• DDC-I Releases Updated Sun/Solaris TADS Development System
• Full Support for Windows NT, 2000, and XP Host Environments for the TADS-68xxx Software Development System
• Influence Strategies - Part II - A Review of the 3 Final Principles of Influence

DDC-I Releases Updated Sun/Solaris TADS Development System

Phoenix, AZ and Lyngby, Denmark – July 15, 2003 — DDC-I is pleased to announce the release of maintenance upgrades for their Sun™/Solaris®-hosted TADS Ada Development System (v5.2.4), incorporating important improvements and enhancements realized during their recent TADS for PC/Windows® rehosting development program. All current TADS targets, MIL-STD-1750A, Intel 960 MC/KB and Motorola 68xxx, are covered by the release.

"Providing consistency across the TADS product line for all hosts and targets is the best way we can support every customers’ changing needs, whether they’re rehosting legacy development projects to the PC/Windows platform, or performing normal maintenance activities on existing programs using the Sun/Solaris infrastructure," explains Harold "Bud" Blum, DDC-I Senior Software Engineer and TADS Product Champion.

Specific updates include improved REM and MOD operations, which now operate on 16-bit unsigned integers, and code generation for comparison of two 16-bit unsigned integers. The linker has also been enhanced to more effectively handle situations where a module name specified in a linker control file could not be located due to the restructuring required to produce the corresponding internal compiler-generated module name.

A mature and reliable solution for each target processor, TADS combines a highly optimizing compiler with selective linking and modular run-time systems to generate the most compact and efficient code available. Classical and Ada 83-specific compiler optimizations offer code size and performance benefits specifically tailored to the individual processor architecture, alongside a complete development toolset for each target chip.

"TADS is a proven and trusted development environment for real-time embedded systems in numerous aerospace, avionics, defense, and other safety-critical programs. DDC-I remains dedicated to providing unsurpassed software tools for all of our clients, as well as superior customer support and engineering services," concludes Blum.

[ Back to Top ]

DDC-I Announces Full Support for Windows NT, 2000, and XP Host Environments for the TADS-68xxx Software Development System

Phoenix, AZ and Lyngby, Denmark – July 21, 2003 — DDC-I today announces the addition of support for Windows® based development platforms for the TADS Ada Development System (v6.0) targeting the Motorola 68xxx. Now offering Windows NT4.x and 2000/XP Professional host capabilities, TADS-68xxx also supports the original Sun™ SPARC®, and DEC VAX/VMS host development environments.

"The enhancement of TADS-68xxx successfully completes our migration of the proven TADS product family of safety-critical real-time software development tools to the Windows enterprise network platform," explains Harold "Bud" Blum, Senior Software Engineer at DDC-I and Product Champion for the TADS product line.

All Windows® hosted TADS-68xxx, TADS-1750A and TADS-i960 tools support both VAX-style and Solaris-style command-line options, mitigating the porting effort for existing build scripts. Runtimes built with TADS v5.x toolsets can normally be reused with v6.0.

A highly optimizing compiler, modular runtimes, and selective linking generate fast, compact code, with classic optimizations tuned for the 68xxx architecture. Ada-specific optimizations include constraint and overflow check elimination, data packing, and static aggregate initialization, alongside 68xxx-specific optimizations like auto-increment detection, condition code tracking, minimization of procedure overhead and exception response time.

The AdaScope debugger provides full source- and machine-level debugging in a customizable environment. Other tools include AdaList and AdaRef, static analyzers to help programmers navigate the source code and locate component information.

"DDC-I remains committed to ensuring our customers have the latest tools, customized solutions and quality support to meet their specific development requirements. For real-time embedded system developers in every safety-critical industry where application failure is not an option, TADS continues to be a valuable development environment," concludes Blum.

