LO G I N SUBSCRIBE

C O. D E S I G N TECH WORK LIFE NEWS I M PAC T PODCASTS VIDEO IF360 FA S

01 -2 7-24 H OW TO B E A S U CC E S S AT E V E RY T H I N G

5 simple strategies for changing anyone’s mind

Michael McQueen the author of Mindstuck explains how to influence people without using
tired old strategies.

[Photo: Wilawan Pantukang/Pexels]

BY N E X T B I G I D E A C LU B
10 MINUTE READ

Michael McQueen is an award-winning speaker, business strategist, and trend forecaster. He has
helped some of the world’s best-known brands maintain relevance and has authored five best-selling
books.

Below, McQueen shares five key insights from his new book, Mindstuck: Mastering the Art of Changing
Minds. Listen to the audio version—read by Michael himself—in the Next Big Idea App.
1. WE’RE
LO GUSING
IN 19TH AND 20TH CENTURY TACTICS FOR CHANGING
S U B S C R21ST
IBE
CENTURY MINDS
C O. D E S I G N TECH WORK LIFE NEWS I M PAC T PODCASTS VIDEO IF360 FA S
We are told you can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink. But what if you could? Having
spent the past two decades helping leaders and organizations embrace the changes they’d rather
fight or ignore, I think changing the minds of even the most stubborn individuals is possible. However,
the process is very different from what conventional wisdom suggests.

While stubbornness is nothing new, we live in an era when it is more prevalent than ever. You could
almost describe obstinance as one of the hallmarks of our age. Yet changing people’s minds is
something we spend a lot of our lives attempting. We spend 40 percent of our time trying to sway the
minds of others, but our persuasive efforts are only successful three to five percent of the time.

One reason is that we often use 19th- and 20th-century tactics to change 21st-century minds. It’s a
dynamic I like to call the Francis Bacon Effect. Francis Bacon was a 17th-century scientist and
philosopher who is often described as one of the founding fathers of the Enlightenment. Francis
Bacon’s big idea was that humans are fundamentally rational and reasonable. As such, he suggested
that to educate or influence someone to change their thinking, the key was exposing them to reliable
evidence and logical arguments. This way, they’d have no option but to come to their senses and see
reason. In recent years, not only have we discovered that this isn’t the case, but the opposite is true.
Exposing people to even the most reliable evidence and logical arguments tends to cause their minds
to clamp down rather than open.

The latest discoveries in brain science offer clues as to why this is the case. It’s worth clarifying that
we can be reasonable and rational, but only part of our brain does this well. I describe this as
the inquiring mind, which lives in our brains’ frontal lobe. The inquiring mind loves logic and is both
meticulous and nuanced. However, it is slow and takes a lot of energy to use, so we use it far less
than you might assume. In fact, our inquiring mind is responsible for only about five to ten percent of
our perceptions and judgments. The rest of our thinking happens in a part of our brains which I refer
to as the instinctive mind. Our instinctive mind is impulsive and efficient and is governed by the parts
of our brain associated with the limbic system. This is one of the most ancient parts of our cognitive
hardware, and it’s typically associated with tribalism, processing emotions, and flight-or-fight reflexes.

One of the things our limbic system does best is protect us. From a survival perspective, our instincts
have served humanity well for thousands of years. The problem is that our instinctive minds react in
much the same way, whether a threat is physical or psychological. The latest brain research has
revealed that when we are confronted with information or ideas that threaten our opinions and
convictions, our neurological instinct is to batten down the hatches and retreat to stubbornness. Even
the best evidence and logic will struggle to get a fair hearing when this happens. Pushing harder in
our persuasive efforts will invariably backfire. Influencing others must always start with intentional
efforts to disarm rather than provoke.

2. LESSEN THE LOSS

One of the dominant emotions associated with stubbornness is fear. Although we’re often told that
humans are inherently afraid of change, recent research reveals this is not true. It is not change that
we fear most; it is loss. Whether it’s a loss of pride, dignity, or certainty, successful persuasion isn’t as
much about selling the upsides of change as it is about lessening the loss.

One of the dynamics that plays into this is something I refer to as psychological sunk cost. Many of us
are familiar with the idea of an economic sunk cost. This describes what happens when we stick with
an unfavorable course of action simply because we have already invested so much money and time
in it. Similarly, we tend to hold onto opinions or worldviews simply because we have invested time,
LO G I(most
energy, and N importantly) our reputation into them. SUBSCRIBE

C O. D E S I G N TECH WORK LIFE NEWS I M PAC T PODCASTS VIDEO IF360 FA S

As a result, we will cling to old ways of thinking rather than embracing ones we know are more
accurate or will serve us better because changing our minds can come at too great a cost for our
dignity. We become afraid of The Unraveling Effect, asking ourselves, if this one thing is not accurate,
what else have I believed to be true that may not be?

