How to lower barriers to change when building and selling products — Jonah Berger’s advice for founders

Brett Berson: I'm curious,  when you look at the body of work that's captured in the book, look, where do you see the, the biggest and most important additive new ideas?

And, and one of the reasons I was interested in, in sort of having you explain it is that you touch and build on a lot of really interesting. Things that have been, um, shared over the past 10 or 20 years. Right. In, in some ways it's picking up pieces of like the classic child Dini book influence or, um, you know, Annie Duke works with us and  we did a, a, a great couple hours on her new book on quitting and, you know, exploring status quo bias and all of these things that kind of touch on different parts of what you've put together.

So like how do you articulate what you're bringing to the world in this new set of ideas?

Jonah Berger: Yeah. You know, I mean, some of this book, um, is deeply my own. So, um, you know, there's [00:01:00] research in the corroborating evidence chapter that, you know, is not even published yet on how, you know, multiple doses of influence encourage people to take action if they're, you know, uh, concentrated in time and, and things along those lines.

Um, similarly in, in the reactance chapter, you know, I talk about providing a menu and the, the power of choice. And we just recently published a paper showing, even if you give people sort of unrelated choice, so think about when you, when you go to a coffee shop and they, rather than asking for tips, ask you, you know, which ice cream do you like better?

Vanilla or chocolate dogs are cats, Um, uh, you know, Duke or unc, whatever it might be, and you sort of vote with your tips and showing that. Even unrelated choice can motivate people to take action. So there's a bunch of, you know, objectively new my stuff in here, but, but you're very right. There's also some stuff that is not mine and is, is not new.

So, you know, take the, the, the roots of the uncertainty chapter. Sure. It talks about freemium and, and a variety of different things. But, but the roots of that chapter is, is [00:02:00] actually, you know, Everett Roger's old classic diffusion of innovations, Um, which, Probably most people listening have not read, um, but is an amazing sort of, uh, interesting book, Famous sociologist sort of talking about the diffusion of hybrid corn and, and various sorts of things and, and noting that the more 

 something has higher triability, it's more likely to be successful. You know, that's not mine. I'm bringing some things together there, but I didn't invent that idea. And so I think while, while pieces of the book are certainly mine, I think one of the contributions  of the book is really bringing these things together in a framework that hasn't been thought about before.

Um, you know, when I, when I've talked to executives or leaders or consultants or founders about trying to change something, um, you know, whether it's, um, a customer's mind, whether it's a a, a colleague or a peers behavior, whatever it might be, um, 98% of the time people come up with some version of pushing more facts, more figures, more reasons, more information.

That's the standard way. We think about getting people to [00:03:00] go, Look, if I, if I just made one more phone call, if I, you know, just made one more PowerPoint presentation,  if they just understood where I  was coming from, they would, they would come around. And, and pushing is a sort of standard way to think about getting people to change.

Um, and if you look at most cases where that's applied, it just doesn't work, . Uh, and so it turns out there's a better way, um, really thinking about what the barriers are to change in removing them. And I think that's also a, a contribution of this book.  finding the root, identifying what the barriers are, um, talking about common barriers and, and helping people figure out how to mitigate them.

Brett Berson: So maybe kind of building on there in, in the context of, of building and selling products and leading teams, why is in, in sort of the work that you've done change so difficult?

Jonah Berger:  I think there's a, a few reasons. Um, so, so first is the challenge of change itself. Um, and second is the approach we often use. 

 anytime we're trying to get people to do something, whether it's buy a new product, use a new [00:04:00] service, um, uh, you know, adopt an idea internally within an organization, we're often asking people to make a choice between something they've done before. and something new. Um, you know, the old product you always buy or a new product, 

 and whenever people are faced with such a choice, um, between the old and the new, um, they have what, uh, is called the status quo bias, which is they have a tendency to stick with the status quo. And, and that by itself wouldn't be a bias, right? Uh, if we stick by the status quo because the status quo is better, that would be one thing.

It's a bias because even when the new thing is better, in fact by, by some estimates up to 2.6 times better, we still tend to stick with the old one. And there are kind of three key reasons that underlie this status quo bias. We can think of this three sort of horseman of, of inertia. Um, one is, It's just easier to do things we've done previously.

It requires less effort. Um, you know,  we've never gone to the grocery store together, but I, but I bet when you go to the grocery store, you tend to buy the same stuff again and again, [00:05:00] not, not exactly the same thing every week, but if you, if you buy milk, you tend to buy a certain size milk from a certain brand, you buy eggs, same sort of thing, right?

It's just easier. It requires more work to figure out,  which new thing would be better. And, and the same is obviously true with startups. You know, we all have the default way of doing things, um, whether it's a default app, whether it's a default way of, uh, working with a service provider, any, anything at all.

It's just easier, requires less work to, to stick, uh, with, with the old one. But it's not just about. It's also about attachment. Um, uh, old product services, ideas, initiatives. Things are not just old things. They're someone's old thing. It's someone's idea. It's someone's approach. It's someone's way of doing things, and they become attached to those things.

There's some nice research that shows in the, in the context of selling homes, for example, that the longer people have lived in their house or or apartment, the more they value it above and beyond market price. Why? [00:06:00] Well, it's theirs, right? They can't imagine letting it go. It's, it's my place. 

 and that's a little bit of the endowment effect also, that we may talk. Later. Um, and, and the third bucket, um, if it was just ease or attachment, that would be bad enough. But, um, if it, if that wasn't enough, there's also risk, which is that old things feel safe and new things feel risky, right?

We know the product we've bought,  We know the way of doing business. We've tried the management strategy we, we've used, and if it, it's not perfect, and that's maybe true, but at least we know what's bad about it. Whereas that new. We don't know yet, right? It could be better, but it could also be worse.

And so that, that risk, that un uncertainty of the new also also leads us to avoid doing new things. So all three of those things  underlie the status quo bias. And so the question then is how can we get people to change? And I think the challenges we talked a little bit about already is that, um, you know, we often think pushing is the right answer.

If I just push people harder, they'll change. And, and it's clear why we think pushing works, right? If there's like a chair in the middle of a [00:07:00] room and we want people to go, well, pushing them is a good way to get the chair to move, right? 

 But if we think about the last time we pushed someone, or if we think 

 Chairs slide across the floor. People don't, people often dig in their heels, They resist, uh, they push back. 

Jonah Berger: and so I, I think what I would just say is, is very simply there's a better way, Right? Um, you can make a really nice analogy to chemistry. Um, uh, I am not a chemist. I'm not smart enough to be a chemist, but I, I do have some friends who are, and they, they talk about how chemical change is really hard.