[ Back to Top ]

Influence Strategies - Part II

By Linda Rising

Last month we looked at the influence strategies identified by Robert Cialdini, a professor at Arizona State University. These are important for us "techies" to know since we usually assume that the world and the people in it operate logically. Cialdini’s research, however, shows that people are influenced by a handful of approaches that seem to work in many different settings. Professionals in sales arenas are quite familiar with these approaches, even if they don’t study the research literature. We need to know these strategies for several reasons. (1) We need to apply them ourselves in our business dealings with others. (2) We need to protect ourselves from their use by those who might not be the most ethical in their dealings. (3) It’s always good to learn more about people and how we think.

As I described last month, Cialdini’s principles were developed as the software industry has created patterns—through experience and analysis. Cialdini and his students have participated not only in controlled experiments, but they have also gone through sales training where the techniques were an important part of the education. Out of these investigations came six basic principles of influence. Lest you think that these strategies are evil, let’s consider that in today’s complex environment, automatic behavior is efficient and necessary for survival. We can’t analyze every situation we encounter every day. Instead, we use stereotypes to classify things and then respond without thinking. Of course, not even the best stereotypes work every time. When we want to and are able to we will analyze information.

As you read these principles, realize that we remain ignorant about persuasion because we refuse to admit that we are affected by politicians, salespeople, advertisers, and other influence professionals. The reality is—none of us is immune to influence. In many of the studies reported here, the subjects were asked before or after the experiment whether they believed they would be influenced and most said they would not. In the experiment, of course, they were influenced, just as we all would be!

Here are the six principles:

• The principle of liking. People like those who are like them.

• The principle of reciprocity. People repay in kind.

• The principle of social proof. People follow the lead of similar others.

• The principle of consistency. People align with their clear commitments.

• The principle of authority. People defer to experts.

• The principle of scarcity. People want more of what they can have less of.

We examined the first three in the previous article and tackle the other three here. For each principle, we’ll consider current research, how you can apply it in your business, and, finally, how you can defend yourself against it.

Did you know that people who bet on horses are most confident in the horse’s chances of winning just after they have placed a bet? Similarly, immediately after casting their ballots, voters believe more strongly that their candidate will win. This confidence is based on the first influence principle we will examine in this article—consistency. We want to appear, and we want to be consistent. Once we make a choice or take a stand, we may find that we encounter pressure to behave consistently. This pressure causes us to find ways that justify our decision. This, in turn, may cause us to act contrary to our best interests.

Consistency is a valued personality trait. The person whose beliefs, words, and deeds don’t match is seen as somewhat undesirable. Consistency is associated with strength and honesty. Sometimes consistency is perceived as being more important than being right! Consistency should be valued. Without it, our lives would be difficult and erratic. But, when consistency occurs without thinking, it can be disastrous.

Consistency is a useful shortcut. Once we have made up our minds about issues, consistency allows us the luxury of not having to think about issues. We don’t have to sift through the incredible amount of information we encounter every day.

Here’s an example that parents encounter every year. Toy companies want to keep sales high at Christmas but they also want the demand for toys to remain high in the early part of the year. The answer—find a way to get parents to buy yet another toy for their already toy-glutted children after Christmas is over. Here’s how it works. A highly advertised toy is undersupplied. Kids want that toy. Parents promise they’ll get it. When it can’t be found, parents buy a substitute and promise that they’ll buy it later when the toy becomes available. After Christmas, ads for the promised toy are featured and parents are reminded of their promises by their children—who never forget! Remember Beanie Babies, Tickle Me Elmo, Furbies, and, of course, Cabbage Patch Kids!

Salesmen try to get you to say "yes." This is the first step upon which to build consistency. A typical question, "Would you buy the car right now if the price is right?" This technique is called "foot-in-the-door."

When voters are called before election day and asked if they would vote, the number who actually show up at the polls significantly increases.

Prospective jurors are asked by a defense lawyer, "If you were the only person who believed in my client’s innocence, could you withstand the pressure from the rest of the jury to change your mind?" This increases the likelihood that a single person can keep the verdict from being guilty.

