Practical Eloquence Blog |

Communication Lessons from The Mooch

By Jack Malcolm / 8.1.2017 / No Comment

I don’t know about you, but I’m going to miss The Mooch. He packed more communication lessons in a shorter time than anyone I’ve ever seen.

There’s an old saying: “No man is completely useless. He can always serve as a bad example.” So, in that spirit, let’s see what we can learn from Anthony’s spectacular flameout:

· The danger of information compulsion. Tom Wolfe coined the term, which is the overwhelming need that people have to tell you something you don’t know, especially when it helps to puff up their own importance. Good listeners know that simply remaining quiet can yield amazing amounts of information from those who suffer from it.

· Impression management is not inauthentic; it’s smart. Nowadays, it’s popular to tout the value of being authentic, and letting your true self come out to others. Yet, when your true self is vain, profane and vindictive, you might want to think about toning it down a bit. It’s called calculated authenticity, and it’s essential, especially when you’re in the public eye.

· Flattery has its limits. Flattery can be surprisingly useful, as I wrote in my last two blog posts, but apparently even Donald Trump has his threshold of embarrassment.

· Nothing is private anymore. Scaramucci claimed that he thought his conversation with Ryan Lizza of the New Yorker was off the record, which Lizza disputes. Regardless, it’s extremely prudent to assume the mike is on at all times.

· Prepare, prepare, prepare. The most effective communicators know precisely what they want to accomplish and how they want to say things when they go into a sales call, which is essentially what a media interview is. His indiscretion was not as serious as Gunter Schabowski’s, which essentially opened up the Berlin Wall, but it was close.

· Choose your timing. It was probably not coincidental that all of this was happening when Scaramucci’s divorce was being finalized. I doubt we’ll ever know if he was thinking at full capacity, but he might have waited to let things settle down a bit before reaching out to the media.

· If you don’t have something good to say about someone, don’t say anything at all.

Looking back at what I’ve written, I’ve written blog posts about almost every one of the lessons that The Mooch should have learned. Maybe if he had been a regular reader of this blog, he would still have a job today!

Expression - Persuasive communication

How to Flatter Others Without Being a Complete Suck-Up

By Jack Malcolm / 6.26.2017 / No Comment

In the last post, we saw that flattery works, even when it is patently obvious to the receiver that you have an ulterior motive for saying nice things about them. That said, I admit that there are three things wrong with following my advice to be a suck-up. First, you may feel a bit slimy doing it, even when you know it’s the smart thing to do. Second, your peers or any outside observers may think less of you. Finally, while the research shows that there’s a low risk of having it backfire on you, there are more skillful and less awkward ways of ingratiating yourself. As Mark Twain said,

The happy phrasing of a compliment is one of the rarest of human gifts, and the happy delivery of it another.

In case you don’t have the “gift”, here are some suggested techniques to improve your complimenting skills:

Probably the most important rule of all is to keep it real by complimenting them for something that you genuinely admire. When you believe it, you are much more likely to say it authentically, and the recipient is much more likely to accept it gladly without question.

Find something different to compliment them on. If it’s something less obvious than what they hear all the time from others, it’s more likely to get their attention, and it also signals that you cared enough to research them carefully before meeting them.

Be specific in your praise. I confess that once or twice, when I’ve had someone compliment me about one of my books, I’ve asked them what they specifically liked about it, and it became obvious that they had not read it.

Of course, these first three suggestions require If it’s someone you’re meeting for the first time, research them as much as you can—the deeper the better. It shows you care, and it’s so easy nowadays that not doing it can be seen as insulting.

Ask them for advice. Everyone loves to be considered important and/or knowledgeable, and asking them for advice is an indirect way of expressing your admiration while potentially getting something valuable in return.

Go behind their backs. In other words, don’t praise them directly. If you praise them to others, you can be sure it will get back to them and seem even more heartfelt for being said to someone else.

Separate the praise from the need. Praise followed by an immediate request is too transparent, so invest into the bank of goodwill early with your compliments before you need anything.

Soft-pedal your praise. Just like a backhanded compliment can offend, you can a faux insult can please: “Wow, that’s actually not such a dumb idea!” Be careful with this one, but it works really well with some personalities, especially people who are a little uncomfortable with suck-ups.

Listen to the other person. I believe that the sincerest form of flattery is not imitation but actually listening—paying the other person the compliment of believing that what they have to say matters.

Finally, adjust your attitude toward complimenting others. If you consider flattery beneath you, ask yourself how making another other person feel important can be a bad thing.

