The Art of Successful Persuasion - Seven Skills You Need To Get Your Point Across Effectively

Industrial and Commercial Training
The art of successful persuasion: seven skills you need to get your point across effectively
Tony Manning
Article information:
To cite this document:
Tony Manning, (2012),"The art of successful persuasion: seven skills you need to get your point across effectively", Industrial and
Commercial Training, Vol. 44 Iss 3 pp. 150 - 158
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00197851211216754
Downloaded on: 05 May 2015, At: 03:15 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 19 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 1405 times since 2012*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Downloaded by Curtin University At 03:15 05 May 2015 (PT)
Chris Miles, (2013),"Persuasion, marketing communication, and the metaphor of magic", European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 47 Iss 11/12
pp. 2002-2019 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/EJM-11-2011-0632
Tony Manning, (2012),"The art of successful influence: matching influence strategies and styles to the context", Industrial and Commercial
Training, Vol. 44 Iss 1 pp. 26-34 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00197851211193390
Johanna Fawkes, (2007),"Public relations models and persuasion ethics: a new approach", Journal of Communication Management, Vol. 11
Iss 4 pp. 313-331 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13632540710843922
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 325738 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about
how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/
authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com

Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than
290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional
customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and
also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.
The art of successful persuasion: seven

skills you need to get your point across
effectively
Tony Manning
Tony Manning is an
Independent Management
Training and Development
Consultant based in Selkirk,
UK.
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to review the extensive and wide-ranging published literature on
the skills needed to get your point across effectively and succeed in the art of persuasion. It provides a
structured, evidence-based framework of learnable interpersonal skills. This framework can be used in
training and development to describe current thinking and best practice in the essential skills needed to
persuade others. It can be used by training and development professionals to help those they work with
reflect on previous attempts at persuasion and prepare for future ones. It can also be used in training
and development work to analyse and give feedback on role-plays and presentations. The use of a
structured, standardised and evidenced-based framework increases the reliability and validity of the
assessment process and, inconsequence, improves the quality of feedback.
Design/methodology/approach The article begins by looking at previous research by the author
showing that the frequency with which people at work use six influence strategies, and combine them to
form various styles, is related to a variety of contextual variables. However, it concludes that, while a
focus on strategies and styles, and their appropriateness to particular contexts, has much merit, it is
inevitably limited. In particular, it lacks specificity and any notion of quality. The concept of skills
overcomes such limitations and provides important additional insights, particularly when focusing on the
skills involved in using reason, the most frequently used and least context-specific of the six influence
strategies, to convince other people at work. Skills are defined as abilities, expertise or proficiency
acquired through learning or training. The skills described herein are interpersonal skills or skills that
people need to interact effectively with others.
Findings Seven skills people need to get their point across effectively and be successful in the art of
persuasion are identified: be clear about who, what and why; target your case on the other
person; search for common ground; keep it simple; appeal to head and heart; be calm and
confident; and make it interactive.
Originality/value The originality and value of this paper lies in the way in which it reviews previous
theory and research on interpersonal influence, identifies seven specific skills from this literature review
and provides a structured, standardised and evidence-based framework of learnable skills. These
findings have implications for anyone who needs to get their point across effectively and succeed in the
art of persuasion, as well as training and development professionals working in this area. The
conclusions complement other research carried out by the author and published in a previous edition of
Industrial and Commercial Training, showing that influencing behaviour varies in different contexts and
arguing that the art of successful influence involves using strategies and styles appropriate to the
context.
Keywords Influence, Persuasion, Skills, Training and development
Paper type Literature review
Introduction
This article is about the art of successful persuasion. It identifies the seven skills an individual
needs to get their point across effectively. It draws on the extensive body of theory and
research that has been published on this topic. Its aim is to provide practical,
evidence-based guidance on how to prepare and deliver a persuasive case, including
how to deal effectively with challenges. It is relevant to everyone who is involved in
PAGE 150
INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL TRAINING
VOL. 44 NO. 3 2012, pp. 150-158, Q Emerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 0019-7858
DOI 10.1108/00197851211216754
persuading other people, as well as those involved in providing training and development in
the skills of successful persuasion.
The seven skills that you need to get your point across effectively are to:
1. be clear about who, what and why;
2. target your case on the other person;
3. search for common ground;
4. keep it simple;
5. appeal to head and heart;
6. be calm and confident; and
7. make it interactive.
Before going on to describe these seven skills more fully, it is useful to say something about
how the ideas in this article are linked to the ideas in a previous article by author where it was
argued that the art of successful influence depends on matching the strategies and style
used to the context. In particular, I will provide a very brief summary of the ideas expressed
in the earlier article, look at the relationship between influence and persuasion, and
distinguish between influence strategies, styles and skills. This initial discussion
underpins the subject matter of this article describing the seven skills needed to get your
point across effectively and succeed in persuading someone to accept your point of view.
The art of successful influence: matching the strategies and style to the context
In a previous article (Manning, 2012), I examined the relationship between influencing
behaviour and a wide range of contextual variables. Evidence was presented to show how,
in practice, the use of particular strategies and styles tends to be linked to contrasting
features of work contexts. The article explored the combination of personal, interpersonal
and organisational reasons that lie behind the exercise of interpersonal influence. Its
underlying theme was that an awareness of the research findings can help people at work,
and those proving training and development in interpersonal influence, to understand the
importance of a flexible approach to influence and choose strategies and styles appropriate
to their particular situation.
Statistically significant relationships were found between the frequency with which
respondents used each of the six influence strategies described, as well as how they
combined them to form various influence styles, and contextual variables. However, the
research also found that one of the strategies reason was used more frequently than the
other five strategies, was related to fewer contextual variables and the degree of degree of
correlation with such variables was lower than that found with other strategies.
In other words, while the frequency of use of reason was found to be related to some
contextual variables, it was the most frequently and widely used influence strategy,
irrespective of the context. It is the strategy that appears to have the greatest utility in
organisational life, irrespective of circumstances. One possible explanation for this is that
organisations are by their very nature rational, in the sense that they are designed to achieve
specific objectives. Kipnis et al. (1984) came up with essentially the same findings and
conclusions in their earlier three-nation study of managerial influence styles.
Influence and persuasion