Callers for contributions begin by asking, "Hello, Mr. Whatits, how are you feeling this evening?" to get you to reply that all is well. When the pitch is made for a contribution for those who are not doing well you are more likely to oblige, "I’m glad to hear that, because I’m calling to ask if you’d be willing to make a donation to help out the unfortunate victims of…" We find it awkward to appear stingy in the context of our own admitted favorable circumstances. In one study, residents were called and asked if they would allow a representative of the Hunger Relief Committee to come to their homes and sell cookies to provide meals for the needy. If the caller asked, "How are you this evening?" and waited for a reply most said they were fine; the success rate doubled for allowing home visits and nearly everyone who had a visit bought cookies.

The most effective early commitments are: active, public, effortful, and freely chosen. Written commitments are especially powerful. First, it provides physical evidence and eliminates the chance of forgetting or denying that it happened. Second, it can be shown to others. That means it can be used to persuade others. It can persuade them that you genuinely believe what was written. What others think is true of us is enormously important in determining what we think is true. In one study, people in Connecticut gave much more money to a canvasser from the MS Society one week after hearing that they were considered charitable people.

Sales people have used written commitments to counter the laws in many states that allow customers a few days after agreeing to purchase an item to cancel the sale and receive a full refund. Since these businesses emphasize high-pressure tactics, customers often buy, not because they want the products but because they are intimidated. When the laws went into effect, customers canceled in droves. A simple strategy reduces the cancellations dramatically. The customer is instructed to fill out the sales agreement. Written commitment prevents many customers from backing out. Something happens when people put their commitments on paper. They live up to what they have written down.

Some companies run "25-50-100-words or less" testimonial contests. The idea is to compose a short statement that says, "I like the product because …" The company judges the entries and awards prizes. The benefit to the company, of course, is to get written personal endorsements. Entrants try to find praiseworthy things about the product and describe them in writing. As a result, they increase their commitment to that product.

Weight loss groups have clients write down a weight loss goal and show that goal to as many people as possible. This simple technique works in many cases where all else has failed.

The more effort spent in making a commitment, the greater its ability to influence the attitudes of the person who made it. Ads for popular music concerts never list the price. Promoters recognize that potential concertgoers are more likely to buy tickets after they call or visit a ticket outlet. Even a phone call is a commitment to the concert. It takes time and effort, especially if put on hold. As a result, they are more likely to buy the tickets, regardless of the price.

In the sales technique called low-balling, something is offered that persuades the customer to decide to buy. After the decision has been made but before the bargain is sealed, the original offer is taken away. Once the decision has been made, most people are reluctant to change their minds. Some even bear some of the responsibility for the error. A recent experiment involved two groups of homeowners. One group was given fuel conservation information just before the winter season. No one in either group changed their fuel usage. The experiment was repeated, but this time the group that was given the information was asked if their names could be listed in the paper. When the utility bills were checked the families whose names were publicized had saved a substantial amount of gas. Now the low-ball was applied. The families were told that their names would not be published. At the end of the winter, the families whose names were to be publicized had saved even more each month than at the start. The explanation of the researchers: People had been low-balled into a conservation commitment. It changed the families’ self-image, which ensured their continued commitment, even when the publicity was not forthcoming. In fact, when the publicity was removed, the families could then feel that they were doing it because of their concern for conservation rather than any publicity.

To apply this principle in your business—discover what your customers want and draw a connection to your products to show how they are consistent with the customers’ values. Market research can uncover what customers want and what they value. Let the voice of the customer drive your selling techniques.

To protect yourself from the consistency principle, don’t sign up for something just to be consistent when you know you’re being taken. Be careful about agreeing to trivial requests. The question to ask yourself is: Knowing what I know now—if I could go back in time when I made this decision, would I make the same choice?