You know, think about carbon being squeezed into a diamond. Think about plant matter being turned into oil over eons of time and, um, you know, various, uh, various, uh, forces. Pushing on them. And so in the lab, uh, chemists often want change happen faster. And so to do that, they add energy to the system. They add temperature, they add pressure, They sort of heat things up, they squeeze them together.

Almost like if you ever take a, a kernel of popcorn and throw it in the microwave, right? It, it heats it up and it. Increases the pressure inside and eventually pop, it becomes, uh, becomes popcorn. Um, and so chemists [00:08:00] often do the same thing, but there's a special set of substances that chemists often use that make change happen faster and easier.

They don't increase the temperature, they don't increase the pressure, they take a different approach. Um, and these substances have done everything from clean the grime on your contact lenses to clean the grime on your car's engine. Multiple Nobel prizes have been won for innovations in, in this space.

And at the core of these substances are called catalyst. Um, and, and when we talk about catalysts at the office,  in the social world, we think so and so was a catalyst. They were a change agent. The word catalyst actually has a very specific meaning. Catalysts don't just create change.

They create change by lowering the barriers to change. Uh, when you think about great catalyst in the social world, they don't say, Well, what could I do to get someone to change? In some sense, they say, Well, why hasn't that person changed already? What's stopping them? What are the barriers or obstacles getting in the way?

If I'm a salesperson, why hasn't this person bought my product or service? Is, is it because they don't have information? Maybe, or, or more likely they, they have enough information, but I don't understand the [00:09:00] key problem that they're wrestling with, right? There's some barrier that's stopping them from doing this.

What is it? Um, and so, you know, uh, in writing this book, I've talked to amazing set of change agents. You know, everybody from, uh, top selling sales people, consultants, founders, all those sorts of folks. I've also talked to hostage negotiators, substance abuse counselors, parenting experts again and again. Uh, the same five barriers come up.

Um, I put 'em in a framework called the reduced framework that stands for reactance, endowment, distance, uncertainty, and corroborating evidence. I'm sure we'll talk about, uh, each in turn. But, um, you know, these five barriers come up again and again, if we understand these barriers, we can make change more likely in, in any situation.

Brett Berson:  how does a lot of your thinking and research apply to sort of the classic venture idea of you need to build a 10 x better product as a starting point and, and, and sort of the thinking being, if you want people to change, you often need something, not to incrementally better, but dramatically do.

Do you think that that idea is valid or not?[00:10:00] 

Jonah Berger: I, in some ways yes, and in some ways no. Right. So  If we can make a much better product, that's certainly a start. Um, but, but the problem is, you know, I work with a, a lot of early stage firms and, and, and larger multinationals and, um, you know, often I'll get called into something and someone will say, 

 we've built this thing that no one's ever built before. Um, it's much better than everything came before it. Um, and so in terms of its quality, you know, it's theoretically better, right? It is 10 x better, whatever it is. Um, but if you ask them all, who needs this? Or what problem does this solve?

Or do people understand why it's better? They often sort of look at you like you're crazy. Like, what do you mean? It's, it's just better? Shouldn't it succeed? And so I think, um, I wouldn't even say being better is a necessary condition. It certainly is a helpful condition. Um, but it's definitely not a sufficient condition.

Um, it's not enough, uh, to be, to be better.  because in some sense, you know, our competition isn't an [00:11:00] established player. 

It's inert. Right. The biggest competitor I think startups have is inertia. Getting people to do something different. Sure, that thing might be better. Sure, your offering might be better, but I've gotta give up something I'm already doing to get there. And for some set of people, it may be better enough that they're willing to switch, but I think for a much larger group, um, it's just not about whether it's better or not.

It's about is it worth making a, a change? And so we really have to get people to let go of the past and help them understand why, why changing is a good idea.

Brett Berson: When you think about this idea of, of catalyzing someone or, or, or having someone do something different, did the strategies and tactics change based on those three pillars you outlined before? You know, which is how attached to someone, what's the perceived risk and the ease. If you dial any of those up or down, does it change the set of strategies and tactics or, or not?[00:12:00] 

Jonah Berger: It to to, to some degree. But, but I think there's an even more basic question to, to ask, which is, is that question of why hasn't someone changed already? Right? What, what is the thing that's stopping them? Is it risk and uncertainty? Is it attachment? Um, is it, is it ease? We need to make it easier for them.

Maybe it may be something else. Um, uh, you know, I, I often work with clients where they say, Oh, we have this strategy. What do you think about this strategy? And, and I tend to do this annoying thing where, where I say, Well, well, what problem are we trying to solve with this strategy? And, and they, Why are you focused on the problem?

Like, let, do you like this strategy or not? And, and I often say, Well, it depends on the problem we're trying to solve. And some of this to me comes from, I used to work in brand naming. So, uh, uh, a number of years ago I worked for a company called Lexicon Branding. They named, um, the Penny chip, uh, Dasani Water, the Super Outback.

And I still do naming work from time to time. So, um, I named, uh, the, the real estate website, Trulia and have, have worked on a number of, of other sort of projects  And [00:13:00] when, when you name things, people are always like, Oh, you just come across the right name and you know, Right.

Like, you, you just hit it and there's that one name and you're like, This, this is it. This is the name that's just gonna change everything. And really, when you do naming work, it's never like, this is it. It's more like this is a direction and these are some solutions in this direction, and these are good solutions in this direction because they solve this problem.

But it's much less about the specific solution and much more about saying, what problem are we trying to solve? And if that's the problem we're trying to solve, what solution does, does a best job there. And so I think really starting by understanding the problem, starting by understanding your, your audience, um, the person, people, organizations, you're trying to change, that, that's essentially the most important thing.

Brett Berson:  what was the story behind the truly a naming project

Brett Berson: in terms of how you landed on it?

Jonah Berger: I'll give you a quick, abbreviated version of, of, of the story. Um, uh, so, uh, you know, they were [00:14:00] looking for something that,  sounded open, easy to use, uh, but also had some hef to it, right? Um, uh, we, we want a website, uh, that is going to be sort of, uh, dealing with a, a difficult, uh, situation, buying a new house to be seeming simple and easy and sort of an improvement.

Um, but at the same time, like a bank. You know, we're not looking for that process just to be sort of flitty and fun. We wanna make sure they're gonna do a good job because it's a serious decision. And so they wanted something, they both had heft, um, uh, and, and sort of signaled openness. Um, and so worked through a number of different names, a number of solutions and, and directions.

Um, uh, you know, another name that was strongly considered was, was Portia. So combining Portico, which is obviously sort of window with, um, like cornucopia, which is sort of a lot of something. And so Portia suggesting  a lot of homes,  But, but the truly direction really came from thinking about kind of signoffs on, on email.

