it relates to persuasion to really make our job easy. We can do it by getting the affluent to think about and remember times they did the kind of thing we want them to do, or thought the way we want them to think, or acted the way we want them to act.

If you are a financial planner, for example: Have your affluent prospect think of the first time they made it to a million. What did it feel like when they became a first time millionaire? Can they envision a future when that number is multiplied by ten or twenty? How will that feel?

How about in real estate? Maybe try revivifying ‘home’. Get your affluent prospects to picture in their head what 'home' means to them. If it doesn’t seem to be a very positive picture, move it around to their dream home. We need to keep the affluent mentally on track with our persuasion and not let them go off down a rabbit hole, especially a rabbit hole of negativity.

We need to get to the people that have some money, that have some ability to buy what we have to sell - the affluent. To actually start things off on the right foot we need to position and frame ourselves in such a way that’s easy for the affluent to hear our message.

If we can get our affluent audience to think the way we want them to, instead of having to teach them something brand new (and especially something that’s bad or difficult), well, we’ve already got half the battle won.

It’s really that simple. That’s what we’re doing. We’re literally getting the affluent to remember the track that will carry our message to success. That’s the way to think of this.

Revivification is the art of getting people to remember the track so that when they do so with our message, they’re already accessing a worn-in pathway. And the minute they start the pathway, people need to complete the pathway. People don’t like to leave things half done.

Your message will be carried to fruition much easier than if you tried to teach the affluent how to think in order to do what needs to be done.

What would be the kind of thing you would want your affluent clients to think about? What pathway would you want them to find that already exists, that would help you to make your message come to fruition?

Until Next Time,

Kenrick E. Cleveland

Hi Persuader,

How do you know if something has really made it into the collective consciousness?

Well, I'll tell you one way... it's on Oprah. Oprah features it.

I want to talk with you a little bit about the movie The Secret. I imagine you've probably seen it, or have heard about it. Maybe you even own it.

Let me give you a few thoughts:

I absolutely love it. It's phenomenal. If you haven't seen it, I highly recommend it and here's why I think it can have a significant impact on your life...

The Law of Attraction is absolutely at work in my life and in the lives of everyone who has the ability or inclination to pay attention. (Obviously that's you, since you had the good sense to subscribe to this newsletter and learn more about persuading the affluent.)

What is the Law of Attraction?

Basically, it says whatever you concentrate on, you'll get more of in return. If you concentrate on your lack of money and worry about paying bills, you're going to get more 'need'.

On the other hand, if you concentrate on drawing money to you, becoming a money magnet, you will attract affluence.

And this isn't just about money. It's about every single thing that you think about. This includes influence, sales and conversion, as well as more personal aspects of life like health and wellness, relationships and spirituality in such concepts as gratitude.

I'm sad to tell you that there are a number of people that, in an attempt to make a name for themselves and parlay off the success of it, have decided that it's appropriate to tear this movie down.

Why? You may ask. And you're probably also thinking, "what does this have to do with persuasion?"

So why would people want to put this movie down?

Well, a typical way of trying to promote oneself these days is to piggyback what you're doing along with something else that's happening in the news.

The Secret is certainly in the news and I have no issue with doing that. In fact, I love to use the piggybacking strategy myself when I get a chance. And I guess you have to take a stand one way or another on things, so this group of people chose to take a negative stand.

Do you agree with everything that you hear from any source? I don't, and I doubt you do either.

So I guess we could then turn and ask, do you agree with everything that you've heard about The Secret, or as a result of watching The Secret? I can tell you that I don't.

But disregarding the entire movie just because there are a few things I disagree with would be like saying, "Money can be used wrongly so I'm going to do the right thing and never try to earn another dime as long as I live. I'll make sure that if ever anyone gives me money, I'm going to give it away because, after all, I don't want to be involved with something bad."

That is definitely throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

If a person objects to positive mental thinking, positive mental attitudes, and the sage advice that has shaped our nation and most all of the successful people in the world today that have followed along the footsteps of great thinkers of our time, then I guess someone could genuinely be upset with The Secret.

But in particular, what did the naysayers pick on? One is that The Secret talks about being responsible in every way. The movie says something to the order of, "We all choose our own reality. Even the people of Darfur consciously chose their plight in life."

Alright, so the people that stood against this movie basically said, "That's nonsense. The Secret is a cult and so it's saying things that are blatantly untrue." They are framing the creators of this movie as a cult.

Do I believe that the people in Darfur (or anywhere else in for that matter who are having horrible problems) consciously choose to be there? No, of course not. And I think in the attempt to entertain and be dramatic, The Secret went a bit too far.

