Tamsen Webster explains how to communicate change by aligning with two ways people process information: automatic and analytical. Effective persuasion uses "if, then, because" logic, combining data with emotion so people both understand and adopt new thinking.
It's pretty clear that if you want change, at some point you have to explain what it is exactly you want people to do and why. And yet it's right in between those two that things sometimes seem to go horribly wrong. Why is that? I've been thinking about this and researching it quite a bit lately, and I think there's a missing link. Let me show you what I'm thinking and let's see if you see it too. So first of all, if we want someone to do something different, then I would suggest that that relies on them changing their thinking somehow, right? After all, how we think drives what we do. So in order for action to happen, we have to change people's thinking. But in order to change people's thinking, we need it to make sense to them the same way it makes sense to us. In order to do that, we have to understand how they process information in the first place. And this is where I think the missing link exists, because we don't really think about that when we put together our communications about change. And the result is kind of a mess all the way along. And here's why. We process information in two different ways. They happen at the same time, but both are critically important when we're thinking about change. The first way is automatically, and we do that based on the things that we already know and already believe, based on previous experiences that have shown us what works and what doesn't. We also process information analytically. In order for something that we say to make sense to someone, It needs to make sense to both that automatic and analytic type of processing. And yet we don't. We usually either focus on one— data, evidence, rational— or the other— emotion, storytelling, etc. But they work together, which means we need to think about them together. The good news is that both processing systems love logic and particularly causal logic, meaning if I want this, Then I should do that because X or Y or Z is true. So to recap, to make sure that we are aligning with how people process information, we need if, then, and because. And to make sure that we can establish mutual understanding, not only do we need to say that if, then, because, we need to make sure that the because has both data and belief involved. When you do that, And if there is alignment with what the outcome is and what those principles and support points are, then someone will in fact change how they start to think about something. So the next time you are thinking about how do I drive action from this idea and what do I need to explain to people, remember that it all starts with how we process information and make sure that you are giving that automatic, and that analytical brain something good to work with. If, then, because.
