"It’s about shared identities"

Quando penso na vantagem das PME, quando penso perigo do Big Data, quando penso em Mongo, penso em:

"Relationships not only intensify willingness to help but also cause it.
.
There’s a lesson here. Our ability to create change in others is often and importantly grounded in shared personal relationships, which create a pre-suasive context for assent. It’s a poor trade-off, then, for social influence when we allow  present-day forces of separation—distancing societal changes, insulating modern technologies—to take a shared sense of human connection out of our exchanges. [Moi ici: Remember big data]
...
What kind of existing or perceived relationships maximize the favorable treatment of fellow members? The answer requires a subtle but crucial distinction. The relationships that lead people to favor another most effectively are not those that allow them to say, “Oh, that person is like us.” They are the ones that allow people to say, “Oh, that person is of us.”[Moi ici: Recordar os irmãos de sangue]
...
The experience of unity is not about simple similarities (although those can work too, but to a lesser degree, via the liking principle). It’s about shared identities. It’s about the categories that individuals use to define themselves and their groups, such as race, ethnicity, nationality, and family, as well as political and religious affiliations. A key characteristic of these categories is that their members tend to feel at one with, merged with, the others. They are the categories in which the conduct of one member influences the self-esteem of other members. Put simply, we is the shared me."

Trechos retirados de "Pre-Suasion: A Revolutionary Way to Influence and Persuade"

"An if/when-then plan "

Aplicar o texto que se segue para empresas, para a definição de objectivos. Ou melhor ainda, para a definição de acções a tomar quando certos eventos ocorrem e indicam que certo cenário vai desenrolar-se:

"The recognition that pre-suasive associations are manufacturable can lead us to much personal profit, even if we are not savvy advertising copywriters or renowned Russian scientists [Pavlov]. From time to time we all set objectives for ourselves, targets to hit, standards to meet and exceed. But too often, our hopes go unrealized as we fail to reach the goals. There’s a well-studied reason for the difficulty: although generating an intention is important, that process alone isn’t enough to get us to take all the steps necessary to achieve a goal. Within health, for instance, we translate our good intentions into any type of active step only about half the time. The disappointing success rates have been traced to a pair of failings. First, besides sometimes forgetting about an intention—let’s say, to exercise more—we frequently don’t recognize opportune moments or circumstances for healthy behaviors, such as taking the stairs rather than the elevator. Second, we are often derailed from goal strivings by factors —such as especially busy days—that distract us from our purpose. Fortunately, there is a category of strategic self-statements that can overcome these problems pre-suasively. The statements have various names in scholarly usage, but I’m going to call them if/when-then plans. They are designed to help us achieve a goal by readying us (1) to register certain cues in settings where we can further our goal, and (2) to take an appropriate action spurred by the cues and consistent with the goal. Let’s say that we aim to lose weight. An if/when-then plan might be “If/when, after my business lunches, the server asks if I’d like to have dessert, then I will order mint tea.”
...
Additionally impressive is the extent to which if/when-then plans are superior to simple intention statements or action plans such as “I intend to lose five pounds this month” or “I plan to lose weight by cutting down on sweets.” Merely stating an intention to reach a goal or even forming an ordinary action plan is considerably less likely to succeed. There are good reasons for the superiority of if/when-then plans: the specific sequencing of elements within the plans can help us defeat the traditional enemies of goal achievement. The “if/when-then” wording is designed to put us on high alert for a particular time or circumstance when a productive action could be performed. We become prepared, first, to notice the favorable time or circumstance and, second, to associate it automatically and directly with desired conduct. Noteworthy is the self-tailored nature of this pre-suasive process. We get to install in ourselves heightened vigilance for certain cues that we have targeted previously, and we get to employ a strong association that we have constructed previously between those cues and a beneficial step toward our goal."

Trechos retirados de "Pre-Suasion: A Revolutionary Way to Influence and Persuade"

"you’re much more persistent when you’re confident in your abilities"

Mais um trecho de Pre-suasion:

"Alan told me that just prior to taking any standardized exam, he’d spend systematic time “getting psyched up” for it.
...
He didn’t take up the minutes before the exam room doors opened as I always had: notes in hand, trying to cram every piece of information I was unsteady about into my brain. He knew, he said, that focusing on material that was still vexing him would only elevate his anxieties. Instead, he spent that crucial time consciously calming his fears and simultaneously building his confidence by reviewing his past academic successes and enumerating his genuine strengths. Much of his test-taking prowess, he was convinced, stemmed from the resultant combination of diminished fear and bolstered confidence: “You can’t think straight when you’re scared,” he reminded me, “plus, you’re much more  persistent when you’re confident in your abilities.”"

