Public Speaking, Sales and PR Flashcards
Make Your Mess
Your Message
-Robin Roberts
As a public person, Robin has divulged a lot of what’s gone on in her personal life. But as a journalist, she
was taught not to insert herself into the stories she’s reporting. This can be a complicated balancing act—one that’s evolving as the nature of information sharing continues to change.
n 2005, Hurricane Katrina hit Mississippi. Robin’s mother lived there and had been with Robin’s sister and her sister’s children during the hurricane. ABC flew Robin down to the area
to cover the story of Katrina on the ground. While the producers set up the shoot, Robin rushed to find her family to make sure they
were okay. How could she not? Luckily, she found them safe and sound. Shortly after, Robin had to go on the air. Charlie Gibson, an ABC anchor, asked Robin on live television if she’d been able to find her family.
Unable to stop herself, Robin started to cry. Her
immediate concern was that she had lost her job
for letting her raw emotions take over on live TV.
“Just the opposite happened,” she says today.
“I was being authentic. I was being in the moment. I was speaking from the heart.
People sensed that, rallied around me, and adopted
my hometown, which was decimated.” People thanked her for being real.
It’s up to news
organizations,
producers, and
editors to decide
how and when to
use a first-person
point of view.
-Robin Roberts
F or a long while, journalists were taught
to keep themselves out of their stories
to ensure complete impartiality. But in the
last 60 or so years—thanks in part to writers
like Joan Didion, Tom Wolfe, and Hunter S.
Thompson—the use of first-person narration in
reported features has become more and more
conventional. It’s often employed by writers
who are looking to imbue their work with a sense
of authority and emotion, or
maybe to add a bit of levity or
scene-setting to a particularly
wieldy story. No matter how
it’s being used, though, one
thing is for sure: First-person
narration draws a reader (or,
in Robin’s case, a viewer) in.
Public
Speaking
-Robin Roberts
Preparation equals confidence. Even those
people who embrace the stage and look like
they’re ad-libbing their way through a great
speech have some predetermined talking points. The way you present those points, in large part,
should be determined by your audience. Before outlining your speech (or your news report),
ask yourself what your audience wants to hear.
For Robin, answering this question sometimes means asking an audience member. She’ll ask the person who
invited her to speak what they’re hoping she
would convey, and then she’ll plan accordingly
by writing out some pertinent bullet points. Communicating effectively during a speaking
engagement requires that you engage your audience. Robin does this by sharing personal anecdotes. Just as you’ve learned to make your
mess your message, if you can insert yourself into
your talking points, you’ll show that you mean
what you’re saying.
where to look
-Robin Roberts
If you’re speaking to a very large crowd, Robin
suggests looking just over the crowd’s eye line.
That will make it appear that you’re looking at
everyone while giving you the personal comfort
of not having to be constantly reminded of the
crowd’s daunting size.
In a smaller crowd, find that one person who’s
looking straight at you and hanging on to your
every word. Speak to them. They’ll make you
feel confident about your speech. The audience
member who’s looking at their phone will only
end up distracting you as well. Ignore them.
where not to look
Don’t look at a prepared script, and definitely try to avoid writing out your speech in full. Your words won’t sound genuine if you’re reading them verbatim from a piece of paper instead of addressing your audience directly. Even if you’re not reading from a piece of paper, you’ll still sound stiff if you’re delivering a memorized speech.
This doesn’t mean you can’t write down anything. Robin suggests using index cards
with bullet points to help you remember your
big ideas
keep it simple
-Robin Roberts
You don’t need to impress the audience with
your sentence structure. You need to keep them
engaged with short phrases and quick, snappy
stories. Audiences always have limited attention
spans, and your speech better cater to that.
That said, your speech isn’t always going to be
a hit. Robin acknowledges that there’s not much you can do when that happens. Just keep talking
like you’re killing it and get through what you
came there to say
Robin always comes back to
being real. That could be easier said than done. Robin is a confident woman who is at ease in front of the
camera, but you may not have the same luck. You know what, though? That’s okay -Robin Roberts
Making an impression during a television
journalism interview, or really any interview,
isn’t solely about wowing people with your
confidence. Confidence is important, but what
matters more is stepping into an interview with
deep knowledge about the specific job you’re
applying for: If you’re interviewing at a magazine, are you intimately familiar
with each editor and writer on staff as well as the magazine’s different sections?
If you’re interviewing at a department store, do you know which brands it carries and which ones it doesn’t? Doing your research ahead of time will show you’re thoughtful and sharp and you have a genuine interest in the role. Don’t be afraid to show that you have a
genuine interest in the interviewer, either.