However, do you know that there are many, many millions of people that actually believe along those lines?

I don't think anyone would say someone would consciously choose that kind of life, but let's say that you believed that we are here on planet earth for a reason: to learn. Life is a school and we're trying to learn all the lessons this school has to offer.

Were all of the lessons you learned in high school positive? Probably not.

Some of them were very difficult. Some of them hurt a lot. Maybe you broke up with a special boyfriend or girlfriend during that time and it was quite devastating. Maybe you thought your whole life was coming to an end and then all of the sudden you were saved by something else going well for you.

Alright, so you learned the lessons of your schooling, good and bad.

Well, there are a lot of people out there who believe in reincarnation. Now once again, I'm not going to ask you to believe in this, not for a second. I'm not going to ask you not to believe in it, not for a second.

Through the perspective of reincarnation they might believe that we choose our parents, we choose the country we're going to be born in, and we choose to live the lessons that earth has to give us such that one day we don't need to come back anymore and we can evolve to a higher level.

With this belief as the basis for this premise, then would it be reasonable if you were the creator of the movie The Secret and you believed in these things, that you would make a statement such as, "The people in Africa who are starving have chose their plight in life so that they could experience these difficulties to learn how to overcome them or simply experience a life of poverty"?

I think the answer is absolutely yes. They didn't choose them consciously; they chose them before they came into this earthly experience.

The big question I have for you is: why should we knock it?

I have my own beliefs and thoughts. I believe we need to be responsible. I believe we need to be careful, but to throw the baby out with the bathwater, I just can't fathom.

What do you think?

Until Next Time,

Kenrick E. Cleveland

Hi Persuader,

Indulge me. Let's enter the realm of fantasy for a moment.

Not THAT kind of fantasy, but the world of make believe, fairy tale, science fiction.

Put yourself in the head of an anthropologist from Mars. Let's pretend we're a team of anthropologists and we've taken on human form and landed in Washington DC, circa 2007.

From this perspective, what conclusions will we come to about American politics?

There's blue and red, there's elephants and donkeys. These represent the "two sides".

Well, are there really only two sides? Of course not. That's absurd.

But realistically, those are the options. Any third side or fourth side candidate is not allowed to contend because "they don't really have a chance of winning". Or "they'll take votes away from the REAL candidate".

So while these sides may appear to vehemently dislike each other, they are sort of in cahoots to keep numbers three, four, or five out of the running. Common ground.

Oh, and it gets better...

The media is an enemy to both sides. They like to highlight the actions of both teams so that they gain more revenue from advertisers.

They're sort of the devil's advocate, but not really because their loyalty is to whomever is in power and whomever owns the media outlet.

More exciting, and extremely advantageous to the media, both sides also have more titillating common enemies:

Hookers (Louisiana Senator David Vitters, who while advocating abstinence-only sex education which excluded information on birth control and safe sex, was identified by two women, the DC Madam and the Canal Street Madam, as being a client - ironic hypocrisy);

The under aged boys (U.S. Representative Mark Foley had ironic hypocrisy with one of these in the form of a Congressional page. Where once he was known as a crusader against child abuse and exploitation, it turned out to be a cover);

Wanton women (yeah, horn dog Bill Clinton and White House intern in the blue dress... at least that was consensual and she was of age).

Other enemies include...

Closeted homosexuality (see my previous post called "The Incongruent Larry Craig", and let's not forget New Jersey Democratic Governor Jim McGreevey);

Extramarital affairs (the list is too long);

And women who don't like being groped or harassed (The Terminator).

I could go on and on. There are obviously other enemies - crack cocaine (Marion Barry), voter fraud, blah, blah, blah.

Blue, red, elephant, donkey, they seem to want to make all the laws and then break them.

In our research as Martian anthropologists, we'd have to conclude that some form of perversion or criminal record is mandatory for political candidates.

We'd also have to conclude that the non-politicians, the ones who vote (or don't vote), have such a short attention span that really, it doesn't much matter. In a few weeks football season starts and there's a new season of "The Biggest Loser" and boy, then it's back to school time and the kids need new backpacks. And before you know it, it's the holidays again.

It helps to jump into the world of fantasy sometimes, to step back and look at the world from a different perspective. Much like putting a different frame on a situation, a different lens on life.

Try it with your life and your persuasion. See how it goes. Tell others about it, tell me about it on this blog. Create a discussion, invite your friends and colleagues to join the discussion here. Lord knows we need to step back from the craziness every once in a while and talk to each other intelligently about what we observe.

