Communicating for
Results
9e
14
Key Ideas
Persuasive
Presentations:
Individual or Team
•Meaning of persuasion
•Types of persuasive
presentations
•Persuasive theories
•Preparing a persuasive speech
•Successful persuasive
presentations
Copyright Cengage © 2011
1
Consider this . . .
We live in a world in which persuasion and
the power to persuade are of extraordinary
importance . . . When we list “freedom of
speech” first among our rights as citizens
guaranteed by the Constitution, we remind
ourselves of the right to speak, to write, to
express ourselves, and to have access to their
words and ideas of others as fundamental
principles upon which our way of life is
founded.
Williams & Cooler, Power Persuasion, Alistair, 1002, p. 3
Copyright Cengage © 2011
2
The Washington Post
Rough Guides/Alamy
Cook Case Study
Read or describe the case study
 Answer the following questions:
 Why were Cooke’s editors so easily
persuaded by her resume & story?
 Was the “instant ethos” response
involved in this study (pp. 407-408)?
 How can we protect ourselves from
this type of persuasion?
Persuasion defined
Definition: Persuasion is communication
intended to influence choice. (Brembeck &
Howell, 1976 p. 19)
Persuasion involves
 Intentionality
Influence not force
Setting limits on acceptable choices
Copyright Cengage © 2011
4
Types of persuasive presentations
2003 Laura Farr/ZUMA Press
 Speech to convince—asks the audience to
believe or agree with you
 Speech to actuate—asks the audience to
take a particular action
Copyright Cengage © 2011
5
Factors Persuasion theory
Logos – Evidence and logic of the message
Ethos – Credibility of the persuader
Pathos – Listener Psychological needs
Opinions – held by key people in the
audience
Copyright Cengage © 2011
6
Persuasion theories
Information-Integration theory
Consistency theories
Elaboration-Likelihood theory
Social Judgement theory
Copyright Cengage © 2011
7
Information-Integration theory
Accumulation and organization of
information and attitude change
Valiance – whether information supports
or refutes previous beliefs
Weight – credibility assigned to the
information
Respected theorist Martin Fishbein
Copyright Cengage © 2011
8
Consistency theories
People prefer consistency and feel
threatened by inconsistency
Theories
Cognitive Dissonance (Leon Festinger)
Attitude beliefs and values (Milton Rokeach)
Copyright Cengage © 2011
9
Elaboration Likelihood theory
Probability listeners will evaluate
arguments critically
Respected theorists – Richard Petty and
John Cacioppo
People use Central Route (elaborate carefully
and critically)
People use Peripheral Route and decide
quickly
Copyright Cengage © 2011
10
Social Judgment theory
People use past experience (internal
anchors) when making judgments
Ego involvement determines latitude of
acceptance or latitude of rejection of a
message
Respected theories – Mazafer Sherif
Copyright Cengage © 2011
11
Factors that influence evidence
Ability to identify evidence in the speech
Acceptance of the evidence
Involvement with the topic
Use of logical sounding phrases
New or novel evidence
Perceived credibility of the speaker >
Copyright Cengage © 2011
12
Factors that influence evidence (Cont)
Citing sources
Citing source qualifications
Citing firsthand evidence
Copyright Cengage © 2011
13
Methods of using Evidence
Method 1: Assertion plus evidence plus
source
Method 2: Assertion plus evidence
Method 3: Assertion plus evidence plus
source plus qualifications of source
Method 4: Assertion plus firsthand
experience
Copyright Cengage © 2011
14
Persuasive Presentations
Outside the organization
Method 3
• Assertion+Evidence+Source Qualifications
Method 4
• Assertion+Firsthand evidence
Inside the organization
Method 1
• Assertion+Evidnce+Source
Method 4
• Assertion+Firsthand evidence
Copyright Cengage © 2011
15
Presenting one side of argument
Present one side when listeners . . .
 Already agree with proposal
 Know little about topic
 Are asked to take immediate action
 Are unlikely to hear other side
One Side
Copyright Cengage © 2011
16
Presenting both sides of argument
Present both sides when listeners . . .