What to do in interviews -Robin Roberts
• Feel proud that you have an interview. You earned it.
If you walk into an interview with your head held high,
your confidence will come through—even if you’re
nervous.
•Be prepared. Do your homework. Come in having
studied up on the company and the person conducting your interview. “Google the heck” out of both,
Robin says.
•Come in with ideas. Because you’ve done your
homework, you should have some creative and
informed thoughts on what the company could be
doing differently or additionally.
• “Dress for the job you want” is an old standby for a
reason. If the interviewer can picture you sitting at the
anchor’s desk delivering the news on their network, it
might help you land the job.
What not to do in interviews -Robin Roberts
•Don’t Be cocky. Confidence is one thing—it shows that
you understand your worth—but being arrogant is
presumptuous and disrespectful. It won’t get you anywhere. As Robin often says, “When you strut, you stumble.”
•Don’t Prep answers for interview questions word for word. Your interviewer will be able to tell if you’ve memorized your reply in advance. Plus, while there are some questions you can be fairly sure interviewers will ask, they may surprise you. Don’t spend time rehearsing your lines—you’ll appear stiff and inflexible.
•Don’t Assume you know what the job will require. No
matter the industry, no one company operates in
exactly the same way as another.
•Don’t Be afraid to ask questions. Leave that interview
being as informed as possible about the job lest you wind up in a position you didn’t bargain for. Asking questions is another way to show you’ve read up on the company and care about what it does.
Like Robin says, there’s no problem with following up.
consider these rules as a guideline before sending a gentle nudge:
-Robin Roberts
- Give the person a chance to respond on their own.
That may mean waiting one or two weeks before
reaching out again. - Be understanding and respectful in your messaging.
Don’t get exasperated, even if it’s your second
follow-up email. Always acknowledge that the
person you’re contacting is busy, and reiterate that
you appreciate their time.
Communicating
Your Value
at Work
-Robin Roberts
d o
•When it comes to negotiation conversations at work, make sure you have a game plan. Know what you’re going to ask for and outline how you will benefit the company if you get what you ask for.
•Know your worth. Before you can tell a boss your
worth, you have to know what you’re bringing to the
table. Write down some of your skills and successes at
your company to date in advance if that helps.
• Show your worth. This may be reminding a boss of
your past accomplishments or telling them specific
attributes you have that are unique on your team.
Why are you the right person for the job?
d o n ’t
•Act entitled. Stay away from commentary about how
long you’ve been working at the company or that “it’s
about time” for a promotion. That can be part of your
case, but it absolutely shouldn’t be all of it.
Handle Criticism With Grace
-Robin Roberts
Let’s face it: Criticism hurts, and putting yourself on TV means opening yourself up to commentary, whether it be positive or negative.
Viewers have criticized Robin for everything from her enunciation to her outfit choices. “It stung, but when I just really sat with it,” she says, she realized those people were just trying to help her. She learned to try and receive it that way—as
constructive criticism. She’s since used some of
that constructive criticism to improve her work.
Of course, not all criticism is constructive (and not all constructive criticism is useful—if one person doesn’t like the shirt you wore on camera
yesterday, that’s no reason to ditch the shirt). There will always be trolls. Unfortunately, this
is especially true for female journalists. It’s more
than okay to block people on social media who
behave in a threatening or abusive manner.
The New York Times’ social media policy, for
example, specifically supports journalists’ right
to “block people on social media who are threatening or abusive.” As Times journalist Rukmini Callimachi writes in the newspaper’s social
media guidelines, “I used to get really upset and
respond to abuse—which only made it worse.
What I finally discovered is that… By blocking
anyone and everyone who uses abusive terms, I
am able to halt the conversation.”
Interviewing
People for TV
-Robin Roberts
A good TV interview looks like a good conversation. The questions don’t appear scripted, and the relationship between interviewer and interviewee almost resembles friendship, or at least camaraderie.
Two key components to conducting a solid interview:
-Robin Roberts
l i s t e n
Some people come into an interview ready to tell their
story. With others, your job is to coax their story out of
them. One way to do this, says Robin, is to show that
you care. Show them that you’re genuinely interested
in what they have to say with conversational cues (“uh huh,” “I see,” “fascinating, go on”) and body language
(eye contact, posture).
f o l l o w u p
Following up means paying attention to small turns
of phrases. Politicians, for example, tend to come to
interviews with talking points. They’re going to say
what they’re going to say regardless of the question
you ask them—they’re masters of spin. Listen carefully to the person who comes to your interview armed with scripted talking points. Pull out the details of what they’re saying, and question them on specifics.