So you think of warm, uh, warm regards, um, you know, whatever it might be. And, and one thing, someone, sometimes [00:15:00] people say is truly,  and sort of thinking about words like that, but making it sound familiar. Um, and truly it sounds like a word we've heard before, right? It's like, if, if truly and Julia had a kid, it would be truly a, um, and so it wasn't that that solution was the only thing that was considered, but for a number of sort of data driven reasons and problem driven reasons, 

 it did a good job, uh, of achieving what it was supposed to achieve.

Brett Berson: That's, that is very cool. Okay, so, so something you were talking about that is something that I really love is, is the idea of if you just had someone going around your office and, and asking everyone what is the problem they're trying to solve, you'd probably boost everyone's performance like that, That singular question is a powerful one.

If you peel that back a little bit or, or you help someone do that, are there any rituals or tactics that you think are particularly helpful to getting to the essence of what the problem we're trying to solve is in the context of what we're talking about, which is getting [00:16:00] someone to adopt something, buy something, change something.

Jonah Berger: Yeah, I mean, I think a lot of it is, is asking why, um, uh, and being willing to, you know, whether it's, uh, you know, the three whys where you don't ask why, once you ask why a couple of times, or whether you might wanna call it something else. But, um, it, it's really trying to think through that customer journey.

Um, uh, if you have multiple segments, what that customer journey is like for different segments and think about what's going to move them down that, that journey. So I'll, I'll give you an example. I was doing a project a few years ago for a, um, a B2B startup, um, that has software to help you find machine parts.

So imagine you, I don't know, you sell or you have backhoes or you, you know, have a John Deere tractor or whatever it might be, and you have a lot of these sort of machines. You need parts for them. Um, it often takes a long time to get parts. Often they're expensive, whatever it might be. And so they basically had a, a way to help you find parts faster.

And so they were selling a software, um, and they were thinking, Oh, you know, we'll knock off money on the price or we'll [00:17:00] do advertising. And, and we started having a conversation around, well, well, what problem will that solve? Right? And so like, let's think through someone who's, um, uh, you know, trying to think about whether they need the software.

So first, you know, um, they may not, um, think they have a problem, right? They may not realize that they could solve more money or solve more time with this software. Maybe they realize they have a problem, but they don't think you'll provide the solution. Maybe they think you might provide the solution, but it's too risky.

Maybe they're sure you'd provide the solution and know they have a problem, but they're worried about it integrating with their existing software systems. Um, and we could come up with many other sort of possible, well, what, what the barriers might be. But what I like about that exercise is it helps us think about solutions, right?

Because if the issue is, hey, you know, I know I have the problem. And, um, I would like to solve that problem, but I don't trust that you're gonna solve the problem for me. Well then something like a free [00:18:00] trial or an introductory rate or a freemium will will help, right? Cuz that'll sort of lower the barrier to trial.

That'll get in, they'll experience it, they'll like it and they'll adopt it. Alternatively, if they don't think they have a problem, well then free's not gonna solve that. Lowering the price is not gonna solve that. You could make something really cheap, but if I don't think I need it, I'm not gonna want to go get it.

And so for those individuals that segment, you need to raise attention to the problem, right? Maybe you give them a cost calculator that helps them see how much money they're losing every month through this problem. Sort of surfacing attention to the problem. On the other hand, they know they have the problem.

They trust you that your solution is valuable, but they don't know whether integrate with their existing systems well there, it's not about dropping the price or providing a, you know, a tool to help them calculate the savings. Then it's about having a team that comes in and providing white glove service to.

Take care of integration, right? Those are three very different solutions. And there, there are probably dozens of others, but very different solutions. And the efficacy of those solutions depends on which problem we believe is, is the issue, or [00:19:00] which multiple problems we believe are the issue. And so it's not really until you understand the problem, can you begin to prescribe a solution.

You think about being a doctor, they,  don't say, Well, let me put a cast on your leg and say, Let me understand the problem and only once I understand the problem can I prescribe a solution. And I think too often, leaders, salespeople, um, uh, founders are, are doctors that 

 think they have a solution regardless of what the problem is. And I think they don't always understand what the problem is. And so thus not only don't understand whether they're truly selling a solution, but which facets or aspects of their solution to focus on forgive audience because they don't understand those audiences' needs.

Brett Berson: Any thoughts on, on the role ? Something that that sort of came up recently is, is a founder again, is building in, in this case a technical product, a piece of infrastructure. And I found that everyone's leaning in and excited on the [00:20:00] conversation, but then they schedule a meeting for four weeks out to look more deeply at the product.

Or I'm super excited, email me and  it either goes into sort of the scheduling vortex that never happens, or it happens in  two months, which seems to be an indication that, that it's certainly not urgent.  Any thoughts on, on that type of problem space?

Jonah Berger: Yeah. So it relates a little bit to something I I talk about in the endowment chapter around burning the ships or sort of highlighting the costs o of an action. 

 the challenge is like, at every moment, is it really worth doing something new? We, we can just wait. It's fine. It's, it's not that bad. Um, and  there's kind of some interesting research which asks people you know, which hurts more. Uh, a minor injury like spraining your ankle or sort of, um, you know, bumping your elbow or, uh, whatever it might be, or a major injury like, you know, shattering your kneecap or, you know, breaking your arm or, or whatever it might be.

And, and everyone gives the same meds. Say, Oh, of course, you know, a, a major injury is much more painful. Like, you know, if I broke a limb it'd be really, really [00:21:00] bad. Where, you know, just lower back pain that comes and goes once in a while really is, isn't that bad? It's just a, a minor pain. Um, and that intuition makes a lot of sense.

Uh, and it's completely. . wrong, and and the reason why is because if you have a major injury, you do work to fix it, right? You go to the emergency room, you get a cast, you go through physical therapy, you do all the difficult things because it's so bad that it requires change. But if you have a minor injury, lower back pain, that flares up once in a while, 

 you never do the work to get it fixed cuz it's not above that threshold to change it. I think another way of thinking about it is like, you know, if you have a couple flies in your house once in a while, you never call an exterminator cuz it's just a couple of flies. If your house is infested with cockroach is you call the exterminator right away.

And, and so I think the challenge, um, as, uh, you know, a sales lead or a founder  to sort of create that urgency is in, in some sense you. Make people realize that they have a major injury. Make people realize that their house is filled with cockroaches. 

 So I'll give you a, a painfully simple [00:22:00] example, but I, I like this example a lot. So, um, I have a cousin who every time, uh, he would, uh, sign his email would, um, you know, go down to the bottom of his email and write Best Charles.

So write best Charles at the bottom. Every email he'd sign out. and I was like watching him do this. I was like, Why do you type that out every time? He's like, What do you mean it only takes like five or 10 seconds? And I said, I, I know, but you could automate it. You could just put that in your email signature and then every time you'd save those five or 10 seconds, he was like, Yeah, I don't really know how to use email signatures.