Influencing people is about getting them to do things that they would otherwise not do.
People at work use a variety of strategies to influence others, including reason, which
involves the use of reasoned argument, information and logic to justify a request. Persuasion
is about convincing people by the use of argument. In other words, reason and
persuasion are intrinsically linked, in that persuasion is about convincing people
through the use of reason.
VOL. 44 NO. 3 2012 INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL TRAINING PAGE 151
Influence strategies, styles and skills

My colleagues and I (Manning et al., 2008) put forward a hierarchical model of influencing
behaviour, based on empirical research on the ways in which people seek to influence others
and the observed relationship between such behaviours. There are three levels in this
model, namely, tactics or specific behaviours, strategies or clusters of tactics and
styles or clusters of strategies.
The important point to note here is that both strategies and styles are, by definition,
relatively broad and general constructs, they are not about specific behaviours. Thus, for
example, to say that someone uses the strategy reason tells us nothing about the specific
information that they use or the kind of logical argument that they use in any particular
situation, only that they tend use certain combinations of tactics or types of behaviours.
It is equally important to note that to say that someone uses a particular strategy like
reason tells us nothing about the proficiency or expertise with which they use such a
strategy. An individual may, for example, use reason in entirely appropriate circumstances
but be ineffective because the information they use is irrelevant or of poor quality, or because
their conclusions do not follow logically from their premises.
In conclusion, while a focus on strategies and styles, and their appropriateness to particular
circumstances, has much merit, it is inevitably limited. In particular, it lacks specificity and
any notion of quality. The concept of skills overcomes such limitations and can provide
important insights, particularly when focusing on the skills involved in using reason, the
most frequently used and least context-specific of the six influence strategies. Skills are
abilities, expertise or proficiency acquired through learning or training. The seven skills
detailed more fully below, are examples of interpersonal skills or skills needed to interact
effectively with others.
1. Be clear about who, what and why