“In-between beliefs” like this can feel unsettling. This psychological discomfort motivates our
instinctive mind to find a resolution that restores the safety of certainty—even if that means ignoring
evidence despite a nagging sense that something’s not right.

The implications of this for persuasion are significant. When we ask someone to consider a new idea
or are challenged to do so ourselves, this is no small ask. It means not just adopting a new viewpoint
but discarding an old one.

The fear of losing certainty becomes particularly terrifying when ideas become conflated with our
identity. Even when a counterpart sees the sense in our perspective, the most rock-solid logic will
have little effect if they feel ego-bound to maintain their position. The other party may agree with us
deep down, but they’ll never admit it if they feel they will lose face. As Ed Coper suggests in his
book Facts and Other Lies, “We must never force people to admit they are stupid in order to admit
they’re wrong.”

3. PRACTICAL WAYS TO AVOID RESISTANCE WHEN TRYING TO INFLUENCE

This comes down to allowing for autonomy. Humans don’t respond well to coercion, so we need to
ensure that our persuasion doesn’t rob the listener of their sense of control. The best way to do this is
by making sure people feel they have a choice. Civic engagement expert Peter Block said it best:
“The yes of another person means nothing if they don’t have the ability to say no. There can be no
commitment if there is no choice.”

One way to affirm people’s autonomy (without giving them free rein) is the technique of guided
choices. This is an approach many parents use with their children, but it’s equally effective in
leadership contexts. In the same way that a parent may give their child an option over the order in
which they do their chores, we can offer choices that allow for a sense of agency. People are more
likely to follow through with something if they feel they have some control over the process.

Beyond guiding choices, another powerful technique for affirming autonomy is to give the option of
doing nothing. Use these fifteen words after making your appeal: “If you can’t do it, I’ll completely
understand.” Then, after a brief pause, you continue: “If you can, I’d really appreciate it.” Of course, this
approach has plenty of variations—phrases like please don’t feel obligated or this is totally up to you—
but the principle remains the same. The other individual retains the power to choose. It also
highlights the most helpful and generous choice they could make. Giving people an out almost
guarantees they’ll opt in.

Approaches like this effectively motivate changes in behavior, but the same principle applies when
influencing beliefs and opinions. Coercive kinds of persuasion are less obvious here, but they can
take the form of resorting to fear, shame, or guilt. While playing to negative emotions can be highly
effective in eliciting a reaction, doing so is counterproductive in the long term as it usually comes at
the cost of genuine affinity and trust. Appealing to higher emotions like hope, altruism, and
responsibility not only grants people the freedom to choose but it encourages them to choose based
on a positive vision for themselves and their world. Such changes are far more likely to stick.
4. THELO
IMPORTANCE
GIN OF TRUST SUBSCRIBE

After years of studying what builds rapport between individuals, neuro-economist Paul Zak
C O. D E S I G N FA S
discovered that Tthe
ECH
mostWimportant
ORK LIFE NEWS
factor I M PAC T
for building PODCASTS
trust VIDEO
is our humanness IF360
. Being real, vulnerable,
and even fallible results in the release of the hormone oxytocin—the neuro mechanism humans
unconsciously use to determine who we can trust.

However, vulnerability tends to be the opposite posture most of us adopt when attempting to
persuade. Instead, we generally lead with our best arguments and our most irrefutable evidence. We
assume that strength, assertiveness, and a sense of being impregnable will make us persuasive.
Things like doubt and uncertainty are to be concealed because these show weakness.

The original masters of persuasion had a very different view. The ancients realized that vulnerability
was the essential foundation for building affinity and trust. Roman rhetorician Quintilian knew this.
For him, one of the most persuasive things any individual could do was not just to acknowledge their
uncertainties and doubts but to lead with them. This idea came to be known as dubitatio from which
we derive the modern English word dubious.

Numerous studies in recent years have confirmed how effective self-doubt is in the process of
winning people over to us and our ideas. For instance, a social psychologist Kip Williams meta-
analysis found that jurors were more likely to view an attorney and their case favorably if the attorney
revealed weaknesses in their case before the opposition had the chance to do so. In doing this, the
attorney signaled that they are fair-minded, balanced, and honest. Verdicts were statistically more
likely to be given in favor of the party first to bring up a shortcoming in their argument.

While it’s only human to want to present ourselves in the best light, doing so is both unproductive and
unpersuasive. To build trust and affinity with those we seek to influence, vulnerability, self-doubt, and
self-disclosure are more likely to shift the dial.

5. AIM FOR APORIA

The very principles, practices, and purpose of debate have changed so enormously over the centuries
that the undisputed original experts of argument—Socrates, Aristotle, and Plato—would hardly
recognize what we describe today as debate. For a start, the ancient concept of argument was far
from a zero-sum game. It was not about winning or losing, scoring points, or ego strutting.