Como não relacionar este último sublinhado com "The Stretch Goal Paradox" ou com as empresas e empresários que se refugiam no papel de coitadinhos e aspiram a protecção da parte do Estado contra os maus que andam a seduzir os clientes a que elas têm direito. Quanto mais barulho menos autoconfiança nas suas capacidades.

Acerca das exportações (parte I)

O valor mensal das exportações no passado mês de Novembro foi o segundo mais alto de sempre, só ultrapassado pelo recorde de Julho de 2015.

Um excelente desempenho das PME. Quando excluímos as exportações de combustíveis e lubrificantes constatamos que Novembro de 2016 foi recorde absoluto de exportações:

Claro que a maioria dos comentadores e políticos, da oposição e da situação, não sublinham estes recordes para não prejudicar a sua narrativa do país-coitadinho, vítima do euro, que lhes dá munições para o seu capital de queixa e reivindicação perante Bruxelas.

Em Pre-suasion, encontrei uma história deliciosa e ao mesmo tempo preocupante:

"often try to convey to various audiences is that, in contests of persuasion, counterarguments are typically more powerful than arguments. This superiority emerges especially when a counterclaim does more than refute a rival’s claim by showing it to be mistaken or misdirected in the particular instance, but does so instead by showing the rival communicator to be an untrustworthy source of information, generally. Issuing a counterargument demonstrating that an opponent’s argument is not to be believed because its maker is misinformed on the topic will usually succeed on that singular issue. But a counterargument that undermines an opponent’s argument by showing him or her to be dishonest in the matter will normally win that battle plus future battles with the opponent."

Depois disto vamos à história:

"perhaps the most effective marketing decision ever made by the tobacco companies lies buried and almost unknown in the industry’s history: after a three-year slide of 10 percent in tobacco consumption in the United States during the late 1960s, Big Tobacco did something that had the extraordinary effect of ending the decline and boosting consumption while slashing advertising expenditures by a third. What was it?
...
On July 22, 1969, during US congressional hearings, representatives of the major American tobacco companies strongly advocated a proposal to ban all of their own ads from television and radio, even though industry studies showed that the broadcast media provided the most effective routes to new sales.
...
[Moi ici: Cá vai a solução para o mistério] In 1967, the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) had ruled that its “fairness doctrine” applied to the issue of tobacco advertising. The fairness doctrine required that equal advertising time be granted on radio and television—solely on radio and television—to all sides of important and controversial topics. If one side purchased broadcast time on these media, the opposing side must be given free time to counterargue.
...
That decision had an immediate impact on the landscape of broadcast advertising. For the first time, anti-tobacco forces such as the American Cancer Society could afford to air counterarguments to the tobacco company messages. They did so via counter-ads that disputed the truthfulness of the images displayed in tobacco company commercials. If a tobacco ad featured healthy, attractive, independent characters, the opposing ads would counterargue that, in fact, tobacco use led to diseased health, damaged attractiveness, and slavish dependence.
.
During the three years that they ran, those anti-tobacco spots slashed tobacco consumption in the United States by nearly 10 percent. At first the tobacco companies responded predictably, increasing their advertising budgets to try to meet the challenge. But, by the rules of the fairness doctrine, for each tobacco ad, equal time had to be provided for a counter-ad that would take another bite out of industry profits. When the logic of the situation hit them, the tobacco companies worked politically to ban their own ads, but solely on the air where the fairness doctrine applied—thereby ensuring that the anti-tobacco forces would no longer get free airtime to make their counterargument."

Imaginem o que seria um anónimo como eu confrontar Ferreira do Amaral com números que desmascaram a sua narrativa da falta de competitividade portuguesa com o euro.

Curiosidade do dia

"of all the bad things that happened to people in hospitals, the one that most preoccupied Redelmeier was clinical misjudgment. Doctors and nurses were human, too. They sometimes failed to see that the information patients offered them was unreliable—for instance, patients often said that they were feeling better, and might indeed believe themselves to be improving, when they had experienced no real change in their condition. Doctors tended to pay attention mainly to what they were asked to pay attention to, and to miss some bigger picture. [Moi ici: Recordar Pre-suasion e a importância desmesurada daquilo a que se chama a atenção] They sometimes failed to notice what they were not directly assigned to notice."