Research by Kipnis and Schmidt (1980)and Manning (2012) indicates that the strategies
that people choose to influence others at work depend on such things as who they want to
influence, including their relative power, the objectives or purpose of the influence attempt
and their expectations of success. These findings highlight the importance of carrying out
some preliminary thinking before engaging in any influence attempt.
Preparation lies at the heart of successful persuasion and it begins with establishing the
need to persuade, including being clear about who you want to persuade, what you
want them to do and why you want them to do it. A need to persuade can be said to exist if,
on balance, the cost-benefits of an influence attempt outweigh those of not making such an
attempt.
Preliminary thinking about persuading also needs to avoid two common pitfalls. The first
pitfall is focussing solely on your reasons for wanting to persuade the other person, without
giving due attention to what might actually persuade them. When we try to get someone else
to do something that they would otherwise not do, the challenge is to convince them and not
ourselves, because what is a good reason for us may not actually persuade them. The
second pitfall is assuming that debating skills persuade other people. While it is, of course,
important to have good arguments and deliver them well, simply winning the argument is
no guarantee that you will actually get your point across effectively and persuade someone.
Indeed, it may make those you seek to influence defensive and hostile, making you less likely
to persuade them.
Preparation lies at the heart of successful persuasion and it

begins with establishing the need to persuade.
PAGE 152 INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL TRAINING VOL. 44 NO. 3 2012
2. Target your case on the other person

In order to avoid falling into the two pitfalls described above, we have to make it easy for
those we seek to persuade to accept what we want, and this requires targeting our case on
them, To do this, we have to find out as much as we can about them, before we prepare a
detailed case. In particular, we need to find out about their organisation and the role that they
play in it, as well as their individual characteristics. These themes are explored more fully
below.
Kanter (1983) suggests that to influence people at work, we should use arguments that are
consistent with their organisational policies, practices and values, so as to make our
proposals attractive to them. I would add to this that our case should also be in line with the
specific role they play, in particular the specific goals that they are expected to achieve in
their job and the activities they are expected to carry out in order to attain these goals.
It is also likely to be useful to find out about the individual, including such things as their
motivation, personality and mood. A detailed discussion of this is beyond the scope of this
article. However, it useful to briefly consider one piece of research on motivation, along with
some examples of how an individuals personality and mood are worth considering.
Curtis et al. (2007) provide an example of how research into motivation was successfully
applied to a major public health project, persuading Ghanaian mothers to wash their hands
with soap. Preliminary research found that only 4 per cent of mothers washed their hands
with soap after defecation and only 2 per cent with soap after cleaning their childs bottom.
Further research had found that they could appeal to three key motives, namely disgust (fear
of contamination), nurture (mothers will do anything for their children) and social acceptance
(wanting to be seen to be clean). A television advertising campaign, informed by these
findings, targeted the majority of mothers who washed their hands regularly with water but
not soap. The programme was very successful, in that 71 per cent of mothers subsequently
knew about the advertisement and the rates of hand washing with soap increased
significantly.
It may also be useful to match our approach to persuasion to the personal traits of the
individual. In order to illustrate this point, it is useful contrast how we might usefully approach
attempting to persuade individuals who differ in their degree of extroversion, a major
dimension of personality identified by many researchers in the field, including Eysenck
(1947) and Costa and McCrae (1985). Extroversion is about how comfortable people are in
social relationships, their level of social inhibition. At one extreme on this scale is the
introvert, who is uncomfortable in social relationships and socially inhibited, and at the
other extreme is the extrovert, who is comfortable in social relationships and socially
uninhibited. When persuading introverts, it is likely to be useful to allow them time for quiet
reflection before action, whereas with extroverts, it is probably better to engage them in
lively discussion and encourage them to talk.
Huczynski (2004) argues that understanding how a persons mood impacts on the
decision-making process can also help those seeking to persuade others. He considers
research on positive moods and various negative moods. He concludes that people in good
moods tend to make faster and more impulsive decisions. Thus it makes sense to try to put
those you seek to persuade in a good mood and hope they dont think too much about the
message. In contrast, when dealing with individuals in negative moods, it is better to
acknowledge their concerns and highlight how what you want will help them to avoid or
overcome such concerns.
3. Search for common ground