And so, you know, it's just not worth the time for me. And, and this is exactly what we talked about a little bit before, right? At every moment, The time to go look up how to, you know, automate an email signature would take, I don't know, five minutes and the time to write that email signature would take 10 seconds.

 And so at no point in time isn't worth taking the action. There's no urgency, but  over time, he's wasting a lot of time doing this. And so this would bother me forever. And, and finally I was writing this book, and so I, I was doing this highlighting, uh, the cost of an action sort of section.

I realized this [00:23:00] was a perfect example of this. So I went to him and I said, Hey, you know, how many emails do you write a day? He said, I don't know, 40 or 50 emails. He said, Oh, okay. How many emails do you write a week? I don't know, 300 emails, 400 email, something like that. I said, Okay. How much time do you spend.

On each email writing your email signature, and he's five or 10 seconds. And I said, Okay, how much time do you spend every week writing your email signature? And he thought about it and he did the math. And then he went ahead and he looked up how to automate an email signature 

Because at every moment, the cost of change is more than the cost of an action, but added up over a period of time, even a short period of time. The cost of inaction are higher than the cost of action. And so we have to highlight the cost of an action. We can't just tell people, Hey, we've got something better.

This is gonna, you know, save you time, save you money, whatever it is, we have to quantify it and quantify the cost of an action. Show people that they are losing something by not doing something, and help them realize that even if the moment to moment costs are harder to create change, uh, even over a short period of time, the cost of inaction is [00:24:00] higher than the cost of action.

Brett Berson:  it's such a great story and illustrates this idea of at any given moment that the benefit maybe isn't transformative or obvious, but it's, it's solving the annoyances over a long period of time that actually delivers a lot of value. 

 I'm curious, is there any other, if you're the founder of a company that's, that's delivering a product like that to the market, are there any other strategies or tactics they should keep in mind?

Jonah Berger:  many of your listeners are probably familiar with the idea of freemium models, sort of, uh, you know, how do you solve this challenge of change?

You, you lower the cost of change, right? You make it less money, uh, let's say in the first period to, to try something. And, and really at the core that's about is understanding switching costs, right? You know,  you got an old product, you got an old service, old way of doing something, and there's that new thing, but there's the cost of change, right?

Even something as simple as switching your phones, let's say from an Apple phone to a Google phone or vice versa, will not only have to [00:25:00] buy a new phone, but you have to understand how to use all the, the different apps that are in there, and you have to sign into different things and transfer all your stuff over.

There's a cost of change. It's not just a monetary cost, it's also a time cost and an effort cost. You know, a company's using a certain software system, everyone knows how to use it, not only to have to pay for that new software system, but even if it's not very expensive, they've gotta know how to use that one and learn how to use it.

And so training is required and so nobody, nobody wants to switch over. but the challenge is not just their switching costs, right?  if you think about when the costs of change, And when the benefits of change occur, the costs are often upfront and the benefits are often later.

why are you switching to a new software system? It's gonna save you money in the long term. Uh, it's gonna save you time, gonna save you effort, whatever it might be. That's the benefit of change. But you incur the costs before you incur the benefit, right?

You gotta pay the money, you gotta switch everybody over. You gotta do the work. And so the work is now, and the benefit is later and further. The work is often certain it's gonna cost a certain amount of money. It's gonna take at least a certain [00:26:00] amount of time or effort, and the benefit is often uncertain.

Right. It should be better, but how do I know it's better? 

 And so this is called the cost benefit . Costs are now, benefits are later. Costs are certain benefits are uncertain.

And so you gotta figure out how to solve this, this cost benefit, . Um, and this was actually one of the reasons that I, I wrote this book in the first place. I was sort of working on problems like this with a variety of different companies. I was helping, uh, Google launch a new service 

And I realized it sort of came back to the same key issue again and again. And, and if you look at what solves this problem well, things like Freeman are, are pretty good, right? What a Freeman do. How does that solve the problem? What, what, what it does, it says, don't trust me that it's good. Try it. Right.

Check this thing out. Um, and by the way, I'm gonna lower the cost of trial. I'm gonna make it not as expensive upfront. Now, maybe it still requires effort and time, but at least the monetary cost is lower. And so people are more willing to try it because it, it solves that cost benefit, at push some of the cost to later and some of the [00:27:00] benefits, uh, to sooner.

And, and, you know, everyone's used, uh, freemium models  and there's an appendix in the back of the book with sort of how to do freemium better. But, but I often work with clients that say something like, God, you know, I love this idea of freemium, but how do I use it here? Right?  I sell a physical product and can we do freemium with a physical product?

I'm a doctor. What would freemium be in a doctor sort of space? I'm a fleet management company that helps manage, uh, vehicles for other firms. What's freemium in, in, in that case? And so if you look at it though, freemium is just one example of a much broader phenomenon. Right. If you think about going to a a car dealership,  and you say, Hey, I'm interested in this new car.

And they say, Great. Give me $50,000. You'd say, No way, right? I'm not gonna give you the money until I actually know that, that I like the thing. They don't do free at a car dealership. What do they do? They, they give you a test drive, right? They allow you to sit in the car  and  see whether you like it.

That's not free in the sense, no free version of the car and premium version of the car. But the, the underlying idea is the same, right? There's a first period of time where we lower [00:28:00] the costs or the barrier trial. We make it easier for people to experience the value of the offering and. If they like it, there's a later period in which they incur some of those costs, whether monetary or otherwise.

And I think the, the thing I don't like about freemium is it focuses on the monetary costs. And the monetary costs are part of the costs. That's part of what the switching costs are, but it's also the time and effort and energy. And often we are unaware of those costs and don't think about them. And if we only focus on the monetary costs, we miss out on getting a lot of people to come over.

And so it's really about lowering the barrier to trial, whether that's through a test drive, whether that's through freemium, whether that's through sampling, whether that's renting rather than buying, whatever it may be. Creating some sense of, of urgency. Resolving that urgency problem by saying, Don't trust me.

Try it yourself. And more likely to try means more willing to buy.

Brett Berson: Are there, when it gets to the, when it gets into this idea of, of effort is required [00:29:00] and time is required to get to some unit of value, are there other strategies and tactics for people to keep in mind other than lowering the barrier?

Jonah Berger: Yeah, I mean, I, I think, uh, we, we have a very good sense of what lowering the monetary barrier is. We have a less good sense of what lowering the time or the effort barrier is. Um, but, but one thing I talk about there is, is how can you drive discovery in some sense? How can you bring the trial to people?