Uncategorized

Flattery Will Get You Everywhere

By Jack Malcolm / 6.19.2017 / No Comment

I was initially appalled when I watched the recent cringeworthy video of Donald Trump’s cabinet meeting, where hugely powerful and successful men and women competed to see who could offer the highest (or lowest, depending on your point of view) form of flattery for their boss.

That was my personal reaction, but my professional reaction was totally different. As distasteful as it may have appeared, it was actually a brilliant display of persuasive communication skill. Think about it this way: if your goal is to advance the interests of the department you head, you need the support of the President. If you’re the only one in the room not competing to outdo the others in compliments, what do you suppose are your chances? (And don’t forget that each of these people is quite accustomed to being on the receiving end of flattery from their subordinates—they know it works.)

Trump’s apparent craving for flattery is probably extreme, but research has shown that flattery works with just about everyone. Stanford professor Jeffery Pfeffer says that “The surest way to keep your position and to build a power base is to help those with more power enhance their positive feelings about themselves.”[1] Jennifer Chatman of UC Berkeley says, “People who bring positive information, that stroke the boss, that make the boss feel good about the decisions he or she has made, that build up the boss’ confidence, those people are going to do better.”[2]

The reason it works is that a person hearing something nice about themselves can either a) believe that the other person is only saying it to curry favor, or b) believe it’s true. The problem with accepting A is that it requires you to think less well not only of the person saying it, but of yourself. Through the magic of motivated reasoning you are much more likely to choose B. And besides, as this recent article indicates, the really powerful may actually be incapable of reading your true intentions (not that you would tell them)!

It also works because it makes the recipient like you better. Robert Cialdini cites a study in which men received comments about themselves (some only praise, some negative comments, and others a mixture) from a person who needed a favor. Those who received only praise reported liking the commenter better, even when they knew they needed a favor and the praise was untrue.[3]

That last statement shows that there’s not much risk of a backlash if your flattery is over the top. In her research, Chatman looked for the point at which flattery becomes less effective, and was not able to find it. Flattery is that powerful, which is why Machiavelli explicitly warned leaders against its power over five hundred years ago.

Flattery isn’t just for managing upward within your organization. It can be useful in sales calls or presentations, especially to get the audience more favorably disposed to your message right at the beginning. Keep in mind that a sales pitch can be ego-threatening to the buyer, because in effect you’re telling them that they’re doing something wrong and they need to change. Soften the blow by stroking their ego at the beginning, to get them more favorably disposed toward your idea and to you personally.

So, go ahead and be a suck-up. If you read this article, you are clearly too smart to let flattery work on you, but you are also too smart to pass up the use of this extremely powerful tool, even if you find it distasteful. But just in case, my next post will address how to do it without being a complete suck-up.

[1] Jeffrey Pfeffer, Power: Why Some People Have It and Others Don’t, p. 31.

[2] Workers’ “Sucking Up” Bad for Business: Experts

[3] Robert, Cialdini, Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion, p. 176.

Expression

3 Credibility Lessons from Comey’s Testimony

By Jack Malcolm / 6.8.2017 / No Comment

I have to admit to taking off three hours from real work today to watch former FBI Director James Comey answer questions from fifteen senators of the Senate Intelligence Committee. Putting aside the fact that he was under oath and therefore subject to severe penalties if he is later found to have lied, I found his testimony to be very credible, for three reasons.

Together, they comprise what I call 3-Ds of credibility: Directness, Detail, and Demeanor.

Directness: First off, Comey answered every question he was asked, except those he felt that he could not comment on in an open session. There was no dancing around or playing cute by giving evasive answers. He also answered each question directly, without any “context-setting” or preemptive excuses for what he was about to say. In general, every answer was a classic example of BLUF, or Bottom Line Up Front.

Detail: He supplied enough concrete details when he described incidents or conversations to give the immediate impression that he was telling the truth, even at one point trying to mimic the facial expressions he saw when he asked AG Sessions not to leave him alone with the President. People who make up stuff don’t tend to supply a lot of detail which can be verified, as for example when he described receiving one phone call at noon as he was getting ready to board a helicopter with the head of the DEA.

Demeanor: Throughout three hours of questioning Comey was calm, thoughtful, and sincere. There was no sense of evasiveness or nerves, nor did he appear to lose his composure or temper when any questioner appeared snarky or hostile. One commentator afterwards said that Comey had told one of his friends that truth makes you calm.

These three factors: directness, detail and demeanor– all contributed to a powerful sense of credibility from Comey’s testimony. Do they prove he was telling the truth? Of course not. He is an experienced lawyer and former prosecutor who knows full well that these three factors could work in his favor, so it’s possible that he faked the whole thing. It’s like the old joke that “sincerity is important, and once you can fake it you’ve got it made”. I don’t think he faked it, but if he did, that by itself does prove how important these three factors are.