This article is an excerpt from the Shortform book guide to "Words That Change Minds" by Shelle Rose Charvet. Shortform has the world's best summaries and analyses of books you should be reading.
Like this article? Sign up for a free trial here.
Would you like to be more effective at convincing people to believe or do certain things? Are you a leader who struggles to get your team members on board?
In Words That Change Minds, communication and influencing language expert Shelle Rose Charvet identifies eight Productivity Patterns. She says that these patterns explain how an individual does their best work after they’ve decided to solve a problem.
Keep reading to learn several persuasive language techniques that take these Productivity Patterns into account.
Persuasive Language Techniques
According to Charvet, understanding Productivity Patterns is particularly important for managers who need to assign tasks to team members, as these patterns reveal individuals’ strengths and weaknesses in the workplace. To maximize productivity, assign team members tasks that require them to think as they’re naturally inclined to think.
(Shortform note: In First, Break All the Rules, Curt Coffman and Marcus Buckingham recommend strategically building teams in which each member’s strengths compensate for the others’ weaknesses. This way, teams can collectively accomplish tasks that a single employee can’t do on their own.)
Most Productivity Patterns lie on a spectrum between two opposites, and verbally mirroring someone’s pattern-driven language is one of the best ways to communicate with and influence them. Let’s take a look at the persuasive language techniques that Charvet recommends in the context of each of these patterns.
Pattern #1: Whole-Oriented or Detail-Oriented
The first Productivity Pattern we’ll discuss describes whether someone is more insightful when looking at the big picture or individual situations: Are they whole-oriented or detail-oriented? (Charvet calls this the “Scope” category.)
Whole-oriented people tend to speak in abstract, sometimes vague terms, writes Charvet. They might say, “We decided to move Brian to the sales team.” In contrast, detail-oriented people tend to describe concrete situations, sometimes in painstaking detail: “Last Friday, Trudy, Mark, and I met in Conference Room B and decided that Brian would be a better fit on the sales team because of how much he’s improved his people skills.”
Make sure to talk in terms of the big picture with whole-oriented people; otherwise, they’ll either get bored or feel overwhelmed. Likewise, speak in comprehensive, concrete terms with detail-oriented people, or they’ll become frustrated with your vague language.
Pattern #2: Level-Headed or Neurotic
The second Productivity Pattern is a description of how someone reacts to high-pressure situations: Are they level-headed or neurotic? Do they address intense events with cool, dispassionate logic, or do they frequently become emotionally overwhelmed? (Charvet calls this the “Stress Response” category.)
Charvet clarifies that unlike most of the other Productivity Patterns, this one isn’t revealed through the words someone says. You can gauge whether someone is level-headed or neurotic by paying attention to how outwardly emotional they are while speaking, especially when discussing a challenging situation. Level-headed people typically stay low-key and detached in conversation, while neurotic people visibly display emotions with their whole bodies—for instance, slumping their shoulders and collapsing into a chair when describing an exhausting day at work.
To influence level-headed people, take care to explain your point of view with airtight logic. To influence neurotic people, speak in emotional language that gets them excited to act.
Pattern #3: Team Player or Lone Wolf
The third Productivity Pattern refers to someone’s preferred level of interaction with other people: Are they a team player or a lone wolf? (Charvet calls this the “Style” category.) Team players do their best work in close collaboration with others—when they’re alone, they may struggle to focus and get things done. In contrast, lone wolves need their own space to do their best work and get distracted if other people are nearby.
To identify whether someone is a team player or a lone wolf, pay attention to how much they mention others when describing their tasks. Team players emphasize the actions of those around them: They might say “We launched our new ad campaign before the deadline we set for ourselves.” Lone wolves emphasize the actions and decisions they make as individuals: “I finished designing the full set of banner ads two months before launch day.”
If you’re managing a team, Charvet recommends that you make sure that team players have opportunities to collaborate with their coworkers while also making sure lone wolves have the personal time and space they need to do their work alone.
Pattern #4: Interpersonally Aware or Self-Preoccupied
The fourth Productivity Pattern describes someone’s sensitivity to nonverbal signals when interacting with others: They’re either interpersonally aware or self-preoccupied. (Charvet calls this the “Attention Direction” category.) People who are interpersonally aware are constantly monitoring the emotions and thoughts of those around them, while self-preoccupied people are only aware of their own emotions and thoughts.
Charvet contends that you can differentiate interpersonally aware and self-preoccupied people through their body language: Interpersonally aware people will display animated movements and facial expressions, whereas self-preoccupied people will generally display a flat affect.
Because your thoughts and emotions have such an impact on interpersonally aware people, send friendly nonverbal signals to make them more receptive to what you’re trying to say. On the other hand, self-preoccupied people typically won’t pick up on these signals.
Pattern #5: Empathetic or Analytic
The fifth Productivity Pattern we’ll discuss refers to how much someone believes emotions are a part of their work: Are they empathetic or analytic? (Charvet calls this the “Organization” category.) Empathetic people see all their tasks as primarily emotional endeavors—the whole point of the work they do is to positively impact someone emotionally (clients, co-workers, or anyone else they interact with). Analytic people, on the other hand, choose to focus on completing meaningful tasks without regard for how those around them feel.
Charvet explains that, when discussing their work, empathetic people will describe how it made them and those around them feel. Mirror this when communicating with them—you might praise an empathetic person by saying, “I loved your proposal to construct a new branch downtown, and the shareholders are going to love it, too.” On the other hand, when discussing their work, analytic people will simply describe the tasks they completed. You can appeal to them by similarly focusing on the work: “Your proposal is great. It’s very well-researched.”
| The Virtue of Reasoned Compassion In Against Empathy, Paul Bloom argues that the most effective and moral action is both analytic and empathetic—a “reasoned compassion.” If you solely perform analytic tasks without regard for their impact on others, you risk inadvertently hurting someone. However, Bloom argues that solely focusing on how people feel also causes undue harm. For one, empathy for those around you can cause you to cultivate anger against people who have done them wrong, fueling aggression and even violence. The solution, according to Bloom, is to use objective, analytical thought to solve problems and help other people. Rationally consider other people’s needs and emotions without fully immersing yourself in their emotional state and getting carried away by irrational feelings. To encourage the people in your life to practice reasoned compassion, consider talking them into a more balanced approach using the language of their motivation pattern. For example, you could say to an overly empathetic person, “When you get carried away, it sometimes frightens the people around you. Could you try to express your feelings in a more reasonable way?” Alternatively, you could say to an overly analytical person, “When you don’t think about how your work affects others, it often undermines the purpose of those tasks.” |
———End of Preview———
Like what you just read? Read the rest of the world's best book summary and analysis of Shelle Rose Charvet's "Words That Change Minds" at Shortform.
Here's what you'll find in our full Words That Change Minds summary:
- Why it's sometimes hard to understand what others are trying to say
- The 14 kinds of mental habits that explain how people think
- How to understand others better and build positive relationships