Until Next Time,

Kenrick E. Cleveland

Hi Persuader,

In the movie The Usual Suspects there's a scene where a detective is interrogating an alleged criminal.

The detective says, "The first thing I learned on the job, know what it was? How to spot a murderer. Let's say you arrest three guys for the same killing. Put them all in jail overnight. The next morning, whoever is sleeping is your man. If you're guilty, you know you're caught, you get some rest - let your guard down, you follow?"

This struck a chord in me about a current event. In the news (you could have hardly avoided it) is the strange story of Senator Larry Craig.

In case you've been out of the country (or in case you don't live the the U.S.), the Republican Senator from Idaho was arrested on June 11th at a Minnesota airport by a plainclothes police officer. The officer was investigating lewd conduct complaints in a men's public restroom.

On August 8th, he pled guilty to misdemeanor disorderly conduct. He paid more than $500 in fines and fees, and a 10-day jail sentence was stayed, with one year probation.

Craig's spokesman said it was a "misunderstanding".

And yet, he pled guilty.

Craig later said, "I should have had the advice of counsel in resolving this matter. In hindsight, I should not have pled guilty. I was trying to handle this matter myself quickly and expiditiously."

Here's where the incongruity comes in:

1. An innocent man doesn't plead guilty. An innocent man puts up a huge fight, doesn't get any sleep, rages about his innocence. (This is not to say that guilty people don't also use this same tactic.)

2. He didn't call an attorney. This is always the first thing one does - whether guilty or innocent - when dealing with law enforcement. What's the "quickest and most expeditious" way to handle a legal matter? Get some representation. Attorneys are like dentists... we don't really want to deal with them until we REALLY need them, but still... this is a "really need them" situation.

3. By saying, "I have never been gay - nor have I ever been gay," he believes that it is possible to be gay, say six months ago, then become ungay, say last week. This points towards a "waffling" and cover up.

And last, but perhaps the most incongruous action of all:

4. He didn't go home and tell his wife about the incident. If something as outrageous as this happened to any one of us and had absolutely no basis in truth, wouldn't we all go home to our spouses (or families or friends) and say, "You're not going to believe what happened to me today. It's the most absurd thing..."

Senator Craig has come up with a scapegoat in the form of "the media".

He claims that he pled guilty because he had been troubled by the investigations into his alleged homosexuality by the Idaho Statesman and claims that he has "been relentlessly and viciously harassed".

The media is easily vilified and a safe scapegoat, but here with his "history" it doesn't ring true.

As persuaders, how, in either situation - whether the allegations are absolutely false or absolutely true - could we frame the story if we were in his shoes?

Did his incongruity give him away?

And what can he do to unframe himself?

Until Next Time,

Kenrick E. Cleveland

Hi Persuader,

Phobias and isms... they come in all shapes and sizes. There's racism, sexism, classism, sizeism, anti-Semitism, anti-intellectualism... All of these represent a belief of superiority of one race, gender, class, size, or religion over another or a hatred of one against another.

Then we've got phobias, which are defined as "irrational fears".

Now there's the new kid on the block, Islamophobia. Actually, the term isn't new. It made its debut in the 1980s, but didn't become popular until after 9/11.

Is Islamophobia a fear? Is it rational or irrational? Could Islamophobia really be just another brand of racism?

We frame our world through words every day. It's all semantics: meaning expressed through language.

For example, we use the term homophobia to describe the irrational fear of homosexuals. However, we do not use the term heterosexism which would suggest the superiority of heterosexuality. Wouldn't heterosexism be more accurate? Who's afraid of homosexuals these days anyway?

You can see the term Islamophobia debated in this article:

http://townhall.com/columnists/DennisPrager/2007/07/31/why_islamophobia_is_a_brilliant_term

Regardless of your personal position on Islamophobia or on this writer's opinion, it is always useful to understand this take from a framing perspective.

Words have enormous power. Words can irritate and incite and enrage, or they can soothe and placate and calm. Words, when used with precision, set the frame for your listener to accept what you're saying. In doing so, you lower resistance and objection with your affluent prospects.

Stay tuned for another post on Monday. Have a great weekend!

Until then,

Kenrick E. Cleveland

Hi Persuader,

Here's a great example of a powerful strategy called gaslighting and how to use it in your persuasive situations with the affluent...

I was flipping through the channels a few nights ago and I stopped on an old episode of M*A*S*H. It was the episode where BJ is bored and in an attempt to entertain himself he decides to have a little fun at Winchester's expense.