A further aspect of targeting the case on the person is identifying common ground, that is to
say establishing what is in your interests as well as those of the person you seek to persuade.
Conger (1998) advocates framing goals that establish common ground with those you seek
to persuade as one of the necessary arts of persuasion. Evidence in support of this claim
comes from Rackham and Carlisle (1978a, b), whose research on effective negotiators
showed that, while more and less effective negotiators both tended to concentrate their
planning on conflict areas, areas of likely disagreement, the more effective ones gave over
three times as much attention to common ground as did their less effective counterparts.
4. Keep it simple
Research on effective persuasion indicates that we are more likely to be successful if we
keep our case simple. Huczynski (2004) concludes that this is because when people make
decisions, they typically generalise from a very limited amount of evidence. Similarly,
Gilovich (2002) describes how we use simple rules or shortcuts to solve problems, including,
judging according to a prototype or stereotype, assigning objects or people to a favourable
or unfavourable class, and judging the likelihood of an event according to instances that
readily come into their mind.
Related to peoples tendency to generalise from limited evidence is the need to be aware of
what is called the dilution effect. Zukier (1982) describes this as the way in which providing
neutral or irrelevant information actually weakens a judgement or impression that you make.
Evidence to support this claim comes from Rackham and Carlisle (1978a, b), who found that
more effective negotiators used fewer reasons to back each argument than their less
effective counterparts. The essential message here is to use few but good arguments and, if
possible, have a simple unifying theme. Moreover, where the case is necessarily complex,
break the argument down into small understandable units.
It is one thing to have a persuasive case and another to actually deliver it in a persuasive
manner. Elsbach and Elofson (2000) showed that how people explain their case affects the
way it is perceived, in terms of their trustworthiness and competency. They found that users
of easy to understand language are more likely to be seen as trustworthy. In contrast, those
who use difficult language tend to be seen to be detached and cold. They therefore
advocated the use of language that is simple and relevant to the recipient. Note that, once
again, the evidence suggests that simple arguments targeted on the recipient are most likely
to be effective.
5. Appeal to head and heart

A case is more likely to have a persuasive effect if it combines both rational and emotional
arguments. There is a considerable amount of evidence supporting this twin-track
approach. Thus, for example, Conger (1998) asserts that, from his experience, one essential
step for successful persuasion is to reinforce your position using vivid language and
compelling evidence. These two themes will be explored more fully below, starting off with
rational argument and moving on to emotional arguments and vivid language.
Huczynski (2004) suggests that rational argument have the greatest impact when they:
B
state the problem before the solution;
contrast the risks and costs of doing nothing with the gains and benefits of action;
state facts and then the inferences made from them;
offer evidence in the form of facts and figures;
highlight the influencers expertise and/or quote trusted experts or research sources; and
show that the proposal is do-able and that it can be piloted and is reversible.
However, a rational argument may not in itself persuade someone. Thus Huczynski (2004)
also states that people typically make decisions on the basis of limited evidence and are
often swayed by the emotional content of evidence. It is, therefore, important to appeal to
hearts as well as minds. The earlier comments on targeting our case on the other person are
relevant here, particularly ideas about appealing to their goals, values, motives, personality
and mood states.
[. . .] it makes sense to try to put those you seek to persuade in

a good mood and hope they dont think too much about the
message.
6. Be calm and confident