That way, they’ll be forced to answer you in more than just canned sound bites. Sometimes you’ll hear something unexpectedly fascinating from the person you’re interviewing—something your research didn’t prepare you for. Feel free to ask follow-ups on those, too, to get
a story that may not have been told yet.
Journalism Rules
-Robin Roberts
Seek Truth and Report It
There’s more to seeking out the truth than sticking to the facts. Seeking truth means providing
adequate context so as not to distort the facts.
It means relying on as many firsthand sources
as possible and crediting secondhand sources
(like other news organizations) when you rely on their work. It means taking extra care to verify
the information you’ve received while reporting
and considering your sources’ motives.
Minimize Harm
When writing a story, it’s important to think
about why you’re telling it. Is it just to catch
readers’ attention with some salacious details?
Is it so you and your news organization will get
more views or clicks? If that’s a yes, and it comes
at the expense of the subject’s safety or peace
of mind, then think twice before broadcasting,
writing, or posting. In other words, weigh the
outcome of your story. Is getting this information out to the public so crucial that it’s worth the discomfort it may cause one source? Or is
the information not so critical after all?
Understanding the difference between a public and private figure is key here. Public figures understand that their positions put them in the
spotlight. For private people, being in a news story could alter their lives in unforeseen ways. Special sensitivity is required when writing about minors, crime survivors, and sources who may be in danger for sharing information.
Act Independently
This means avoiding all conflicts of interest as
a journalist or at the very least disclosing them.
It’s probably okay to quote a subject matter
expert who also happens to be your cousin, as
long as you mention in the article that he or she
is your cousin. However, if your partner is the
CEO of a company, you probably shouldn’t be
reporting on that company.
Generally, newsrooms don’t permit journalists
to accept gifts that exceed about $25 in value. It’s
probably all right to take the gift bag from a convention, but it’s not okay to accept free travel, a night at a hotel, or a Rolex. (That’s right: Payto-play Instagram influencers and “bloggers”
who accept free stuff in exchange for posts are
not reliable or ethical sources of information.
Chances are they won’t share an honest review
of a hotel or restaurant when they’re being paid
to talk about it.)
Allowing a source to buy you a coffee is usually fine—a full meal, if possible, should be
avoided (unless you’re paying for the meal on
your own dime). On the flip side, journalists
should not be paying sources for information.
Sure, the National Enquirer made this a practice for
years—the tabloid famously paid Elvis Presley’s cousin thousands of dollars to snap a picture of the King in his casket—but it’s certainly not considered ethical. Payment can influence what
a source might tell you.
Be Accountable and Transparent
This one is simple. If a journalist makes a mistake, they should acknowledge that and provide
clear corrections of their errors. And transparency means transparency—how journalists do
their work isn’t meant to be a secret from those
who watch, read, or listen to the news. It’s more
than okay to tell the public about the journalistic process and how you went about reporting
a story
Objective of journalism
-Robin Roberts
Regardless of whom you’re interviewing or what you’re reporting on, the main
objective is always the same. You’re there to
tell a story for the benefit of the public, your
viewers (or readers or listeners). As Robin
says, helping people tell their stories is the
reason to go into journalism. If you have
that desire, then you can follow in Robin’s
footsteps and tell stories to the world
Emotional Utility. (NeuroMarketing)
Utility is a quick measure of gain or loss calculated by our
brain to assess the importance and urgency of a decision. When the brain
evaluates the relevance and value of a persuasive message, it quickly computes the likelihood that expected benefits exceed the costs. Although you may not realize this, a sales offer, your brain is busy figuring out if the sum of the
benefits that is above the cost you must pay.
The net difference is commonly
referred to as the utility of that decision [41] or its gain, a critical concept of
NeuroMap that is extensively discussed in Chapter 7, Demonstrate the Gain.
More importantly, there are two powerful emotions that affect the perception of
the utility of any buying decision: the fear of regret and the fear of loss.
The fear of regret may arise when the outcome of a situation is not what we
expect. This happens when you consider the utility of the decision to fall short of
your expectations. On the other hand, the feeling of loss appears when we no
longer own or control something we value. In fact, Knutson and his colleagues
[41] from Stanford produced convincing neuroimaging evidence showing that
we use distinct circuits when we expect a gain or a loss.