Trecho retirado de "Michael Lewis’ The Undoing Project: How do ER surgeons avoid dumb, deadly mistakes? Ask their doctor."

Que acham da capacidade dos humanos? (parte II)

Parte I.

Há anos li um texto, (era capaz de jurar que o li em "Thinking, Fast and Slow" de Daniel Kahneman...mas também poderia tê-lo lido em "Risk Savvy: How To Make Good Decisions" ou em "Gut Feelings: Short Cuts to Better Decision Making" de Gerd Gigerenzer), que ilustrava como duas pessoas observando o mesmo jogo, observando as mesmas imagens, chegavam a conclusões honestas completamente diferentes porque cada uma processava as imagens de forma diferente em função da sua preferência clubística.

Como não recordar as palavras equivocadas do candidato Cavaco Silva:

"dois adultos, (de boa-fé acrescentava eu, perante os mesmos factos chegam às mesmas conclusões"

Assim, foi com um sorriso que encontrei estes trechos em "Pre-suasion":

"Imagine that you are in a café enjoying a cup of coffee. At the table directly in front of you, a man and a woman are deciding which movie to see that evening. After a few minutes, they settle on one of the options and set off to the theater. As they leave, you notice that one of your friends had been sitting at the table behind them. Your friend sees you, joins you, and remarks on the couple’s movie conversation, saying, “It’s always just one person who drives the decision in those kinds of debates, isn’t it?” You laugh and nod because you noticed that too: although the man was trying to be diplomatic about it, he clearly was the one who determined the couple’s movie choice. Your amusement disappears, though, when your friend observes, “She sounded sweet, but she just pushed until she got her way.”
.
Dr. Shelley Taylor, a social psychologist at the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA), knows why you and your friend could have heard the same conversation but come to opposite judgments about who determined the end result. It was a small accident of seating arrangements: you were positioned to observe the exchange over the shoulder of the woman, making the man more visible and salient, while your friend had the reverse point of view. Taylor and her colleagues conducted a series of experiments in which observers watched and listened to conversations that had been scripted carefully so that neither discussion partner contributed more than the other. Some observers watched from a perspective that allowed them to see the face of one the parties over the shoulder of the other, while other observers saw both faces from the side, equally. All the observers were then asked to judge who had more influence in the discussion, based on tone, content, and direction. The outcomes were always the same: whomever’s face was more visible was judged to be more causal.
...
No matter what they tried, the researchers couldn’t stop observers from presuming that the causal agent in the interaction they’d witnessed was the one whose face was most visible to them. They were astonished to see it appear in “practically unmovable” and “automatic” form, even when the conversation topic was personally important to the observers; even when the observers were distracted by the researchers; even when the observers experienced a long delay before judging the discussants; and even when the observers expected to have to communicate their judgments to other people. What’s more, not only did this pattern emerge whether the judges were male or female, but also it appeared whether the conversations were viewed in person or on videotape."

O que pensar dos programas sobre repetição de imagens de lances polémicos no futebol?

Que acham da capacidade dos humanos?

"It is rousing and worrisome (depending on whether you are playing offense or defense) to recognize that these persuasive outcomes can flow from attention- shifting techniques so slight as to go unrecognized as agents of change.
...
[Moi ici: A estória que se segue é deliciosa] Suppose you’ve started an online furniture store that specializes in various types of sofas. Some are attractive to customers because of their comfort and others because of their price. Is there anything you can think to do that would incline visitors to your website to focus on the feature of comfort and, consequently, to prefer to make a sofa purchase that prioritized it over cost?
...
In an article largely overlooked since it was published in 2002, they described how they were able to draw website visitors’ attention to the goal of comfort merely by placing fluffy clouds on the background wallpaper of the site’s landing page. That maneuver led those visitors to assign elevated levels of importance to comfort when asked what they were looking for in a sofa. Those same visitors also became more likely to search the site for information about the comfort features of the sofas in stock and, most notably, to choose a more comfortable (and more costly) sofa as their preferred purchase.
.
To make sure their results were due to the landing page wallpaper and not to some general human preference for comfort, Mandel and Johnson reversed their procedure for other visitors, who saw wallpaper that pulled their attention to the goal of economy by depicting pennies instead of clouds. These visitors assigned greater levels of importance to price, searched the site primarily for cost information, and preferred an inexpensive sofa. Remarkably, despite having their importance ratings, search behavior, and buying preferences all altered pre-suasively by the landing page wallpaper, when questioned afterward, most participants refused to believe that the depicted clouds or pennies had affected them in any way."