He takes a pair of Winchester's pants and replaces them with a much larger pair. When Winchester puts them on, BJ casually asks if Winchester is feeling okay, mentioning that lately he's looked a little sickly. Maybe he's not eating enough to keep up his energy, and oh boy, does he look way too thin!

A few scenes later BJ replaces the pants with a much smaller pair and when Winchester tries them on, BJ again casually "notices" how much weight Winchester has gained, which sends the vain Winchester into a dieting frenzy.

Having observed this all, Hawkeye asks BJ, "What's next?"

BJ simply responds, "Tomorrow he gets taller."

This is an example of gaslighting as a harmless prank, but the technique has far more nefarious potential and conversely when used ethically, some positive potential as well.

As with all the techniques I teach, I want to emphasize that these strategies are incredibly powerful and are developed to help with persuasion and should be used ethically with your prospects.

From the 1944 film Gaslight the term "gaslighting" acquired the meaning of ruthlessly manipulating an individual into believing something other than the truth.

The jist of the movie is that a husband tries to make his wife seem insane in order to get her out of his way by getting her admitted to a mental hospital. He does this in subtle ways that cause her to doubt her own ability to interpret reality.

Understanding and influencing how your affluent prospect interprets their reality is an intregal part of persuasion.

There are five main strategies employed in the technique of gaslighting and you can use each one to your advantage when persuading your affluent prospects.

The first is repetitive questioning and this is used to plant the seed of doubt in a person.

Game shows employ this tactic in order to heighten anticipation by causing the contestants to doubt their decisions - asking and reasking, "are you sure?"

A simple cock of the head, a raising of the eyebrow, and a comment such as, "really?" can install in the recipient, the necessary seed of doubt needed to set them off guard.

With this strategy, it is most effective to come from a non-threatening or non-challenging position. After all, you only have their best interest at heart, so go ahead and make them aware of it.

The second strategy used in gaslighting is to point out things that aren't there.

This is a particularly useful strategy in undermining a sense of reality. On the flip side, this can be used just as effectively in pointing out a person's assets and qualities, especially if the person has no idea that this quality exists within them (and even if it doesn't actually exist within them).

In interactions with a boss, a client, a prospect, someone of authority, or someone we'd like to sell to, this can be an effective tactic. Appealing to a sense of vanity or ego, when done correctly, can work phenomenally.

Warning: if the compliment is completely without merit, an obvious fabrication, then one is sure to be discovered. Subtlety and at least a small nugget of honesty works best here.

The third strategy may be employed by various professionals, experts and/or authority figures. For example, a therapist (or minister, or pychic, or doctor) has specialized or divine access to unseeable information about you - deep, mysterious information that only they know how to reveal and which gives them "the answer" that you seek.

This phenomenon causes the client to lower defenses and be more trusting and dependant. This may be part of the reason patients sometimes develop crushes on their therapists.

With these "mysteries" it is implied that the authority figure or expert is really the only way.

In sales, this technique is employed when the customer says they can get the product or service elsewhere.

For example, I really love music and not too long ago I went out to update my stereo system, specifically to find new speakers. A really knowledgeable sales lady in the store said, "Oh, you look like a person who really is a connoisseur of music."

I replied, "Yeah, I am."

And she said, "Well, you gotta hear this... Now, let me warn you. You're going to hear it and you're going to love it. And they're expensive, so should we start with something less?"

Well, I loved them. Immediately. Could I have bought it cheaper elsewhere? Probably. But you know what, the great thing was, she said, "I'll stand behind this and if anything goes wrong, we'll fix it for free. And if you need any help, I'll come and help you."

And then came the specialized knowledge. She said, "Are you good at positioning speakers?"

Positioning speakers? I had no idea what she was talking about.

I said, "You mean like other than setting them on the floor?"

"Oh, not with Martin Logans. They have to be positioned. They have to be so far from the wall and even then, it's an art. It's not a science." She continued, "Like you'll put it about so far from the wall, but there's a sweet spot and you have to turn it and adjust it and all of a sudden they sound like they're worth double what they are."

Specialized knowledge.

Well, I wasn't maneuvered into buying the speakers because of this, but let me tell you something, it didn't hurt that she had really excellent information that I wouldn't have been able to get had I ordered my speakers elsewhere.

The fourth gaslighting strategy involves revealing the secret thoughts of others.

Another term for this: gossip. But it's a specialized gossip, maneuvering the person in an attempt to give them 'insight' or a heads up about what others are saying and thereby establishing you as the one who cares enough to know the truth in driving a wedge between them and the others you name.