The fear of loss
activates the insula (which also fires when we experience disgust) and
deactivates the medial prefrontal cortex, whereas the expectation of gain
generates more activity in the nucleus accumbens.
Emotional Encoding. (NeuroMarketing)
Emotional encoding represents the effect a message has
on memory, which is often a measure of how a persuasive message ultimately
succeeds. Being able to remember an advertisement does correlate positively
with the probability of selecting a brand [43, 44]. After all, how can you decide
if you do not remember which brand you are supposed to pick and why?
The study of how information encoding is performed in the brain has received
considerable attention from neuroscientists since the mid-1990s. Though it is
still very difficult to crack the neural code of memory in general, it is clear that
subcortical areas of the brain such as the hippocampus and the amygdala have an
important role in creating and maintaining our long-term memories [32]. This
may surprise you, but crucial functions such as remembering our short-term and long-term experiences are largely controlled by the primal brain and without
much of your awareness involved.
Also, research conducted by Bogdan Draganski and his colleagues [45]
demonstrated that gray matter volume increases as a result of learning, offering
scientists more tangible ways to measure the neuroanatomical correlates of emotional marking. How cool is that? The more you store information, the more
you create circuits in your brains! In fact, a famous study conducted on London
cab drivers [46] confirmed that by having to remember the names and location
of London’s 25,000 streets, their brains had a larger hippocampus than most
people. That is because the hippocampus is responsible for storing and
organizing our long-term memory. You can think of your long-term memory as
a muscle: the more you work it out, the stronger it will be.
The Elaboration Likelihood Model (NeuroMarketing)
Inspired by the cognitive theoretical movement, this model [51] states that a
persuasive message will trigger a logical succession of mental processes that
engage either a central (cognitive) or peripheral (emotional) route. Both routes represent the levels of thinking performed by recipients to understand the
meaning of the information.
The central route ensures that the message is
considered further (or elaborated), in which case the message has achieved its persuasive intent. However, if a message is processed by the peripheral route, the effect is predicted to be mild. According to the Elaboration Likelihood
Model, a good message is only elaborated if it appeals at a deep and personal
level.
Advocates of the Elaboration Likelihood Model argue that an effective campaign must include strong proofs to establish the credibility of the claims used in a persuasive message. However, despite its wide popularity, the critical
flaw of the Elaboration Likelihood Model is to assert that persuasion is possible
if recipients only engage cognitively with the content of a message, a fact that is
not supported by NeuroMap and by most neuromarketing research studies of the
past decade.
The Psychological Reactance Theory (NeuroMarketing)
According to this theory, humans are deeply motivated by the desire to hold themselves accountable and free from other’s rules and suggestions [52]. The
psychological reactance theory predicts that if people believe that their freedom to choose how they want to conduct their lives is under attack or manipulated,they will experience an ardent desire to react as a way to remove the pressure.
Reactance is believed to be at its peak during adolescence because teens have a strong drive toward independence and form beliefs and attitudes that often compete with those recommended by their parents. This model further predicts that explicit persuasive messages trigger more resistance than implicit attempts.
Also, Grandpre [53] demonstrated that reactance to persuasive messages increases with age. This may further explain why campaigns invoking the role of parents discussing the dangers of smoking are not effective [54]. The major flaw of the model, however, is the suggestion that persuasive messages are always recognized consciously, a fact that is clearly no longer defendable based on the
evidence generated by neuromarketing studies.
The Message Framing Approach (NeuroMarketing)
This model is based on the notion that a persuasive message can be framed in
two ways: either a loss if recipients fail to act/buy or a gain if recipients agree to
act/buy [55]. Loss-framed messages are typically effective when they raise
consciousness on the risks or loss associated with a lack of action. For instance,
you may kill people by texting and driving, or you may be financially ruined if
your house is destroyed by a fire and you have no insurance.
Experiments using this approach have demonstrated that loss-framed messages are better at preventing risky behaviors than changing them, suggesting that the effect may only be short-term [56–58]. Our research also shows that loss-framed messages work better than gain-framed messages because of the role played by the primal brain.