Que acham disto?

Que acham da capacidade dos humanos?

Entretanto, ontem à noite ao preparar uma sessão de trabalho numa empresa visitei o seu sítio na internet e encontrei como missão:

"É nossa missão oferecer serviços, a um preço justo e ..."

O primeiro tópico a que chamam a atenção é ... o preço! No entanto, nos testemunhos sobre o que fazem e para quem aparecem nomes ligados ao segmento do luxo.

Trechos retirados de "Pre-suasion"

O truque da atenção

"Pre-suasion" é uma leitura viciante:

"The Importance of Attention . . . Is Importance...
WHAT’S SALIENT IS IMPORTANT
...
anything that draws focused attention to itself can lead observers to overestimate its importance.
...
“Nothing in life is as important as you think it is while you are thinking about it.”
...
a communicator who gets an audience to focus on a key element of a message pre-loads it with importance. [Moi ici: Quase que jurava que as redes sociais minam esta possibilidade daí que os agenda-setters não gostem] This form of pre-suasion accounts for what many see as the principle role (labeled agenda setting) that the news media play in influencing public opinion. The central tenet of agenda-setting theory is that the media rarely produce change directly, by presenting compelling evidence that  sweeps an audience to new positions; they are much more likely to persuade indirectly, by giving selected issues and facts better coverage than other issues and facts. [Moi ici: Lembrei-me do nome Alberto Gonçalves. Por que será?] It’s this coverage that leads audience members—by virtue of the greater attention they devote to certain topics—to decide that these are the most important to be taken into consideration when adopting a position.
...
This sensible system of focusing our limited attentional resources on what does indeed possess special import has an imperfection, though: we can be brought to the mistaken belief that something is important merely because we have been led by some irrelevant factor to give it our narrowed attention. All too often, people believe that if they have paid attention to an idea or event or group, it must be important enough to warrant the consideration.
...
Thus, the persuader who artfully draws outsize attention to the most favorable feature of an offer becomes a successful pre-suader."

Em linha com o aviso que faço aos líderes das PME quando acreditam que o que os media relatam acerca das empresas grandes é aplicável e desejável nas suas empresas.

A importância do essencial

Ao longo dos anos abordo o tema do retorno da atenção e da estreiteza da nossa largura de banda, se dedicamos a nossa atenção a umas coisas não a podemos dedicar a outras ao mesmo tempo. Recordar O retorno da atenção (Agosto de 2009).

Agora em Pre-suasion encontro:

"In the English language, we are said to “pay” attention, which plainly implies that the process extracts a cost. Research on cognitive functioning shows us the form of the fee: when attention is paid to something, the price is attention lost to something else. Indeed, because the human mind appears able to hold only one thing in conscious awareness at a time, the toll is a momentary loss of focused attention to everything else. Have you ever noticed how difficult it is to experience - genuinely experience - two things at once?
...
my car’s CD player is structured to work like my brain, allowing me but a single track of music at a time. That’s for good reason, as it would be folly to play more than one simultaneously. I’d just hear noise. So it is with human cognition. Even though there are always multiple “tracks” of information available, we consciously select only the one we want to register at that moment. Any other arrangement would leave us overloaded and unable to react to distinct aspects of  the mongrelized input."

Recordar a contagem de passes e o gorila.

Por isto, também por isto, é importante esclarecer o que não é prioritário, o que não é estratégico, para que possamos dedicar mais tempo ao essencial.

Não perca tempo

Já aqui escrevi, mais do que uma vez, que os líderes de uma associação sectorial ou empresarial devem idealmente vir da vanguarda do pensamento estratégico.

Colocar e manter mentes demasiado agarradas ao passado, demasiado confiantes no direito adquirido ao queijo  garantido, em posições de chefia tem tendência a resultar em erro.

Considerando o tema de Pre-suasion, por exemplo aqui e aqui:

"frequently the factor most likely to determine a person’s choice in a situation is not the one that counsels most wisely there; it is one that has been elevated in attention (and, thereby, in privilege) at the time of the decision"

Se quem ocupa uma posição de liderança vê a mudança como uma ameaça, vê um futuro com mais nuvens negras do que oportunidades, então, o mais provável é que todo o sector assuma esse posicionamento e se refugie no papel de vítima, de coitadinho que tem de depender de outros para sobreviver.