Other aspects of the language people use, the way in which they talk, also impact on how
they are likely to be seen. Thus, for example, Silvester et al. (2002) found that, in selection
interviews, selectors valued people who showed that they are responsible for their actions.
Similarly, Walther (1993) describes talking in ways that convey a positive image to listeners,
including using I statements, owning what you say, projecting a positive image and
adopting an active tone, showing respect to others and giving them credit, telling the truth
and showing a willingness to learn from experience.
It is not only the words that we use that impact on how we are seen and the success of our
attempts to persuade others, but tone of voice and non-verbal behaviour are also important.
There is an extensive body of theory and research on these themes, as described in
Huczynski (2004), a full discussion of which is beyond the scope of this article. It is, however,
worth noting that the tone of voice most likely to be seen in a positive light is one that is clear
and concise, calm and confident, and controlled and carefully articulated. Non-verbal
behaviour is likely to be perceived favourably if it portrays the individual as relaxed, proud
but not macho and attentive.
7. Make it interactive
Much of the above account about delivering a persuasive case has, not surprisingly, tended
to concentrate on actually presenting the message. However, in the same way that debating
skills do not influence other people, nor do monologues. Persuasion is more effective it is a
dialogue, an interactive process, involving both receiving information and transmitting it.
This is clearly demonstrated in Rackham and Morgans (1977) research on appraisal
interviewing and Rackham and Carlisles (1978a, b)research on negotiating. Effective
appraisers and effective negotiators were both found to use more seeking information,
summarising and testing understanding than their less effective counterparts. The crucial
point to note here is that all three behaviours are associated with active listening.
One of the recurring themes in the discussion so far is about behaving in an
assertive-responsive way and ensuring that this comes across consistently in our verbal
behaviour, including the words we use and our tone of voice, and our non-verbal behaviour, if
we are to succeed in the art of persuasion. We need to ask for what we want and say how feel
in a clear, concise and direct way. We also need to listen to what the other party says and
how they feel, show that we are listening and respond in a constructive way. The totality of
our behaviour needs to point to the fact that we are calm and relaxed, confident and
assertive, action-oriented and, at the same time, attentive and responsive to the wants and
feelings of the other person.
Nonetheless, however thoroughly we prepare to persuade someone and target our case on
them, we are still likely to have to deal with challenges from them and challenges what they
say. In so doing, it is helpful to keep in mind that dissent and disagreement are normal,
natural and functional. They are normal in that are a feature of almost all attempts at
persuasion. They are natural in that they arise from individuals having different points of view
arising from their different roles, goals, values and personal qualities. They can also be
functional, in that they acknowledge such differences, allow for their expression and ensure
that ideas are subjected to critical scrutiny. There are, however, more and less effective ways
to challenge ideas and to respond to challenges. The core skills in dealing effectively with
challenges and making challenges are described briefly below.
The guiding principle for dealing with challenges is to actively listen to them before
responding. This means asking questions, probing responses and playing back what you
hear by summarising and testing your understanding. In particular, asking those you seek
influence about their concerns and priorities. By actively listening, it is possible to make sure
that you understand what they think, how they feel and why they think and feel this way, as
well as to demonstrate your understanding. Then you are in the best position to respond
constructively.
Huczynski (2004) argues that, if you do get a hostile response to an influence attempt, it is
important to focus on areas of agreement before going on to address differences. However,
this raises further questions about what to do if differences of opinion remain, and how to
challenge someones ideas in ways that may persuade them. Challenges to the ideas of
others can be presented either as questions or direct challenges. These options are
explored more fully below.
It is often more effective to begin by asking questions. There are various reasons for this.
First, it does not feel like a direct attack or challenge. Second, it may reveal weaknesses in
the other persons position. Third, it may also allow you to become aware of things that you
were not previously aware of. Constructive ways of challenging using questions include
asking people: where they stand on a particular matter; to justify their position; to re-assess
their position; their ideas on how to resolve any differences.
Differences of opinion may persist nonetheless and it may, therefore, be necessary to make
a more direct challenge. When doing so, it is always useful to summarise the other persons
concerns and priorities at the outset and, where possible, stress the links between their
concerns and your proposals. It is also useful to highlight how what you have done, or would
like to do, can help them to address their concerns and meet their priorities. Once again, this
is all about targeting your case on the other person, searching for common ground and
making it interactive.
When making a more direct challenge, it is usually more effective to present ideas in general
terms, so that they can be easily modified. This allows those you seek to persuade a degree
of ownership, providing them with opportunities to make the idea their idea. Similarly, it is
useful to present ideas as suggestions, in the form of questions floated as possibilities.
Evidence for this comes from Honey (1988), who found that when ideas were presented in
conversations as suggestions, rather than as direct proposals, they were more likely to be
followed by expressions of support and less likely to be met with statements of difficulty. This
also allows for a degree of ownership, providing further scope for the other person to make
the idea their idea.
There is also research that indicates that certain forms of challenging are
counter-productive. In particular, Rackham and Carlisle (1978a, b) found that more
effective negotiators made less frequent use of what might be described as more
aggressive or hostile responses than less effective negotiators. More specifically, they made
less use of attacking and defensive behaviour, irritators (i.e. words that upset people but
added nothing of substance) and sentences that began with I disagree. Interestingly, they
were also more likely to comment on their feelings and motives, suggesting greater
sensitivity, as well as less aggression and hostility.
In the way of a final thought on dealing with challenges, it is worth briefly considering what to
do if you find yourself persuaded by the other person and have doubts about your own
original position. In these circumstances, it is important to be prepared to reconsider your
objectives, bearing in mind that you do not have any necessary claim on truth. It is worth
thinking about possible compromises or concessions, searching for a mutually acceptable
agreement, even if you do not get everything you want. However, it is important not to allow
yourself to be bounced into an ill-considered decision. Thus it is worth considering using
adjournments, asking for time, carrying out pilot studies or having trial periods. These are all
devices that give you more time to think, discuss things with third parties and develop other
possible win-win outcomes or mutually acceptable compromises.
Implicit in the above approach to dealing with disagreement is an open-minded willingness
to listen to the other persons point of view and engage in a constructive two way dialogue.
There is also a willingness to move from your original position in order to arrive at a mutually
acceptable compromise or a long-term win-win solution.
Conclusions and implications for training and development