The Limited Capacity Model of Mediated Message Processing (NeuroMarketing)
The Limited Capacity Model is another model inspired by the field of cognitive
psychology. It provides a conceptual framework based on a series of empirical
studies examining the relative effect of message elements on key cognitive
functions such as encoding, storage, retrieval, information processing, and
limited capacity [59]. The model suggests that allocation of brain resources may
be equally distributed among several cognitive subprocesses leading to
inconsistent results in recall and general effect on recipients. Studies using the
Limited Capacity Model indicate that adolescents remember more details from
public service announcements than college students do and require more speed
in narratives to stay engaged. This model did confirm that key cognitive
differences exist between adolescents and adults and that these differences may
Kahneman’s Two-Brain Model (NeuroMarketing)
The dual processing theory was originally introduced by Stanovich and West
[61], and is also known as the System 1 and System 2 theory. It was eventually
popularized by Daniel Kahneman through his seminal book Thinking, Fast and Slow [62], for which he received the Nobel prize in economics. The tenets of this approach are both simple and profound.
Although the research supporting this
model was done to study rationality and explain cognitive processes in a
multitude of decision-making tasks, the value of the theoretical framework
extends far beyond cognitive psychology. In fact, it speaks directly to the nature of human cognitive biases and how they affect our day-to‐day choices.
For Kahneman, humans regularly access two decision systems that have different if not opposing priorities. System 1 is the most primitive part of the brain. It is automatic, unconscious, and requires low computational resources. System 2 is
the newest part of our brain. It is more intentional, needs more consciousness,
and has access to more cognitive resources to establish goals and calculate consequences of our decisions. Kahneman argues that System 1 rules over most of our decisions
Error Management Theory and Cognitive Biases (NeuroMarketing)
Psychologists Martie Haselton and Danie Nettle [67] proposed a very powerful
model to integrate most cognitive biases based on the theory of evolution called the error management theory (EMT). According to EMT, we collectively suffer
from “paranoid optimism” a dynamic tension that pushes us on one end to “play safe” and on another to “seek risk.” The paradoxical nature of this tension is a function of our drive to survive. For instance, men tend to overestimate how
much women desire them. Haselton and Nettle argue that this tendency may
have been reinforced over thousands of years to increase the number of sexual opportunities, and therefore increase the number of children from one pool of genes. They also argue that decision-making adaptations have evolved to make us “commit predictable errors.” They posit that EMT predicts that human psychology contains evolved “decision rules that are biased toward committing one type of error over another.”
NeuroMap can also explain and predict the same biases. The dominance of the primal brain is crucial during events that compromise our survival. In the absence of enough cognitive energy and the required need to act quickly, we activate programs that minimize risk. Now let’s go back to the tendency to be overly optimistic. This does not easily reconcile with the drive to avoid risk. For
instance, people tend to be overly optimistic about health problems they face
[68]. In that case, EMT states that we have more sensitivity to harms that may
arise from external sources (others) than harms that can come from internal
sources (us). This suggests that we have different biases based on the origin of the risk. Once again, this is predicted by NeuroMap. External threats are urgent
for the primal brain to process and trigger our instinctive response to avoid risk and uncertainty. However, internal threats are typically more complex to assess and therefore are more likely to engage cognitive resources from the rational brain, which may be more naturally inclined toward optimism and hope.
Haselton and Nettle call this phenomena “paranoid optimism.” They observe
that we appear fear-centered about the environment (primal) but optimistic about
the self (rational)
The Bias of Thin-slicing (NeuroMarketing)
Malcolm Gladwell’s book Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking [69]
tells curious stories in which people make seemingly absurd decisions using a
limited amount of information. He calls this bias “thin-slicing” and draws
examples from a wide range of situations involving scientists, doctors,
executives, art experts, and more. In all these cases, logic and rationality are
missing.
Choices are made in the “blink of an eye” even though they may
involve smart and educated decision makers. Although Gladwell does not
investigate the neuroscience of “thin-slicing,” NeuroMap can explain many of
the situations he describes. For instance, in the presence of too much
information, the primal brain takes over while the rational brain stalls.
Furthermore, when our primal brain dominates plenty of emotional factors
influence our decisions beyond our level of consciousness. Although there are clear benefits from allowing the primal brain to control an enormous number of our decisions, it can lead us to make very bad choices. Remember the example
of trying to find how much the candy was worth?
Your primal brain took over,
and most likely you did not get the right answer!
Another important book discussing the faulty nature of many of our decisions is
Predictably Irrational by Daniel Ariely [70]. The book presents several
cognitive biases that affect many of our decisions, basically because the primal
brain controls the process below our level of awareness. Following are a few cognitive biases.
The Bias of Relativity (NeuroMarketing)
To decide, we need to be able to contrast options that appear radically different.
By offering two options that are about the same, and a third that is radically
different, most people will choose the third. The primal brain is wired to make
quick decisions, and contrast allows that level of efficiency. When we easily
compare and contrast options, we are allowing the dominance of the primal brain
to rule our choices.