Um, because the challenge of trials, look, there's a set of people that are willing to try something. Um, but trial usually takes effort. I have to know you exist to try something. Um, and I have to think I would like you and I have to be willing to do the work to go try it, right? If I, um, you know, test drive a car, I have to know that the brand exists.

I have to identify where the dealership is. I have to drive there, I have to sit in it, I have to experience it. It's some work. Um, if you look at what company like Carvana has done, right, um, they bring the car to you so they [00:30:00] reduce some of that cost. You can try it at home for seven days, so they reduce some of that cost of trial.

Um, but, but that idea is sort of saying, Well, well, how can we bring the trial to people? How can we embed trial in something they're already. Doing, And there's a nice example of this with the company. Acura obviously makes cars and um, you know, they had this problem a number of years ago where it turns out lots of people like Acura.

If you, if you've driven an Acura, you like it a lot. If you have an Acura, you often, you know, when you trade it in, you buy a second one. But there weren't enough of these people. And so they're trying to figure out essentially how do we get more people to experience the the car. Um, and test drives are great, but not enough people are coming to the dealership either because they don't know of the brand or they don't think of it.

It's not top of mind. They think of Lexus. They don't think of Acura. And so they do this interesting program where they pair with W hotels and they say, Look,  anyone's staying at a W Hotel can get a ride in an Acura for. When you check in or you get a little slip of paper and they say, We have this anywhere, uh, anytime program.

You don't need to be in the car market. You don't need to want a new car. You just need a ride to your meeting, to the airport, whatever it is, we'll [00:31:00] give you a ride in an Acura for free. Now, does everyone who stayed as a W Hotel take a ride in Acura? No, but hundreds of thousands people do. Do all of them end up buying an Acura?

No, but tens of thousand do. Right. Why? Because this program drives discovery. It essentially embeds trial in something people are already doing rather than asking them to skip the monetary costs. Right. But do the work and effort of sort of seeking out trial and finding it, it embeds trial in something that they're already doing.

And so I think this question of, yes, there are other costs. How do we reduce them? How can we bring trial to people? How can we embed it in something they're, they're already setting out to do? I was working a, a few years ago with a, a company that makes like single family apartment homes and they were trying to figure out how do we get people to check them out.

They had a model unit, but not enough people were, were stopping by. And so we ended up doing a simple program. We basically just encourage residents to have parties. We, we give them, you know, uh, six foot subs. Uh, we encourage Super Bowl parties. We give away different things. Magnum bottles of champagne.

Why? Because if you [00:32:00] have a party, you get a whole bunch of people who've never seen the place before inside a residence. Uh, getting them to see what it's like and helping them realize that maybe they would like living there as well. Um, and so it's not just about having that model home or that sort of opportunity to try, it's trying to put that trial in something people already want or already doing so that they're trying it without even really realizing it.

Brett Berson: So we've touched on a few  of these ideas as we've been bouncing around a bit. But if you zoom out and, and you think about early stage startup building their first product and bringing it to market, are there consistent patterns and traps and mistakes you see those founders make when it gets into  this sphere of sales persuasion, getting someone to adopt a thing that, that maybe we haven't hit on in great detail yet?

Jonah Berger: Yeah, I mean, I think one thing I often find, um, is that very few companies truly understand what they're. selling, many companies have a clear sense of what they make. [00:33:00] They make software, they make a certain product, whatever it is. But what you make and what you sell are, are not necessarily the same things.

So think about a simple example like running shoes. Um, I would argue that no one actually wants running. And you might say, Well, what do you mean no one wants running shoes? I mean, they sell millions, if not tens of men, not hundreds of millions of pairs of running shoes a year. I have running shoes in my own closet.

 you don't want running shoes just to have running shoes, right? You want running shoes to do something.  You want running shoes to get in shape. You want running shoes to look athletic. You want running shoes because you're a sneaker head, whatever it might be.

Running shoes are a means to an end. They're not the end in themselves. Same, same with a drill, right? Um, uh, you look at a company like Black and Decker, they sell lots of, um, things like drills and, um, screwdrivers and, and the like. Um, but nobody actually wants a drill, right? Nobody's sitting there going, You know what I would like to have in my house?

I would like a drill. It would make my life complete. No know what they want is a hole in the wall. They wanna build something, They want to do something with the drill. Um, and so the more [00:34:00] you truly understand what you're selling, what that customer need is, Um, the more successful you can be.  people don't buy products and services.

They buy solutions to problems. They have a particular need.  I wanna hang some pictures. I don't wanna drill, I wanna hang some pictures.

A drill is a way to do that. Now note, there's lots of other ways to do that. I could hire TaskRabbit, uh, to do that. I could see if there's a neighborhood tool exchange, uh, to do that. Um, uh, you know, there may be other ways to, to do it, but I think the more we understand what we're selling, um, what customers are really buying from us, what need they have, um, the more successful we're gonna be.

And, and sometimes it's not about solutions to problems. Um, and I think this is less sort of the technology focused, um, companies, but, um, you know, particularly in the consumer space, people also buy tickets to better versions of themselves, right? You know, I buy this thing because I believe that this will.

allow me to achieve my goals and, and be a better person or, um, you know, think about myself more positively or [00:35:00] signal a certain I identity. And so the more I think we understand what people are buying in whatever market we're in, the more effectively we can answer that question of what are we selling?

And the more effectively we can target everything from our market communications to our, our product benefits, to hit that true understanding of what we're selling.

Brett Berson:  one of the things you mentioned a minute ago is the role of identity and, and I read a really interesting, I don't know, I, I think it was a, a part of a book and I'm blanking on which one, but it, it, it was giving the example of if you yourself want to get into running that there's value in trying to shift your identity to identify as a runner because runners run regularly.

Instead of just focusing on trying to run X period of time a week, if you can focus on shifting your identity, it can have  these very powerful effects. I'm curious if, if there's anything more you can say about the role of identity in some [00:36:00] of the topics that we're talking about and the role that might play in, uh, persuasion or sales or product adoption.

Jonah Berger: There's 

Jonah Berger:  this famous old framework or idea called masos Hierarchy of needs, sort of a pyramid.

On the bottom of the pyramid is basic physiological needs like hunger and thirst and safety. And at the top is self-actualization kind being a better version of yourself. And you can sort of move up this pyramid, um, in, in various ways. And, and one of the things close to the top is, is identity. People care what group they're part of.

People care what other people think about them. People care whether they have status.  they don't just buy products and services for what they do. They buy products or services, what they mean, or what they say about, about them. And so identities are, are really important.

Um, you know, you talk to startup founders, you know, many companies in many industries want to think of the. As technology companies, Not, not just because you may get a higher valuation if you're a technology company, um, but also cuz it, it's a maybe more [00:37:00] exciting space to be in. Maybe it's easier to attract talent.