This can be used to install insecurity and destroy relationships, so be aware that others may use this on you. When you understand how it works, you can counteract it.

When you are the one performing the strategies, remember to use the utmost integrity with all of these.

To use this positively, you can "gossip" about the good things people are saying. "Confidentially, so and so says you're doing an amazing job, but she didn't want me to tell you this because she's afraid of losing you."

It helps to install positive behavior. Encouragement and praise are more powerful than derision and destruction.

The final strategy employed in gaslighting is to use the mighty power of the many against the fragile power of the one.

Kids do this all the time. It's employed in politics, religion, and suburbia, through the media, the educational system, and society-at-large in varying degrees.

It's a groupthink straight out of 1984.

Ganging up on others is a very powerful tactic. If many others confront you, telling you your position is wrong, it's very difficult to maintain your belief.

This one also has a positive use...

Bring the power of social proof to bear before you are challenged.

Show how studies or polls indicate that your position is overwhelmingly supported. A tremendous amount of people are not what I'd call "independent thinkers". When shown how, "overwhelmingly" a product or position is supported, they want to belong, agree and buy.

As you can see, gaslighting isn't necessarily a nice practice. It is designed into trick someone into doubting themselves and their own sanity.

But there are ways that gaslighting can be used for a positive outcome. You have to decide whether it's the right thing to use this technique and when it's the right time not to use it, but just know this:

There may be other people out there who are using it on you. At least if you know how to think like this, you'll know also how to defend against it.

Listen, this is just the tip of the persuasion iceberg. For more information on persuasion, and how you can strengthen your power of influence, please go to www.PersuasionFactor.com for a course on the details of persuading the affluent.

For further reading specifically on the subject of gaslighting, try Gaslighting, The Double Whammy, Interrogation, and Other Methods of Covert Control In Psychotherapy and Analysis by Dr. Theo L. Dorpat and Gaslighting: How To Drive Your Enemies Crazy by Vistor Santoro.

Until next time,

Kenrick E. Cleveland

I Just Can't Help Myself:
Framing The Third and Fourth Taboo

Let's see if this stirs you up. It's a stretch, and a pretty volatile subject. But maybe, just maybe, I'm trying to stir us all up.

We're all familiar with what they refer to as "the oldest profession". And we've all got our ideas and fears on the evils that arise from such a profession. In our society, prostitution is illegal. It's connected to drugs, violence, disease, abuse, and other problems. That's the frame. We can all agree on that, right?

How about looking through someone else's frame? A former student and acquaintance of mine sent me an e-mail recently with a link and all it said was, 'Check out this frame.' The link was to the International Committee for Prostitute's Rights. http://www.walnet.org/csis/groups/icpr_charter.html

I did a little further research and found that there's an organization called C.O.Y.O.T.E. It stands for Call Off Your Old Tired Ethics. This is a 'sex worker's' rights organization. (Notice the shift from 'prostitutes' to 'sex workers'.)

There is a strong movement in many major metropolitan cities in the USA and, in fact, all over the world, to decriminalize the profession and give 'sex workers' rights and protection by regulating the industry.

Wow. Talk about a changing perspective. I had definitely never heard of such a thing and it totally blew me away.

The idea is to differentiate between people who are being victimized and people who feel empowered in this industry. It's a hugely complex issue with the added emotional intensity that only religion, politics and sexuality, can incite.

One of their arguments is that this kind of work is an important part of the economy and that just looking to the legalized prostitution in Nevada and in other countries, points to how some of the dangers can be taken out of the industry by way of regulation. Get rid of the pimps, the violence is cut down. Mandatory monthly medical treatment and safe practices, nearly eliminate the medical and health dangers.

The proponents have taken this highly charged issue out of the frame of morality, and put it in the frame of 'important part of the economy'. Advocates of legalizing drugs use the same argument. And, as with prostitution, point to Amsterdam as an example of how a shift in strategy can work.

How much is spent each year on imprisoning petty pot growers/users, and 'working girls'? If no violence or pain to another human being takes place, these are 'victimless crimes'. I'm absolutely not advocating this, but just showing, yet again, where once we thought ours was the only belief possible to have, there are intelligent, thoughtful opponents to our construct of reality.

Again, this is just an exercise in framing and when you can reframe a very strong argument with another strong argument, whoever has the better frame, wins.

For more framing, instigating, cajoling, stirring up, and prompting, call Kim at kim@MAXpersuasion.com.

Until next time,

Kenrick E. Cleveland