You’ve probably heard of the work of a famous researcher named Milgram, who ran a series of experiments where subjects in a Teacher role were willing to deliver shocks to a suffering subject in a Learner role. The Learner was an actor who only pretended to be shocked. The question Milgram was trying to answer: When it is their job, how much pain will ordinary people inflict on an innocent person? The answer: a typical Teacher (regardless of sex) was willing to deliver as much pain as possible.

The results of Milgram’s experiments surprised everyone, including Milgram. Before the study, Milgram’s colleagues, graduate students, and psychology majors at Yale (where the experiment was performed) were asked to estimate how many subjects would go all the way to the last (450v) shock. The answers fell in the 1-2% range. A separate, independent group of 39 psychiatrists predicted that only 1 in a thousand would be willing to continue to the end. No one was prepared for the actual results.

Milgram explains it as a deep-seated sense of duty to authority. Teachers hated what they were doing and begged the researcher to let them stop. Despite the protests, however, they continued to respond to the researcher and obeyed to the end.

In later versions of the experiment where the researcher told the Teacher to stop—even when the Learner insisted that he could stand the shock—all Teachers refused to give any additional shock. In another version, when two researchers issued contradictory orders (one said stop when the Leaner cried out and the other said continue), the Teacher was unsure but always decided to stop.

Milgram began his investigations to understand how German citizens could have participated in the torture and killing of millions of innocents during WWII. He planned to test his procedures in the US and then take them to Germany. The first experiment at Yale, however, made it clear that he could save his money and stay at home. He said, "I found so much obedience. I hardly saw the need of taking the experiment to Germany." When Milgram’s experiment was eventually repeated in Holland, Germany, Spain, Italy, Australia, and Jordan, the results were similar.

A hierarchical and widely accepted system offers incredible benefit to a society. The opposite extreme is anarchy—not known for its beneficial effects on cultural groups. We are brought up to believe that obedience to proper authority is right and disobedience is wrong. Religious teachings also emphasize respect for authority. The Bible tells of Abraham’s willingness to plunge a dagger through the heart of his young son because God, without any explanation, ordered it. It was a test of obedience—and he passed.

Usually we don’t agonize over the demands of authority. We just do it. We often do it when it makes no sense at all.

Errors in the medication patients receive can occur for a number of reasons, however one series of studies attributes much of the problem to the mindless deference to the attending physician. Patients, nurses, pharmacists, and other physicians do not question the prescription. In one experiment, a researcher called a hospital ward, directing the answering nurse to give 20 mg of Astrogen to a specific ward patient. The nurse should have been cautious for several reasons: (1) The prescription was given over the phone. (2) The medication was unauthorized. Astrogen was not on the ward stock list. (3) The prescribed dosage was clearly and dangerously excessive. Labels on the medication clearly state that the maximum daily dose was 10 mg. (4) The directive was given by someone unknown to the nurse. Yet in 95% of the cases, the nurses went straight to the ward medicine cabinet where they secured the ordered dosage and started for the patient’s room to administer it, where they were stopped by an observer, who explained the experiment.

A separate group of nurses was asked what they would do in the experimental situation. Only two individuals said they would have given the medication as ordered. This shows that we are not even aware of the influence of authority.

In monkey colonies, where rigid hierarchies exist, beneficial innovations, learning how to use a stick to bring food into the cage, for example, do not spread quickly unless they are introduced to a dominant animal. When a lower animal learns the new technique first, the rest remain mostly oblivious. In one study, a new food was introduced to a youngster, low on the hierarchy. A year and a half later, only 51% of the colony had tried the new food. In a second group, when the new food was introduced to the leader, the practice spread through the entire colony in 4 hours.

In 1995 on the Chicago Bulls basketball team, when the acknowledged leader and star, Michael Jordan, began eating three Energy Booster bars before each game, according to substitute player, Steve Kerr, "B.J. Armstrong (another non-star player) and I were the only ones eating the bars before. Then Michael eats some, now everybody’s eating them."

