The Small BIG: Small Changes That Spark Big Influence by Steve J. Martin, Noah Goldstein, Robert Cialdini
Tags: Business & Economics, Management
Ads: Link
overall number of customer objections, but also benefit the supplier by allowing them to keep each customer for an extra three months. And everybody wins, since the customers would have flexibility in that first three months to decide whether they were satisfied with the service.
Of course we recognize that in an ideal world it would be preferable not to have to wait at all. But sometimes, as we occasionally pointed out to our editors, a little late is certainly better than never.
Chapter 15.
What SMALL BIG do you owe it to yourself to act on?
E very day we see persuasive messages appealing to our sense of obligation and moral responsibility to other people. Commercials tell us we owe it to our families to buy life insurance. Politicians tell us we owe it to our fellow citizens to buy products produced domestically. Environmentalists tell us we owe it to future generations to conserve the world’s natural resources. And our conscience tells us we owe it to our parents to take care of them as they get older after all they’ve done for us. It’s clear that we owe it to a lot of different people to do the right things in life, but is there one person out there whom we might owe it to the most?
How about your future self?
Researchers Christopher Bryan and Hal Hershfield explored the hypothesis that people can be persuaded to engage in behaviors that are beneficial to themselves in the long-term (even if they are seemingly costly in the short-term) by appealing to their sense of moral responsibility to the future version of themselves.
Considering that most people are in danger of not saving enough to ensure a financially secure future, the specific behavior that Bryan and Hershfield examined was saving money for retirement. To test their ideas, the researchers studied nearly 200 staff members of a university who had not been contributing much to their retirement plans.
All staff members enrolled in the study were sent a message reminding them of the importance of saving for retirement and strongly encouraging them to increase their savings rate. However, the last paragraph of the message differed significantly depending on which group the staff members were randomly assigned to.
For example, in the “standard future self-interest” condition, participants read, “We urge you to consider your long-term interests and to start saving more now. After all, your long-term well-being is at stake. Your decisions now will determine how much money is available to you when you retire.”
In the “obligation to future self” condition, participants read, “We urge you to consider the responsibility you have to yourself in retirement and to start saving more now. After all, your ‘future self’ is completely dependent on you. Your decisions now will determine how much financial security your future self can count on.”
Two weeks later, the researchers asked the university benefits office to report how much participants changed their retirement plan savings rate after they viewed the message. Those who received the “obligation to future self” message increased their savings rate by 0.85 percent more than those who received the “standard future self-interest” message. At first glance this doesn’t seem that much of a difference, but consider the results if a 30-year-old man earning the national median salary of $45,485 per year increases his standard 5 percent contribution to 5.85 percent. Assuming he gets no raises over his lifetime (an extremely conservative estimate), on retirement at 65 years of age that small increase will have accrued an extra $68,797 of savings. Another way of looking at it is that the man in this example can retire roughly one and a half years earlier simply because of his response to the owe-it-to-yourself persuasive message!
This research demonstrates how appealing to people’s moral responsibility to the future version of themselves can be a powerful influence strategy. However, it is
Of course we recognize that in an ideal world it would be preferable not to have to wait at all. But sometimes, as we occasionally pointed out to our editors, a little late is certainly better than never.
Chapter 15.
What SMALL BIG do you owe it to yourself to act on?
E very day we see persuasive messages appealing to our sense of obligation and moral responsibility to other people. Commercials tell us we owe it to our families to buy life insurance. Politicians tell us we owe it to our fellow citizens to buy products produced domestically. Environmentalists tell us we owe it to future generations to conserve the world’s natural resources. And our conscience tells us we owe it to our parents to take care of them as they get older after all they’ve done for us. It’s clear that we owe it to a lot of different people to do the right things in life, but is there one person out there whom we might owe it to the most?
How about your future self?
Researchers Christopher Bryan and Hal Hershfield explored the hypothesis that people can be persuaded to engage in behaviors that are beneficial to themselves in the long-term (even if they are seemingly costly in the short-term) by appealing to their sense of moral responsibility to the future version of themselves.
Considering that most people are in danger of not saving enough to ensure a financially secure future, the specific behavior that Bryan and Hershfield examined was saving money for retirement. To test their ideas, the researchers studied nearly 200 staff members of a university who had not been contributing much to their retirement plans.
All staff members enrolled in the study were sent a message reminding them of the importance of saving for retirement and strongly encouraging them to increase their savings rate. However, the last paragraph of the message differed significantly depending on which group the staff members were randomly assigned to.
For example, in the “standard future self-interest” condition, participants read, “We urge you to consider your long-term interests and to start saving more now. After all, your long-term well-being is at stake. Your decisions now will determine how much money is available to you when you retire.”
In the “obligation to future self” condition, participants read, “We urge you to consider the responsibility you have to yourself in retirement and to start saving more now. After all, your ‘future self’ is completely dependent on you. Your decisions now will determine how much financial security your future self can count on.”
Two weeks later, the researchers asked the university benefits office to report how much participants changed their retirement plan savings rate after they viewed the message. Those who received the “obligation to future self” message increased their savings rate by 0.85 percent more than those who received the “standard future self-interest” message. At first glance this doesn’t seem that much of a difference, but consider the results if a 30-year-old man earning the national median salary of $45,485 per year increases his standard 5 percent contribution to 5.85 percent. Assuming he gets no raises over his lifetime (an extremely conservative estimate), on retirement at 65 years of age that small increase will have accrued an extra $68,797 of savings. Another way of looking at it is that the man in this example can retire roughly one and a half years earlier simply because of his response to the owe-it-to-yourself persuasive message!
This research demonstrates how appealing to people’s moral responsibility to the future version of themselves can be a powerful influence strategy. However, it is
Similar Books