For Socrates and his contemporaries, losing an argument was not a failure or a source of shame and
embarrassment. Quite the contrary. The feeling associated with being tripped up in an argument was
described as a moment of enlightenment, self-knowledge, and freedom. They had a name for
it: aporia.

According to modern philosopher James Garvey, the ancient notion of aporia was “a weightless
moment as you float free of the mental rut you were in—you stop, your eyes narrow, and no words
come to you.” This feeling of aporia represented a wonderful opportunity to move in a new intellectual
direction and grasp new possibilities.

The word aporia means “no path,” and that’s what losing an argument once represented. It was a
liberating and exhilarating feeling to be in unfamiliar territory where the next step was unclear. In their
pursuit of intellectual free-fall, the ancient Greeks would argue passionately for hours, not with the
intention of dominating their opponent; aporia was their aim.
In our adversarial age, when it’s rare for a discussion in the public square to end up in any place other
LO G I N
than a battleground, this is a concept we would do well to revive. When we seekS UtoB Spersuade
CRIBE
others,
we should consider the words of eighteenth-century French essayist Joseph Joubert, “The aim of an FA S
C O. D E S I G N TECH WORK LIFE NEWS I M PAC T PODCASTS VIDEO IF360
argument should not be victory, but progress.”

Although we may win the point or trump our opponent’s argument, if our victory has come at the cost
of the relationship, we have both lost. Moreover, it’s highly unlikely that genuine persuasion has
occurred. As the American writer and columnist Tim Kreider observes, exhausting someone through
argument is not the same thing as convincing them. In the context of any high-stakes interaction
where we are looking to persuade another individual, the decision we all need to make carefully is
whether we are more interested in making a point or making progress. We may live in an age of
obstinance, but I’m convinced persuasion is an art that everyone can master.

This article originally appeared in Next Big Idea Club magazine and is reprinted with permission.

Now accepting applications for Innovation by Design.

Apply by February 23 for your chance to be featured!

Work Smarter, not harder. Get our editors' tips and stories delivered weekly.

Email *

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

SIGN UP

Privacy Policy

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

The best new nonfiction book summaries in 15 minutes, directly from the authors. Book club curated by Malcolm
Gladwell, Adam Grant, Susan Cain, and Daniel Pink. More

E X P LO R E TO P I C S

H OW TO B E A S U C C E S S AT E V E RY T H I N G
 LO G I N SUBSCRIBE

C O. D E S I G N TECH WORK LIFE NEWS I M PAC T PODCASTS VIDEO IF360 FA S

 LO G I N SUBSCRIBE

C O. D E S I G N TECH WORK LIFE NEWS I M PAC T PODCASTS VIDEO IF360 FA S

 LO G I N SUBSCRIBE

C O. D E S I G N TECH WORK LIFE NEWS I M PAC T PODCASTS VIDEO IF360 FA S

 LO G I N SUBSCRIBE

C O. D E S I G N TECH WORK LIFE NEWS I M PAC T PODCASTS VIDEO IF360 FA S

 LO G I N SUBSCRIBE

C O. D E S I G N TECH WORK LIFE NEWS I M PAC T PODCASTS VIDEO IF360 FA S

TECH NEWS CO.DESIGN WORK LIFE

T EC H NEWS CO. D E S I G N WO R K L I F E
How to watch the Microsoft, Levi’s, The NFL’s secret The relentless
NFL Conference TikTok, Ebay, and mission to rid the pursuit of short-
Championships more: all the tech U.S. of each term wins might
live on CBS and and retail losing team’s feel good in the
Fox without cable companies that championship moment, but it’s
have recently swag a recipe for
made layoffs irrelevance
T EC H
 Why Tally is the NEWS CO. D E S I G N WO R K L I F E
best LO
free
G I Nway to $50 million in one Ikea has a plan 5 traits that set
SUBSCRIBE

make a survey day: Detroit for the office of athletes apart at

C O. D E S I G N TECH W O RLions’s
K L I F E ‘Taylor
NEWS I M PAC Tthe Pfuture,
O D C A S Tand
S VIDEO I F 3 6 0(and why FA S
it work
Swift’ effect on looks a lot like they make
T EC H the city’s coworking excellent hires)
Before you get on economy
a 737 Max, here
are some CO. D E S I G N WO R K L I F E
answers to your NEWS Levi’s layoffs: The What to do when
questions Looking to catch jeans giant is your counteroffer
up on Oscar- cutting its global is better than
nominated films? workforce by up your new job
Here’s how to to 15% offer
watch them
online

Fast Company & Inc © 2024 Mansueto Ventures, LLC

Advertise Careers Privacy Policy

Terms Do Not Sell My Data Notice of Collection

Permissions Help Center About Us Site Map

Fastcompany.com adheres to NewsGuard’s

nine standards of credibility and transparency.
Learn More