Remember the Sanka commercial where Robert Young warned the audience of the dangers of caffeine? Why was this commercial so effective? Because Young was associated with Marcus Welby, M.D., the role he played in an earlier long-running TV series. This commercial was able to use the authority principle without real authority—just the appearance of authority. Con artists use titles, clothes, and other trappings of authority. They know that these greatly increase their chances for compliance.

Titles make their owners seem taller. In one experiment at a university, a man was introduced as a visitor from Cambridge University. His status was represented differently to different groups. After he left the room, the subjects were asked to estimate his height. It was found that with each increase in status: Student, demonstrator, lecturer, senior lecturer, professor, he "grew" in height an average of a half-inch. As professor he was seen 2 ½ inches taller than as a student.

Another study found that after winning an election, politicians become taller in the eyes of the voters. Since 1990 the US presidency has been won by the taller of the major party candidates in nearly 90% of the elections. Women are significantly more likely to respond to a man’s personal ad when he describes himself as tall. For women, size works in the opposite direction. Women who report being short and weighing less get more action.

More than three times as many people followed a jaywalker dressed in a business suit across traffic as they did when the jaywalker was wearing ordinary street clothes. Police officers in traditional uniforms were rated by observers as more fair, helpful, intelligent, honest, and good than those in plain clothes.

To apply this principle in business, share your knowledge, your expertise, your credentials with the customer. Be honest in your approach, however, any attempt to conceal anything will undoubtedly be uncovered and work against you. You can use small inabilities to actually increase your position, since admitting a small defect up front and then countering with real credentials is very effective.

The best defense against the authority principle is to ask, "Is this person truly an expert?" Clearly Robert Young is not a doctor or an authority. Pausing a moment to reflect on the usually obvious credentials of the advertiser or seller may be enough to enable logical thought to save the day.

As a rule, if an item is rare or becoming rare, it is more valuable. Even opportunities seem more valuable when they are less available. We will routinely interrupt an interesting conversation to answer the ring of an unknown caller. If I don’t take the call, I might miss it (and the information it carries) for good.

People are more motivated by the thought of losing something than by the thought of gaining something of equal value. Especially under conditions of risk and uncertainty, the threat of loss has a powerful influence on our decision-making.

The most common use of the scarcity principle is the "limited-number" tactic. Have you ever had this experience? You’re shopping in an appliance store, interested in a certain sale item. The salesperson approaches and says, "I see you’re interested in this model and I can understand why: it’s a great machine at a great price. But, unfortunately, I sold the last one 20 minutes ago." You’re disappointed. The model is suddenly very attractive because of its scarcity. You ask if an unsold model could be in the back room or in the warehouse. "Well, it’s possible. I’ll check. Am I right in saying that this is the model you want and if I can get it for you at this price, you’ll take it?" (Recognize this application of the consistency principle?) You agree and when the salesperson returns to announce that the model has been found, he has a sales contract in hand.

I read a newspaper report of a scam that offers a victim (usually an older person) an opportunity to invest and then in a follow-up call takes the offer away. Then the victim receives a third call and learns that the opportunity has suddenly become available again—but that the victim must act quickly. Of course, the victim panics, worried that the opportunity might disappear again, and signs up for the deal.

An important element of the scarcity principle is loss of freedom. We hate to lose freedom we already have. A town in Florida imposed an anti-phosphate ordinance prohibiting not only the use but also the possession of products containing phosphates. Smuggling and hoarding ensued. The people came to see phosphate cleaners as better products than before.

This is typical when we have lost an established freedom. When something becomes less available, we experience an increased desire for it. We don’t understand why we want the item more; all we know is that we want it. To make sense of our increased desire, we endow it with a host of positive qualities.

The tendency to want what has been banned and to presume that it is more worthwhile is not limited to commodities. It also applies to information. The interesting result of censorship is not that we want the information more—it’s that we believe the information more.