The Bias of Anchoring (NeuroMarketing)
Our first decisions may considerably influence the rest of the decisions we make
regarding the same product or solution. This suggests that we are wired to repeat
decisions we find satisfying. That is why habits are so addictive. We argue the
reason we do that is because the primal brain wants to reduce cognitive effort by
retrieving old patterns of behavior. It also explains why it is so difficult to
change our behavior in general or shift to another brand of toothpaste!
The Bias of Zero Cost (NeuroMarketing)
We always prefer free options over fee options because we perceive that there is
no risk when the item has no price. According to Ariely, the reason free shipping
offers are so effective is that it lifts the objection of adding any cost on top of the
price of an item. In fact, the zero-cost bias reflects the loss-avoidance bias of the
primal brain. It is not logical and rational to wait in line for a free ice cream, yet
thousands of people do it because they are under the dominance of their primal
brain, which seeks instant gratification!
The Bias of Social Norms (NeuroMarketing)
We act based on what is expected of our community of reference (social norm),
and this may influence the way we respond to market offers. If the offer is
aligned with the social norm, we accept the offer. If it is not, we reject it. What
this explains is that incongruence between our primal brain (compliance reduces
risk or regret) and the rational brain (evaluation of a market offer) disrupts the
risk or regret) and the rational brain (evaluation of a market offer) disrupts the
bottom-up effect. NeuroMap predicts that for messages/offers to work, they must
stimulate both the primal and the rational brains.
The Bias of Multiplying Options (NeuroMarketing)
According to Ariely, we pretend that we prefer more options than fewer.
Paradoxically, to survive, we are better off reviewing a limited number of
options. We will discuss this bias when we elaborate on contrastable as a
persuasion stimulus later in this chapter. We argue that the primal brain hates too
many choices. The rational brain does not mind going through an extensive
evaluation process, but it may delay decisions in the process. This creates a
paradox in many of our decisions. We tend to say we want options, but at a
deeper level, we do not want to face the cognitive burden of choosing among
many. NeuroMap posits that a persuasive message can trigger decisions when it
asserts that there is only one good decision: the one you suggest!
The Bias of Expectations (NeuroMarketing)
What we expect influences our behavior. This bias is the direct consequence of
the dominance of the primal brain over the rational brain. What we want is
known to emerge in primal subcortical areas of the brain. What we want shapes
what we expect, and what we expect does overrule what we logically and
rationally report we need.
Too much information: (NeuroMarketing)
The dominance of the primal brain is based on
survival priorities that are deeply anchored in our biology. Cognition came
later. We are not wired to process a lot of information, spend ample time
finding patterns, or agonize over decisions. Too much information freezes
the primal brain.
Not enough meaning: (NeuroMarketing)
Our primal brain does not have the cognitive
resources to compute and resolve complex arrays of data. If the pattern of a
situation is completely new, and not urgent or relevant, the primal brain will
not be able to retrieve a previously stored set of commands that would
accelerate the processing of the information. We love cognitive fluency
because it conserves valuable energy
Not enough time: (NeuroMarketing)
: Time is directly related to how much energy the brain
needs to process information. In the primal brain, faster is always better.
Therefore, situations that require time do not appeal to our older brain
structures and receive low priority.
Not enough memory: (NeuroMarketing)
Our brain is not designed to store much information.
The reason is simple. Encoding is costly, because of the energy required to
store but also to maintain and retrieve our memories. Recent research
demonstrates that memorizing attaches specific neurons to our memories. In
fact, by using light to stimulate nerve connections, Dr. Malinow and his team
successfully removed and reactivated memories by stimulating synapses in
rats’ brains [71]. This only proves further that the brain welcomes situations
or events that make it easy to hold information in working memory and not
highly dependent on long-term encoding. The primal brain favors such
conditions over others.
Focus on Your Audience First (NeuroMarketing)
. Make sure you put your audience, prospect, or
listeners at the center of the message. So many ads or presentations forget this
simple rule. Admit it: Have you not ever started a presentation by saying, “Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Today I would like to tell you about our
company, our values, our mission statement, our technology…”?
The image in Figure 4.3 is indicative of just how interested and excited the primal brains of your audience will be while listening to your introduction
In a matter of a few seconds, you only prove that you have no intention of
putting your audience at the center of the story because it is all about you instead
of them!
According to Kahneman [82], we experience 20,000 psychological “present”
moments per day, each three seconds long. Since the primal brain craves input
that is personal, a substantial portion of these moments is spent thinking about
us!
