Foundational Principles of Influence
The book Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion, written by Robert Cialdini, is a work founded on principles of influence. The findings led the author to believe that at least four rules provide unique nonprofit growth opportunities. These involved “reciprocity,” implying that individuals try to return in kind; “scarcity,” implying that possibilities appear more critical when they are less accessible; “authority,” meaning humans try to defer to authorities; and “consistency,” meaning individuals start behaving continuously (Cialdini & Martin, 2006).
Additional Techniques for Nonprofit Influence
Nonprofit executives should combine the techniques to have the most influence. Other key findings involve the importance of “social proof,” which states that people will act appropriately if they witness others acting similarly, and “liking,” which states that people are more likely to agree with someone they know and like (Cialdini & Martin, 2006).
Persuasion’s Role in Social Change
Consequently, persuasion can be connected to social welfare and social change, which can be illustrated through the example of Ethiopian and Mexican collaboration brought by Cialdini and Martin (2006). With persuasion, people or states are more inclined to reciprocate, and when observing such actions in others, many behave similarly, leading to social change.
Criticism and Theoretical Foundation
The research has been criticized for not having enough theoretical base. However, the author of Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion has a background in research. Three tests were conducted to determine how well a rejection-then-moderation technique works to influence people to comply with requests for favors. In each of the three tests, there was a scenario where the requester sought a big favor at first, which was denied to him, and then a modest favor (Cialdini et al., 1975).
Empirical Evidence and Hypotheses
Each test’s additional control circumstances provided evidence of the theory that a principle for reciprocal concessions channels the impact (Cialdini et al., 1975). The study was founded on the hypothesis of Freedman and Fraser (1966), who looked at the foot-in-the-door method as a way to convince an individual to agree to do something for them. They showed that persuading someone to comply with a small request significantly improves the probability that they will comply with a later, more significant request (Freedman & Fraser, 1966). Therefore, the book by Cialdini had enough foundation to establish its principles.
References
Cialdini, R., & Martin, S. (2006). The power of persuasion. Training Journal, 40-44. Web.
Cialdini, R. B., Vincent, J. E., Lewis, S. K., Catalan, J., Wheeler, D., & Darby, B. L. (1975). Reciprocal concessions procedure for inducing compliance: The door-in-the-face technique. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 31(2), 206–215. Web.
Freedman, J. L., & Fraser, S. C. (1966). Compliance without pressure: The foot-in-the-door technique. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 4(2), 195–202. Web.