Similarly, you know, if you, if you look at the shift among MBA students towards entrepreneurship over the past 10 or 15 or 20 years, you know, I did my PhD at, at Stanford, um, and at Stanford, lots of students going to entrepreneurship.

When I originally came to Wharton, sort of around 2007, very few Wharton students were interested in it. Um, they would say, you know, Oh, the only people go into entrepreneurship are the people that, you know, couldn't get a job in finance or consulting. Now, 15 years later, it's, it's flipped and, and lots of people are, are, are going into entrepreneurship, um, because it's a more desirable identity for, for them it's, it's, it's become something that people, um, it's not just that it's, um, monetarily valuable potentially, but it's, it's a desirable identity that people wanna hold.

And so I think just as we've talked about in terms of barriers throughout this discussion, you know, understanding what those identities people wanna hold. And showing them how they can use our product services and ideas to help them achieve those identities or avoid [00:38:00] undesired identities, uh, can often be a powerful motivator.

Brett Berson: when you zoom out and you think about this role of identity and how does somebody wanna shape their identity or what future version of themself, um, can your product help them be? Is there an example of, of, of a company that's done that very well and, and I think there's obviously a zillion d. of this,  Nike is kind of a piece of that, this idea of, of, you know, if you have a body, you're an athlete and, and, and getting people to identify as athletes.

And if you're an athlete, you wanna, you want to be in business with Nike or the fact that they were early in getting the biggest, most influential people in athletics to, wear their stuff. Um, but maybe another flavor of this is like, I, I, I think something that's maybe slightly underrated  maybe in the case of enterprise software is, is how do you communicate the idea that this thing can help the person get [00:39:00] promoted in their career?

And, and that future sort of version of themself, not necessarily business impact or anything else, but like, how does this get you from a director to a VP potentially? And so sort of, those are kind of the threads that I was pulling on.

Jonah Berger:  there's some great research, for example, that, that shows if you give, um, people a policy, uh, potential, you know, tax increase or other sort of, um, policy to, to think about voting on, um, uh, you would think that people care a lot about the policy itself.

So they'd evaluate the policy based on, you know, whether the policy fits with their views and values and all those things and make a decision. But in addition to giving people policies, they tell them which party supports this policy. And so they take the same policy and they tell some people, Democrats support it and they tell other people, Republicans support it 

And what they find is that party matters even more than policy. Right. Even for something we think of as like, you know, political views and their, you know, views. We support and views, we don't take the same issue. Tell people that people like them, like it, their side likes it.

[00:40:00] They go, Yes, that's me. I support it. Tell them the other side likes it. People, you know, opposite them. Like it, they will, they will avoid it. Um, and so even something like political choices is a lot about id, what identities do we hold rather than just sort of the functional benefits, uh, of, of doing something.

Um, and so I, I think the same thing is, is true more, more generally in the, in the consumer space. You know, obviously Patagonia doesn't just sell jackets or clothing. They sell and identity. Think about something as simple as going to the store and picking up bread, right? There's a brand, Dave's killer bread that is selling a lot more than just seeds.

Um, you know, they're selling an identity, they're selling a set of values, they're selling a mission, they're selling something that's bigger than oneself. And so I think you see a lot of companies and organizations. Moving up, uh, this sort of Maslow's hierarchy of needs to access these higher level values.

Um, and I also think you see the same thing, um, in more, more B2B type companies  even companies doing things like giving out awards, uh, to certain [00:41:00] individuals who've used the software or done something with it, showcasing like, Hey, these are people who used us and this helped them get to where they're going.

Helps people not only go, Okay, this works well, okay, this will help my companies will save them money, but like, Oh, interesting, if I use this, maybe I'll be like this person. And so you're actually not selling the features of the software that even the benefits of the software you're selling, how this thing can help you get to this place you want to get to.

Brett Berson: Do you think about these ideas relative to where the company is in, its in its life cycle  if you take an example of Peloton,  if I remember back to the early days of Peloton, had a very sort of functional message and pitch, which was something like, you know, um, workout classes in your house or whatever it was.

And then as the company matured, it became more [00:42:00] aspirational, maybe, maybe more tied to someone's identity of, we go farther together, or whatever the language might be. Does sort of the arc or, or, or decade long story of the company fit into any of these ideas?

Jonah Berger: I think, I think to some degree, right  if I came out with some new thing and you didn't know anything about what the thing did and all I was promising was some sort of identity, the identity might be desirable. But  unless I'm selling clothing, which in some sense is mostly about an identity and, and kind of little Ls.

Many other products, services also have a functional component that we sort of have to believe in it and understand and, and see how it, it works. Um, and, and I think Peloton in some sense was also trying to not only sell what they were selling, but but build a category, right? Change the way people think about exercise.

And, and so I think there's certainly. On a product life cycle, a company life cycle, a tendency to, to move to identity based approaches later on, [00:43:00] once you're sort of more well established. Um, also in part because copycats come in, right? And so someone comes in and they sell kind of what you're selling at a lower price.

And so if all you're selling is the sort of functional benefit, someone can undercut you on price. But if what you're selling is an identity benefit, self-actualization belief in yourself, it it's really hard for somebody to, to compete on that.  think about Nike as an example.

What, what is someone else gonna say? Oh, you know, you'll just do it with us even better than Nike, right? We, we are gonna be better at helping you achieve your, you know, ideal self,  it's hard to make an argument that you're better.

And so I think once you've taken that position, Um, it's hard for others to kind of box you out. Um, and it allows you to avoid some of the sort of race to the bottom. Um, while we have these features, well, now does someone else have these features? What's the cost being offered? Is this cost less? Um, because you're not just comparing features.

And so in, in some sense, that's the benefit of a brand, right? That's a benefit of brand equity. You're, you're not just selling a product and a set of [00:44:00] features, you're selling something bigger than that. Um, and, and that's one reason to build brands and build brand equity over time.

Brett Berson: Something you touched on just briefly is, is sort of potentially the difference between  bringing something new to an existing category. creating an entirely new category or potentially modifying an existing category D. Does any of your work or research sort of express itself differently in those three modalities?

Uh,

Jonah Berger: I mean, I think it's always harder  if you're building a category many people say, Oh, well you're first to market, and so it's easy. And so you don't have any competition fair. But you also have to convince someone that like doing this new thing is, is reasonable.

And so you're not just saying like, Hey, there's a thing you want to do. I'm the best at it. And so I both have to convince you to do the new thing and in some sense, to pick me while, while doing it. One thing I talk a little bit in the, in the distance chapter of, um, the catalyst is, is this idea of sort of stepping stones [00:45:00] from a product design standpoint.