Focus on a Pain That Is Relevant to Your Audience (NeuroMarketing)
Our primal brain seeks
to protect us. Therefore, in your attempts to persuade, highlight, if not magnify, a
threat, a risk, or a pitfall that your solution can solve. As a result, you will
command immediate attention. Too often, messages focus on the solution (business centered) and not the problem (personal). NeuroMap suggests that
before offering a solution, you need to remind your audience of a pain they have experienced or do not want to face.
This is not to manipulate or create undue stress. It is simply to recognize that the primal brain will not dedicate energy unless your message is both urgent and relevant to the person you are trying to
engage.
CONTRASTABLE (NeuroMarketing)
The priority of the primal brain is to accelerate decisions, and we do that best when we have limited options. This points to an important paradox in consumer behavior: customers tend to tell you they want lots of brand options, even though
they subconsciously resist using valuable energy to evaluate and sort the best
ones. I did not discover this paradox by practicing conventional marketing.
Rather, I detected this puzzling contradiction nearly 20 years ago by observing shoppers in grocery stores. At the time, I was the vice president of marketing of a grocery chain called Grocery Outlet. Grocery Outlet sold top brands at bargain
prices in 12 US states.
Our products’ variety was somewhat limited given the
nature of our retail concept, so I wanted to know if we could increase our sales
by adding additional brands for certain categories of products. I conducted focus
groups, and sure enough, when I asked customers if they wanted more choices,
they always said yes.
However, when I observed them shopping in the stores, they systematically froze in front of too many possible choices. When faced with too many options that were not immediately contrastable with one another,
customers were unable to quickly and easily differentiate among assorted brands. This explained why our category sales did not move quickly when we added brands. Customers were overwhelmed by being in front of so many
options.
The Use of Contrastable Offers in Comparative Advertising (Neuromarketing)
The most common use of contrastable in advertising is comparative advertising,
where one brand compares itself to another. There are many research papers on
the effect of comparative advertising, but few make any reference to consumer
neuroscience and none provide a brain-based interpretation of its results.
According to Professor Fred Beard, a general conclusion we can draw, though, is
that comparative advertising works! – especially for “products of high quality,”
where claims are well substantiated and focused on salient benefits that are
believable [86]. Beard explains that comparative advertising works especially
well for companies that have a smaller market share. This makes perfect sense!
How can you convince anyone to buy your product unless you do the
challenging work of finding what your unique differentiators are first?
Find the Salient Benefits of Your Solution. (Neuromarketing)
The primal brain will not accept the burden of making complicated decisions. Too often, sales messages spew a list of reasons that customers should consider a solution. However, these reasons do little to motivate the primal brain to commit the energy required to consider them all.
Therefore, you need to distill a limited number of benefits, and then
demonstrate that no other brand or company can deliver a solution that is as
unique and as effective as yours. Later in this book, we will elaborate further on
how you can find your claims. Claims represent the compact list of the top
benefits you offer. They can accelerate the decision and create contrastable
situations that make immediate sense for the primal brain.
Typically, claims will provide direct solutions to pains and grab attention to make your message completely relevant to an urgent threat or risk that your audience faces. Once you magnify a pain and show how your solution can solve it, customers will beg
to buy your solution. As David Ogilvy famously suggested, selling is easy: “Just light a fire under people’s chairs, and then present the extinguisher!”
Compare Your Solution to a Competitor (Neuromarketing)
Contrasting your product or solution
with that of a competitor is a good strategy. “Before and after” stories can do
that as well. Show the life of one of your customers before they own your
product or solution – it should be painful to see! – and then show the relief of
their pain as the contrast. This scenario is the typical story that you see in an
infomercial and for a good reason: it works!
What to Remember About Contrastable (NeuroMarketing)
Despite what we say, we do not like multiple buying options because it
overwhelms our primal inclination to decide quickly and to do so with the least amount of brain energy.
Comparing two situations makes decisions easy for the primal brain.
Rather than stating: “Choose us because we are one of the leading companies in the XYZ industry,” highlight only a few unique benefits (claims).
Contrast stories of before and after, or your brand against the competition, to
help your customers decide.
TANGIBLE (NeuroMarketing)
Making something tangible means to achieve simplicity and minimize the
cognitive energy necessary to process your message. The primal brain does not
have the cognitive resources offered by the rational brain, yet it dominates the
initial review process of any persuasive message.
