‘Influence’ gets a bad reputation.
Mention the word, and people immediately picture dark patterns, or someone being herded into a decision they didn’t quite mean to make. Cue crossed arms and mild (or not so mild) suspicion. Is this where I’m supposed to be sold to?
Fair enough! Because a lot of what passes for ‘influence’ deserves the side-eye.
But let’s be clear: influence isn’t something marketers invented. It’s something humans do all day, every day. At work, at home, in meetings, in emails. In how we frame a question or tell a story, and even in what we choose not to say.
The psychology of influence isn’t about tricks. It’s about how people actually make decisions, as opposed to how we like to think they do.
And those two things are… not the same.
We like to think we’re rational
We’re not rational. Not really.
Most people like to believe their decisions are calm, logical, and evidence-based. We weigh the pros and cons, assess the risks, then proceed sensibly. Very grown up.
In reality, our brains are running a constant background process of shortcuts, assumptions, and emotional signals. Not because we’re careless, but because we’re busy. Decision-making is expensive, cognitively speaking. The brain is always looking for ways to conserve energy. Pop quiz – did you know that our brains account for around 4% of body mass, but consume 20% of our energy?
In fact, most of our decisions happen subconsciously, driven by automatic processes rather than deliberate reasoning. The conscious explanation usually comes after the decision, not before.
So instead of evaluating everything from scratch, we lean on patterns:
- Does this feel familiar?
- Does this seem risky?
- What are people like me doing?
- What might I lose if I get this wrong?
These aren’t flaws, but survival mechanisms. They just happen to show up in boardrooms as much as they do in supermarkets.
Influence works when it aligns with those mechanisms rather than trying to overpower them.
Influence is about framing, not forcing
Good influence doesn’t shove; it frames.
It helps someone see a situation clearly enough to make a decision they were already leaning towards, but hadn’t quite articulated yet. It removes friction, reduces uncertainty, and makes the implications of inaction as visible as the implications of action.
Bad influence, on the other hand, tries to bypass judgment altogether. It relies on pressure, urgency, or confusion. It’s loud where it should be precise, with the principles of influence used as weapons
The difference is intent.
Ethical influence respects agency. It assumes the other person is capable of making a good decision once the picture is clear. Manipulative influence assumes they need to be rushed, cornered, or dazzled into compliance.
People feel that difference instantly, even if they can’t always explain it.
Loss looms larger than gain
One of the most misunderstood aspects of influence is loss aversion.
Put simply, we are more motivated to avoid losing something than we are to gain something of equal value. Dropping your ice cream causes more emotional damage than eating it brings joy. This isn’t pessimism. It’s wiring.
This is why influence that focuses solely on upside often falls flat. ‘Here’s what you could gain’ is nice. ‘Here’s what you’re already risking by doing nothing’ is clarifying.
Used ethically, this isn’t fear-mongering. It’s realism.
If a decision genuinely carries a cost to delay, naming that cost is helpful. It allows people to weigh trade-offs properly. The problem arises when losses are exaggerated, invented, or weaponised.
Again, intent matters.
Familiarity builds trust faster than brilliance
Another quiet force in influence is familiarity.
People trust what feels recognisable. Not because they’re unimaginative, but because familiarity signals safety. It answers the unspoken question: Am I going to regret engaging with this?
Psychological studies show that repeated exposure to the same idea, person, or message increases perceived trustworthiness and preference, even when no new information is added. Familiarity, it turns out, breeds comfort long before it breeds contempt.
This is why clarity often outperforms cleverness, why straightforward language beats jargon, and why consistency over time builds more influence than one dazzling performance.
When influence fails, it’s often because someone tried to sound impressive instead of understandable.
Which is ironic, really.
Social proof isn’t about bandwagons
Social proof gets misused almost as much as scarcity.
Used well, it reassures. Used poorly, it becomes ‘everyone’s doing it’ energy that immediately triggers resistance, especially in senior audiences.
Behavioural research consistently shows that people are far more influenced by the behaviour of similar others than by popularity alone. Social proof works best when it feels relevant, not when it feels crowded.
People don’t want to follow crowds. They want to know that people like them have made similar decisions and survived just fine.
That subtle distinction makes all the difference.
The most ethical influence is often quiet
Here’s the part that makes some marketers uncomfortable. The strongest influence often doesn’t feel like influence at all.
It feels like someone is finally saying the thing you’ve been circling for weeks. It doesn’t rely on pressure, need urgency theatrics, or shouting.
It simply helps someone see the situation as it is, including the trade-offs, constraints, and consequences. Then it steps back.
Which is why ethical influence scales trust, not just conversions.
Influence is inevitable. How you use it isn’t.
Whether you like it or not, you influence people. Through your words, structure, tone, and even omissions.
The question isn’t whether you influence. It’s whether you do it with care.
Used thoughtfully, influence supports better decisions. It respects time, intelligence, and autonomy. It replaces pressure with perspective.
And in a world full of noise, that’s persuasive and refreshing.
If you want to be more influential and persuasive, I’ve got what you need
I’ve been doing this for over 25 years and learned about ethical persuasion and influence from the man who literally wrote the book on it (Cialdini). I have a few course options depending on whether you’re an individual or a team, looking for a taster or something more substantial. Explore them and let me know if you have any questions! I’m only a call or click away.