Um, and and the idea there is, you know, when you ask people for a big change to do something quite different from what they're doing at the moment, they'll, they'll often say, No, right? It's too much, it's too different. It's scary. I I don't wanna do it. If you think about analogy of a river, for example, you know, if you ask someone, Oh, Ford this big river, they, I don't know how deep it is in the middle, it's gonna take a while to cross.

What if I get swept up by the current? No thanks. But, but so what, what good product designers often do is they create what are called stepping stones  They see, okay, this is where people are at the moment. This is where I want to get them to in one year, two years, five years, whatever it is.

Um, I'd love to get them there right now, but that's gonna be challenging. They're not gonna do that. And so what kind of versions of my product or versions of the  existing sort of place where they are, can I do to move them in my direction? Um, whether it's, you know, core of the way, they are a third of the way, they're a 10th of the way, they're, whatever it is.

And so I don't ask them to make that big leap right away. I ask them to make a small leap and then ask them to make another one. And so it's kind of asking [00:46:00] for less and then asking for more. It's chunking the change. It's taking a big, big thing you want people to do. And rather than asking 'em to do it right away, breaking it down into, into smaller chunks.

I think about Uber  I remember the first time I took Uber and it was still sort of the, the time where it was like a black car service. Um, and I remember going like, Oh, well, yeah, you know, I don't, am I gonna get in a car with people I don't really know?

Well, I guess I know what a black car is and you know, I haven't really taken one before, but it seems kind of like high end. It's sort of like a high end taxi. I, I guess I can use that. And, and the place where Uber today is like, Hey, you hit a button, someone you've never met before, shows up at your house.

You get in with their car and you completely trust them. Um, and I think if they went to market with that, initially people had been like, No, I'm not gonna do this. This is, you know exactly what my mom told me not to do. Don't get in a car with strangers. But instead they started with something that was closer to what people were used to.

Oh, a black car. But it's like a different way of calling a black car. Well, that's not such a big ask. And then they do that. And then they're familiar with that and they say, Oh, well hey, we used to be the thing you would call a black car in. Now you can call a cheaper version [00:47:00] of that. Oh, everyone likes something cheaper.

Why? Why not? And so sort of moving in that stepping stone way to the eventual place they ended up 

Brett Berson: So switching gears slightly, if a founder comes to you and they said, Hey Jonah, we brought our first product to market and we have 10 early pilot customers and three of them are using the product, are deep in the product and finding a lot of value, and seven are kind of less engaged or, or, or it doesn't seem to be providing value and like, Hey, I have a chance to go talk to all my customers.

In these two buckets, the super engaged and the not engaged, do you have any advice for what they should be doing in those conversations to maximize learning?

Jonah Berger:  I think you should think about a, a few things. Um, so, so first is understanding how they're different, right? What, what, why is someone in this one group and why is someone in this other group? Are they there because of preexisting differences? So, hey, these are two segments of people. And even if, even if I hadn't known some found it useful and some didn't, um, I would've [00:48:00] said these were two groups of people initially.

And, and indeed, whether they're finding useful or not is consistent with their segment.  which might mean, hey, We have great product market fit for one segment, but maybe not for another segment. Alternatively, they may all be in the same segment. Um, and it may not be the segment or sort of preexisting, uh, issues problem situation that brought them to either liking it or not.

Um, but it may be sort of what they uncovered. Or their, their journey to usage, right? Maybe they haven't realized about, uh, some of the benefits of this offering. Maybe they're stuck in a particular version of a use case and they haven't uncovered, uh, certain, certain things. Or maybe the way they're thinking about using the product or service isn't, isn't exactly what you have in mind.

And so I think first just trying to figure out are they different groups of people or they had a different, they're the same group of people, but they've had different experiences. 

Brett Berson: One of the things we haven't talked to much as much about is negotiating specifically over price. And what types of advice or frameworks do you have for people who, for [00:49:00] a, a meaningful percentage of their job? Are negotiating with people over price, right? I want to sell you this piece of software for a hundred dollars and the person wants to pay $50 and, and how to approach those kind of conversations.

Jonah Berger: Yeah, I mean, I, there are a lot of ways to think about negotiating, um, and, uh, a lot of different approaches that can be valuable. Um, certainly understanding, um, your negotiating partners is a classic, right? So there's that, you know, that old story of the, the, the chefs and the orange. Where, uh, there are two chefs and, um, both of them need an orange to cook and there's only one orange left in the kitchen.

And so they're stuck cuz they don't know what to do. But, um, if they talk, um, then they realize that one chef needs the orange to make something and the other chef needs the orange line to do something else. And so there's actually a better way to split that orange rather than half sort of, someone takes the middle and someone takes the outside.

That requires like, um, like many of, of the ideas of lowering the barriers, understanding your audience. And [00:50:00] so, you know, going back to the negotiation of a hundred dollars for the software, why is it that they. Wanna pay, uh, a hundred dollars. I, I was recently actually in a negotiation for a, for a project where  they were saying, Look, we don't want to do it this way because we're worried about how it looks.

And I thought that they were worried about the rate because the rate was too high, but they were really worried about how the optics of how the rate looked. And so if we instead did an hourly rate, we actually did as a project based rate, they were fine with that, right? They were very happy to pay the money, but they just didn't want the optics 

But if I just assumed they didn't wanna pay the money, we could have never gotten that, that solution. So that's, that's one thing. I think also helping people, um, uh, understand the trade offs that you are wrestling with as well. So saying to someone, Okay,  you don't wanna pay a hundred dollars for the software, great.

You wanna pay $80. Well, for $80 I can give you this. Like, which, which do you want? Which do you want? You want the $80 and this version, you want the a hundred dollars and this version. And the same thing is true internally when you're, you're negotiating with potential hires, you know, saying, Hey, um, uh, you know, I [00:51:00] can give you this salary with this much vacation and this much equity, or I can give you higher salary for less equity, or I can give you lower salary for more equity or more vacation.

Giving them choice. Allows for autonomy. Um, a a a lot of, um, uh, some of the challenges of changing minds is when we push, as we've talked about, people push back. And that's because this idea of reactance, right? People wanna feel like they are in control of their choices. 

And so what this idea of, um, uh, asking don't telling or this sort of negotiating strategy is about, these tactics are all about allowing for agency, about giving people back some sense of freedom, uh, and control. Giving them choice, right? Giving them a sense that they are part of the process, that it's not being foisted on them.

Um, I even talk about a strategy in the book called Providing a Menu. Often we want people to do some, We say, Hey, do X. And uh, here are all the reasons why you should do X. And they sit there going, Okay, I hear you, but these are the reasons why X doesn't work for me. And so what great catalyst, what great change agents often do is they provide a menu.