So, the quality of making things tangible is the quality of serving information to
the brain that does not require much mental effort. We welcome speed and
simplicity because we welcome the opportunity to not waste cognitive energy.
Let’s simply reflect on one idiom that says it all: paying attention. What does this
expression imply? That you are asking people to “spend something,” which is
effectively brain energy. The reason we are so bad about consciously controlling
our attention is that the primal brain is the guardian of that spending. Before you can even think of selling anything, you must sell the value of using your
audience’s energy to process your message.
The Power of Cognitive Fluency (NeuroMarketing)
The Power of Cognitive Fluency
The value of making your message more tangible is supported by the study of
how much we enjoy cognitive fluency. Cognitive fluency is the subjective
experience of ease or difficulty to complete a mental task.
It is a well-researched
bias that explains how much we favor processing information that is easy to
understand. For example, we prefer people whose names are easier to pronounce
than others [91]. Also, we remember better what is easier to learn [92]. Shares in companies that have easy-to‐pronounce names tend to outperform others. The
fluency of many cognitive processes is “pre-assessed” by the primal brain.
Anything that appears complicated within the first few milliseconds is likely to
be rejected by the rest of the brain.
For instance, whenever I talk about our persuasion model, I hold a brain in my hand to establish that I am passionate about the topic. Doing so increases people’s attention and reinforces the
perception that I am competent to talk about neuroscience!
More importantly, it
makes the SalesBrain model easier to understand because I am not just relying
on words to explain it. It makes a complex topic more cognitively fluent
What to Remember About Tangible (NeuroMarketing)
The primal brain is the guardian of our cognitive energy.
Don’t expect messages that create cognitive effort to persuade.
Making a message complicated is easy but achieving cognitive fluency is
difficult.
You need to work hard to create a simple, yet persuasive message.
MEMORABLE (NeuroMarketing)
Memory, or how information is encoded, is a complicated function of the brain.
First, it is largely distributed across many brain areas, some located in the primal
brain (hippocampus, amygdala), but also in newer cortical areas like the
temporal lobes or the prefrontal lobes. A full discussion on memory is beyond
the scope of this book but discussing short-term memory and how you can
improve your ability to impress upon your audience to make your messages
more memorable is extremely important
Working Memory (NeuroMarketing)
The concept of working memory is critical to how you can
make your message more memorable. Working memory holds information in
our brains for a short period (short-term memory), and transforms the
information to guide a decision, a thought, or a movement. Working memory
can be stimulated by input coming from your senses (the ringing of your alarm
clock), or from your long-term memory (retrieving the address of the restaurant
where you are meeting a friend). As you realize by now, the whole point of
presenting a persuasive message is to make sure it is easy for people’s brains to
manipulate the information they receive. Therefore, your ability to persuade is
completely dependent on the activation of your audience’s working memory.
Studies prove that the frontal lobes are extensively involved in activating the
process by which we hold and manipulate short-term information we receive.
And SalesBrain’s research shows that only messages that engage the primal brain
first are successfully processed by our working memory.
Applying Memorable to Persuasive Messages
(NeuroMarketing)
To make your message memorable, create a narrative that will have limited and short attention dips.
Narratives that work on the brain grab attention at the beginning and the end
of each segment
What to Remember About Memorable (NeuroMarketing)
We are wired to remember basic information to guide our short-term actions.
Message recall is affected by sensory memory, which further influences both
short-term and working memory. Both are critical systems that make
encoding fragile.
The primal brain needs a solid narrative structure with a strong beginning
and strong end to create attention and retention.
Messages imprint better in the brain if they focus on the pain first.
Applying Visual to Persuasive Messages (NeuroMarketing)
Maximizing the visual appeal of your message is a priority. There are many
ways to apply this core stimulus when you craft an ad, a corporate video, a
commercial, a web page, and, of course, a face-to‐face presentation.
First, always remind yourself that your audience will not process the entire
visual stimuli. Only a fraction of what you show will be seen. Less is more.
Eyetracking studies confirm that only a fraction of a web page or a packaging label
will be processed by most people, regardless of age, gender, or education. There
are 100 million receptors in the eye, but only a few million fibers in the optic
nerve. Fifty percent of our visual brain is directed to process less than 5% of the
visual world. It is as if our eye movements curiously help us see more of small
areas, not more of big areas.
Second, focus on improving the saliency of your images.
Visual saliency is the
inherent quality your visual stimuli must have to capture and captivate your
audience. We typically process details in the center of the visual field, but the contrast between an object and its surroundings makes it more salient