Esses "líderes" presos ao passado, quando o mundo muda ficam perdidos e como que esperam ser socorridos. Líderes (sem aspas) virados para o futuro acham-se a si mesmos, encontram um novo lar nesse novo futuro.

Numa pesquisa que fiz aqui no blogue fui parar por acaso, não há acasos todas as coincidências são significativas, a um postal de Julho de 2006 intitulado "O futuro para o têxtil português" onde se podia ler:

""In a fast-paced environment where time-to-market and short-cycle production are powerful levers of competitive advantage, proximity has taken on much greater significance in all but "fashion" items, where once-a-season orders still prevail.
...
The keys to success in an age of product proliferation, the authors found, are no longer economies of scale and cheap labor but an up-to-the-minute knowledge of what sells and what doesn't, flexible manufacturing capabilities that can respond appropriately to demand, lean rather than fat and costly inventories, and the rapid replenishment of stock."

Agora pensem nos anos que o sector têxtil perdeu em Portugal porque em vez de olhar para o futuro pelo lado das oportunidades, em vez de divulgar esse futuro possível, em vez de comunicar os exemplos de sucesso, gastou demasiado tempo a defender o passado, a esperar que tudo voltasse à "normalidade".

Este blogue ganhou vida própria entretanto mas quando começou a ser escrito com regularidade tinha como objectivo ser um prolongamento da minha memória. E ter memória ás vezes é um castigo dos deuses:

• Qual é o recurso mais escasso? (Outubro de 2010)
• Arrepiante (Outubro de 2010)
• Algo me diz que Nuno Melo apanhou a maré quando ela já está a mudar (Janeiro de 2011)
• O tempo que se perdeu (Maio de 2013)

Agora imagine que a sua empresa têxtil tinha recorrido aos serviços deste consultor anónimo da província e que tinha feito um gerador de cenários e tinha formulado uma estratégia de trajectória para vir encontrar-se com um futuro mais risonho à custa da batota, comandando em vez de ser comandada, apostando na proximidade, na rapidez, na flexibilidade muito antes dos outros.

Se tiver tempo leia mesmo este postal de ontem "Isto está tudo ligado (parte II)". Consegue sentir como eu o arrepio de descobrir o quão facilmente podemos ser enganados por nós próprios?

E mais uma vez aquela descoberta: sentado num banco no interior do Amoreiras, ao princípio de uma noite de 1998, enquanto aguardava pela minha colega Dores para jantarmos, lia Stephen Covey em “The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People”:

"Não é o que acontece que conta, é o que nós decidimos fazer com o que nos acontece."

E aquela outra mais recente mas igualmente bela proporcionada por Gonzales:

"É como se a nossa economia fosse um conjunto de pessoas que viajava de avião. O avião despenhou-se e, agora, as pessoas encontram-se numa floresta tropical cheia de perigos e riscos. Há uns que querem aventurar-se e procurar a salvação atravessando a floresta, há outros que querem permanecer junto ao avião esperando que ele volte novamente a levantar vôo, há outros que gritam por ajuda e esperam um milagre. O que aprendi com Gonzales, e chocou com o que ouvi de Lobo Xavier, é que os que decidem aventurar-se e procurar a salvação, enfrentando o desconhecido, ao fazerem essa viagem, acabam por se transformarem a eles próprios e o mais interessante é que quando chegam à "civilização", ou quando são encontrados, já não estão perdidos, já se encontraram, já se adaptaram a uma nova realidade." 

Não perca tempo com líderes que fazem do seu sector um coitadinho, procure gente com o locus de controlo no interior.

BTW, se precisar de apoio estamos por aqui.

Isto está tudo ligado (parte II)

Parte I.

Impressionante o potencial de manipulação em que caímos facilmente:

"Consider the results of an experiment performed by communication scientists San Bolkan and Peter Andersen, who approached people and made a request for assistance with a survey. We have all experienced something similar when a clipboard-carrying researcher stops us in a shopping mall or supermarket and asks for a few minutes of our time. As is the case for the typical shopping mall requester, these scientists’ success was dismal: only 29 percent of those asked to participate consented. But Bolkan and Andersen thought they could boost compliance without resorting to any of the costly payments that marketers often feel forced to employ. They stopped a second sample of individuals and began the interaction with a pre-suasive opener: “Do you consider yourself a helpful person?” Following brief reflection, nearly everyone answered yes. In that privileged moment—after subjects had confirmed privately and affirmed publicly their helpful natures—the researchers pounced, requesting help with their survey. Now 77.3 percent volunteered.
...
frequently the factor most likely to determine a person’s choice in a situation is not the one that counsels most wisely there; it is one that has been elevated in attention (and, thereby, in privilege) at the time of the decision.
...
In a companion study, the two scientists found that it was similarly possible to increase willingness to try an unfamiliar consumer product by beginning with a comparable but differently customized pre-suasive opener—this time asking people if they considered themselves adventurous. The consumer product was a new soft drink, and individuals had to agree to supply an email address so they could be sent instructions on how to get a free sample. Half were stopped and asked if they wanted to provide their addresses for this purpose. Most were reluctant—only 33 percent volunteered their contact information. The other subjects were asked initially, “Do you consider yourself to be somebody who is adventurous and likes to try new things?” Almost all said yes—following which, 75.7 percent gave their email addresses.
.
Two features of these findings strike me as remarkable. First, of the subjects who were asked if they counted themselves adventurous, 97 percent (seventy out of seventy-two) responded affirmatively. The idea that nearly everybody qualifies as an adventurous type is ludicrous. Yet when asked the single-chute question of whether they fit this category, people nominate themselves almost invariably. Such is the power of positive test strategy and the blinkered perspective it creates. The evidence shows that this process can significantly increase the percentage of individuals who brand themselves as adventurous or helpful or even unhappy. Moreover, the narrowed perspective, though temporary, is anything but inconsequential. For a persuasively privileged moment, it renders these individuals highly vulnerable to aligned requests—as the data of research scientists and the practices of cult recruiters attest.
.
The other noteworthy feature of the soft-drink experiment is not that a simple question could shunt so many people into a particular choice but that it could shunt so many of them into a potentially dangerous choice."

Dou por mim a recordar os discursos de Brutus primeiro e Marco António depois e a volubilidade da multidão, na peça de Shakespeare sobre Júlio César.

Trecho retirado de "Pre-Suasion: A Revolutionary Way to Influence and Persuade"

Isto está tudo ligado

os membros da "Comissão de Utentes da Via do Infante" emigraram? nunca mais se ouviu falar deles, nem quando as portagens aumentam... ;)

— Zé Nô (@zeno_1972) December 30, 2016

"If I inquired whether you were unhappy in, let’s say, the social arena, your natural tendency to hunt for confirmations rather than for disconfirmations of the possibility would lead you to find more proof of discontent than if I asked whether you were happy there. This was the outcome when members of a sample of Canadians were asked either if they were unhappy or happy with their social lives. Those asked if they were unhappy were far more likely to encounter dissatisfactions as they thought about it and, consequently, were 375 percent more likely to declare themselves unhappy.
.
There are multiple lessons to draw from this finding. First, if a pollster wants to know only whether you are dissatisfied with something—it could be a consumer product or an elected representative or a government policy—watch out. Be suspicious as well of the one who asks only if you are satisfied. Single-chute  questions of this sort can get you both to mistake and misstate your position. I’d recommend declining to participate in surveys that employ this biased form of questioning."

Isto está tudo ligado.

Por que será que António José Teixeira e Ana Lourenço e um rol de comentadores transitaram para a RTP?

Trecho retirado de "Pre-Suasion: A Revolutionary Way to Influence and Persuade"

"what we present first changes the way people experience what we present to them next"

"The highest achievers spent more time crafting what they did and said before making a request. They set about their mission as skilled gardeners who know that even the finest seeds will not take root in stony soil or bear fullest fruit in poorly prepared ground.
...
the best performers also considered and cared about what, specifically, they would be offering in those situations. But much more than their less effective colleagues, they didn’t rely on the legitimate merits of an offer to get it accepted; they recognized that the psychological frame in which an appeal is first placed can carry equal or even greater weight.
.
Besides, they were frequently in no position to tinker with the merits of what they had to offer; someone else in the organization had created the product, program, or plan they were recommending, often in fixed form. Their responsibility was to present it most productively. To accomplish that, they did something that gave them a singular kind of persuasive traction: before introducing their message, they arranged to make their audience sympathetic to it.
.
There’s a critical insight in all this for those of us who want to learn to be more influential. The best persuaders become the best through pre-suasion—the  process of arranging for recipients to be receptive to a message before they encounter it. To persuade optimally, then, it’s necessary to pre-suade optimally. But how?
.
In part, the answer involves an essential but poorly appreciated tenet of all communication: what we present first changes the way people experience what we present to them next."

Trechos retirados de "Pre-suasion"