In this article, I have outlined a comprehensive, evidence-based framework, made up of
seven skills, for getting your point across effectively and being successful in the art of
successful. These interpersonal skills are learnable and are relevant to anyone who engages
in attempts to persuade others.
In my training and development work, I have used the seven-skill framework not only to
communicate best practice and current thinking about successful persuasion but also to
facilitate individual development. Individuals can use the framework as a template against
which they can review their previous attempts at persuasion and prepare for future ones.
The framework can also be used as an aid to providing balanced, constructive and specific
feedback on role-plays and presentations included in training and development activities, in
the form of self-assessment and/or observations of others. The advantage of having a
standardised, structured and evidence-based framework, with clearly defined behaviours,
is that it makes the assessment process more reliable and more valid and, in consequence,
ensures consistently high quality of feedback.
References
Conger, J.A. (1998), The necessary art of persuasion, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 76 No. 3,
pp. 84-95.
Costa, P.T. Jr and McCrae, R.R. (1985), NEO Personality Inventory Manual, Psychological Assessment
Resources, Odessa, FL.
Curtis, A., Garbrah-Aidoo, N. and Scott, B. (2007), Masters of marketing: bringing private sector skills
to public sector partnerships, American Journal of Public Health, Vol. 97 4, April, pp. 634-41.
Elsbach, K.D. and Elofson, G. (2000), How the packaging of decision explanation affects perception of
trustworthiness, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 80-90.
Eysenck, H.J. (1947), Dimensions of Personality, Praeger, New York, NY.
Gilovich, T. (Ed.) (2002), Heuristics and Biases, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY.
Honey, P. (1988), Improve Your People Skills, Institute of Personnel Management, London.
Huczynski, A. (2004), Influencing within Organizations, 2nd ed., Routledge, London.
Kanter, R.M. (1983), The Change Masters, Routledge, London.
Kipnis, D. and Schmidt, S.M. (1980), Intraorganizational influencing tactics: explorations in getting
ones way, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 65 No. 4, pp. 440-52.
Kipnis, D., Schmidt, S.M., Swaffin-Smith, C. and Wilkinson, I. (1984), Patterns of managerial influence:
shotgun managers, tacticians and bystanders, Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 58-67.
Manning, T. (2012), The art of successful influence: matching influence strategies and styles to the
context, Industrial and Commercial Training, Vol. 44 No. 1, pp. 26-34.
Manning, T., Pogson, G. and Morrison, Z. (2008), Interpersonal influence in the workplace, part 1:
an introduction to concepts and a theoretical model, Industrial and Commercial Training, Vol. 40 No. 2,
pp. 87-94.
Rackham, N. and Carlisle, J. (1978a), The effective negotiator, part 1: the behaviour of effective
negotiators, Journal of European Industrial Training, Vol. 2 No. 6, pp. 6-10.
Rackham, N. and Carlisle, J. (1978b), The effective negotiator, part 2: planning for negotiations,
Journal of European Industrial Training, Vol. 2 No. 7, pp. 2-5.
Rackham, N. and Morgan, T. (1977), Behaviour Analysis in Training, McGraw-Hill, London.
Silvester, J., Anderson-Gough, F.M. and Mohamad, A.R. (2002), Locus of control, attributions and
impression management in the selection interview, Journal of Occupational and Organizational
Psychology, Vol. 75 No. 1, pp. 59-76.
Walther, G.R. (1993), Say What You Mean and Get What You Want, Piatkus, London.
Zukier, H. (1982), The dilution effect: the role of correlation and the dispersion of predictor variables in
the use of non-diagnostic information, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 43,
pp. 1163-74.
About the author
Tony Manning is an Independent Management Training and Development Consultant,

based in Selkirk in Scotland, working mainly in the public sector in the UK. Tony Manning can
be contacted at: tony.manning@virgin.net
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

The Art of Successful Persuasion - Seven Skills You Need To Get Your Point Across Effectively

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

The Art of Successful Persuasion - Seven Skills You Need To Get Your Point Across Effectively

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Industrial and Commercial Training

Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:

Downloaded by Curtin University At 03:15 05 May 2015 (PT)

About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com