They give [00:52:00] people multiple options. They say, Hey, I think you should do X or Y, Which one do you think is better? And again, that subtly, but importantly, shifts the role as a listener. Now, rather than sitting there thinking about all the reasons I don't like X, now I'm sitting there going, Okay, well which one do I like better?

X or Y? And I'm not thinking about A, B, C, D, E, FG, and all the other things I could do instead, right?  You're not giving people infinite options.

You're not allowing to do everything. You have to give 'em a real choice. But by guiding that choice, by focusing them on a set of options, you can encourage them to choose from within the things you want them to do rather than outside of them.

Brett Berson: So going back to where we started the conversation, you, you laid out sort of the architecture of the, the book, which is this reduced framework, and you, you sort of briefly talked through the, the pillars of it. Are there any pieces or, or, or maybe one or two of them that you don't think we, we fully explored in this conversation that if you're in the founder's seat would be most valuable for you to know about or keep in mind[00:53:00] 

Jonah Berger: Yeah, . So we kind of went all, all around. I think we touched on different things at different points in time.  but maybe what I'll do is I'll just briefly talk about all five next to each other in case that's useful. Yeah. So, um, The, the framework again, is reduce, uh, and that's an acronym.

Uh, the R is for reactance, all about reducing reactance, essentially, uh, allowing for agency, giving people back a sense of freedom and control, giving them choice, um, asking questions rather than maintenance statements, highlighting a , pointing out where their attitudes and their actions don't line up and encouraging them to do the work, to change it rather than pushing them.

Um, endowment is, is all about the fact that it's hard to let go of the past. Um, and so to ease endowment, we have to highlight the cost of an action. Uh, make people realize that  doing nothing isn't as costless as they, they might think, uh, the D is for distance and we need to shrink distance.

Um, uh, and when sometimes when we ask for too much, people ignore us, they ignore even the possibility of changing. And so in a sense, we need to ask for less and [00:54:00] then ask for more chunk the change, breaking down big change into smaller chunks, uh, or switching the field and finding a different way or different.

Access to, um, uh, encourage people to think about, uh, the U is uncertainty. Um, uh, and there to eat, to ease, uncertainty, change always involves switching costs. It involves this cost benefit, . And so we have to lower the barriers to trial. Um, uh, help people experience the value of what we're offering.

Uh, drive discovery, bring it to them, um, reduce that uncertainty they might have. And last but not least, is corroborating evidence. Sometimes, particularly for big changes, people need multiple sources of proof, right? If something's cheap, if it's easy, if it's close to what they're doing already, they don't need a lot to change.

But the more it's expensive, the more it's difficult, the more it's challenging. The more they're gonna need more evidence to tip the scales to, to, to move things. And so there we need to provide multiple sources of proof, other people beyond us that are trying to, to change them. There's an old adage, if someone says you have a tail, [00:55:00] you laugh cuz of course you don't have a tail.

But if five people say you have a tail, well then maybe you turn around and you take a look. Why? Cuz if five people say the same thing, it's harder to think that they're crazy. And so sometimes we need multiple sources of evidence condensed in time to push people over the the hump to drive action.

Brett Berson: And maybe to end in, in all the interviews and conversations you had while writing the book, is there one that kind of most stuck out to you had an outsized impact on your ideas? Or, or, or, or maybe just delighted you in some way?

Jonah Berger:  I talked to some hostage negotiators and, and they had some amazing stories. Um, and, and I'll, I'll tell one, it's not a positive story, but it's a, a deep and rich and interesting story. 

 hostage negotiators talking to, to someone who's thinking of, of committing. , uh, and he's thinking of committed suicide cuz he's lost his job. Uh, and he thinks the only he can provide for his family, uh, is, is by killing himself.  because he has, he has an insurance policy and so he is thinking, [00:56:00] Look, uh, if I kill myself, the insurance policy will pay off.

My family won't be safe. The problem is that that won't work. If he kills himself, the insurance company won't pay out. And so the standard sort of solution would be to go in there and tell me he's wrong. Hey, you know, you're wrong. This isn't gonna work, so you  just shouldn't do it. Um, but obviously someone in that situation is, is not in the right frame of mind, right?

They're, they're close to the edge. It's unclear what they're, they're going to do. Um, uh, and so you can't just tell them they're wrong. That's not gonna work. And so, um, this amazing negotiator I talked to first, you know, he always starts every, um, every situation by introducing himself and saying, Are you okay?

And so he starts by having a conversation with the guy. Um, he's, Are you okay? You know, Is there anything I can get you? Um, uh, you know, you, you seem like you're really upset, you tell me more about why you're upset. Starts having a conversation. Um, and the guy says, This is why I'm upset. You know, I'm, I'm trying to provide for my family.

He says, Oh, tell me about your family. And so the guys, I have  two young boys, I wanna, you know, help them grow up to be, um, uh, great young men. Um, oh, that sounds real interesting. You know, Tell me more about them. How old are they? What do you do with them? Oh, I take them [00:57:00] fishing. You know, I wanna teach 'em how to be polite, all these different things.

And so they, they have this winding conversation. . And then  the negotiator stops for a moment and he says, Wow, you, you seem like you care a lot about your kids, don't you? And the guy says, Yeah, yeah, I do. And the negotiator says, Well, you know, if you, if you kill yourself, your kids are gonna lose the best friend they've ever had.

And then he just stops. Because what he's done is he's helped that person realize that the best way to get what they wanted in the first place, which is helping their kids, was to doing what the negotiator wanted to do in the first place. Which is have the person not, not kill themselves, not by telling them to do it, not by te hey, this is why you should do it.

This is all the things, but by showing. that there was a better path, right? By helping them realize that the best way to get to their outcome was to listen to the, what, what the negotiator said in, in the first place. And so, you know, he, he talked about how negotiators, novice negotiators always wanna jump to influence.

The first thing they wanna do is change someone's mind. Seasoned negotiators start with understanding. [00:58:00] They start by understanding the person, the audience, the group that they're trying to change, building empathy, and then only then moving to influence. And I think as a salesperson, that sounds really challenging.

And by the way, being a, a negotiator in a situation where someone's trying to kill themselves is a horrible situation. I hope no one is a, is ever very challenging situation. Being a salesperson is certainly much, um, much. Um, but, but the insights from this negotiator, the insights of how this negotiator solves problem, I think is relevant to all of us, right?

Don't start with influence. Don't start by saying, Here's what you should do here, because I want you to do it. Start with understanding. Start by understanding the person or people you're trying to change, and use that to help you show them that the best way for them to get what they want is to do what you wanted them to do in the first place.

Brett Berson: Good place to end. Thank you, Jonah.

Jonah Berger: no problem. Thanks for having me.