 Are knowledgeable
 Already disagree
 Likely to hear both sides
 Agree, but new to position or belief
Side #2
Side #1
Copyright Cengage © 2011
17
Inoculation Theory
Informing audience so that they will be
familiar with opposing arguments
Can be best accomplished by presenting
both sides
Helps listeners build counterarguments
Key is to show disadvantages of your plan
is minor without fallacious reasoning
Copyright Cengage © 2011
18
Fallacious reasoning
Ad hominem--attacking person not argument
 Ad populum--everyone knows idea is right
 Ad Ignoratiam--can’t prove wrong; must be right
 Begging the question--it is because it is
 Hasty generalization--based on too few examples
 Post hoc--B followed A; therefore, A caused B
 Slippery slope--one bad step leads to another
Copyright Cengage © 2011
19
Factors of speaker credibility
Topic involvement
Listeners who have low involvement
persuaded by speaker expertise
Very involved listeners persuaded by
argument quality
Audio/Video mode
Listener persuaded by speaker credibility
In Print Mode listener persuaded by data and
quality of the evidence
Copyright Cengage © 2011
20
Factors of speaker credibility
Email or Internet messages
Listeners persuaded by speaker credibility
When message uses emotional appeal and
appeals to listener values instant ethos occurs
Audience and speaker similarity
Enhances trustworthiness
Speaker judged as more competent
Copyright Cengage © 2011
21
Elements of speaker credibility
 Trustworthiness
 Competency
 Dynamism
 Objectivity
 Organizational rank
Copyright Cengage © 2011
22
Improving speaker credibility
Have a highly credible source introduce
you
Support assertions with current
documented credible sources
Identify your views with a person the
audience respects
Copyright Cengage © 2011
23
Improving speaker credibility
Present both sides and show you are fair
and honest
Present ideas in a smooth, forceful and
self-assured manner
Establish common ground with audience
Recognize in content and delivery the
formal status and knowledge of listeners
Copyright Cengage © 2011
24
Credibility, Fraud and the Internet
Internet fraud based on the following “click-whir” responses . . .




Reciprocation—feel obligated to reciprocate
Commitment & consistency—defend decisions
Social proof—if others do it, it must be right
Likeability—more influenced by people we like
 Authority—influenced by those with authority
 Scarcity—value scarce items more
Copyright Cengage © 2011
25
Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs
Self-actualization
Self-esteem
Social
Safety
Physiological
Audience Involvement
Relevancy – look at topic from audience
viewpoint
Fun and activities – get audience involved
Commonality and emotion – share
something you and the audience have in
common
Graphics and charts – use graphs and
charts as involvement starters
Copyright Cengage © 2011
27
Opinions of key leaders
Opinions leaders are . . .
NOVA Development
 Better educated & influential
 More knowledgeable in important areas
 More likely to converse
Copyright Cengage © 2011
28
Making persuasive presentations
Analyze expected listeners and needs
Write exact purpose as position statement
Determine initial credibility and plan to
increase it if necessary
Research topic and choose best method for
presenting evidence
Copyright Cengage © 2011
29
Making persuasive presentations
Decide how to organize for best effect
Prepare outlines or storyboards to check
verbal, visual supports, introduction,
conclusion
Review presentation to ensure it’s ethical
Practice presentation
Copyright Cengage © 2011
30
Making persuasive presentations
Decide how to organize for best effect
Organizational Patterns
Claim
Causal
Problem-Solution
Criteria Satisfaction
Comparative Advantages
Motivated Sequence
Copyright Cengage © 2011
31
Claim Pattern
I. Claim 1
II. Claim 2
III. Claim 3
Copyright Cengage © 2011
32
Copyright Cengage © 2011
Causal Patterns
I. Cause
II. Effect
OR
III.Solution
I. Cause
II. Effect
III. Action
Copyright Cengage © 2011
34
Copyright Cengage © 2011
Copyright Cengage © 2011
Criteria Satisfaction
I. Any plan must meet the following
necessary criteria
II. Solution X does (or doesn’t meet) the
criteria
Copyright Cengage © 2011
37
Copyright Cengage © 2011
Comparative Advantages pattern
I. Plan X is ineffective
II. Plan Y is Superior
OR
I. Plan X is average
II. Plan Y is far better
Copyright Cengage © 2011
39
Copyright Cengage © 2011
Motivated Sequence
I. Attention Step
II. Need Step
III. Satisfaction Step
IV. Visualization Step
V. Action Step
Copyright Cengage © 2011
41
Copyright Cengage © 2011
Effective team presentations
 Content: Organized, supported, &
smooth
 Visuals: Creative, professional, &
effective
 Delivery: Smooth, polished, & dynamic
Copyright Cengage © 2011
43
Adapting team presentations to media
 Don’t wear white or sharp contrast
clothing
 Avoid stripes, polka dots, & patterns
 Avoid warm or hot colors
 Wear lightweight fabrics
 Wear “slenderizing” clothing
 Avoid shiny jewelry or shiny clothing
 Women wear regular makeup
Copyright Cengage © 2011
44
Communicating for
Results
9e
14
Key Ideas
Persuasive
Presentations:
Individual or Team
•Meaning of persuasion
•Types of persuasive
presentations
•Persuasive theories
•Preparing a persuasive speech
•Successful persuasive
presentations
Copyright Cengage © 2011
45