When students learned that a speech opposing coed dorms on campus would be banned, they became more opposed to the idea of coed dorms. Without ever hearing the speech, students became more supportive of its argument. The most effective strategy for members of a fringe political group may not be to publicize the unpopular views but to get those views censored and then publicize the censorship. Perhaps the authors of the Constitution understood this principle when they wrote the free speech provision of the First Amendment.

In one study, undergraduates were shown ads for a novel. For half the students, the ads included "a book for adults only, restricted to those 21 years and over." The other half saw no age restriction. Those who read the age restrictions wanted to read the book more and believed that they would like the book more.

Consider the impact on a jury when told to disregard information that has already been heard—members of the jury then regard that information as more valuable.

Procter & Gamble tried an experiment in NY by eliminating coupons and instead lowering everyday prices. The result was a consumer revolt—even though P&G showed that only 2% of coupons are used and that by lowering prices, consumers paid the same with less hassle. The revolt happened because coupons, for many, are an inalienable right. People react strongly when you take things away, even if they never use them.

Not only do we want the same item more when it is scarce, we want it most when we are competing for it. Advertisers say demand has limited the number we can buy or the time the product/price is available. The message is not just that the product is good because other people think so, but also that we are in direct competition with those people for it. A realtor trying to sell to a "fence sitting" prospect will mention another prospective buyer who has seen the house, liked it, and is scheduled to return the following day to talk terms. There is something almost physical about wanting to have a contested item. Shoppers at big close-out sales or bargain bins report being emotionally caught up in the experience.

I heard about a college student who devised an ingenious way of making money in his spare time. He would buy a couple of used cars through the newspaper on one weekend, clean them up and sell them the following weekend by placing an ad in the Sunday paper. Prospects who called were all given the same appointment time. Usually, the first person who arrived would begin studying the car and engaging in standard car-buying behavior—pointing out defects and asking if the price were negotiable. The situation changed radically when the second prospect showed up. The availability of the car to either prospect suddenly became limited by the presence of the other. Often the first to arrive would introduce the element of rivalry by saying, "Just a minute, I was here first." If he didn’t, the seller would do it for him. Suddenly the leisurely assessment of the car by the first prospect became a now-or-never, limited-time-only rush to a decision. The second arrival would be equally agitated and pace around the periphery, straining to get at the suddenly desirable item. If the first prospect didn’t take the car, the second one was ready to pounce. If this was not enough, the trap snapped shut as soon as the third prospect arrived. The prospects failed to see that the increased desire for the car had little to do with the merits of the car. It was the principle of scarcity combined with rivalry.

Since customers are like the rest of us and respond to loss as a powerful influence principle, emphasize what will be lost to them if they don’t choose your product or service. Is it reliability, quality, dependability? Outlining the penalties, as well as the benefits, will make a convincing package.

The problem is our typical reaction to scarcity hinders our ability to think. When we watch as something we want becomes less available, a physical agitation sets in. Especially in those cases involving direct competition, our blood pressure rises and we become more emotional. This increase in emotion causes a decrease in logic. Under these circumstances it’s almost impossible to remain rational and calm.

Understanding the pressure of scarcity may not be enough to help us since logic and thinking processes are overcome in emotional situations. This may be why scarcity tactics are so effective. When they are used, our first line of defense—a thoughtful analysis of the situation—becomes less likely.

Whenever we confront scarcity pressure, we should ask ourselves what we want from the item. If we want it for a utilitarian reasons, we should remember that scarce things are not any better just because of their limited availability. The key to avoiding the influence of scarcity is to be alert to the distinction between naturally occurring, honest scarcity and the fabricated variety favored by high-pressure sales persons.

Often when we make a decision we don’t use all the relevant available information. Instead, we use only one representative piece. An isolated piece of information, even though it normally helps us make the correct decision, can lead us to make stupid mistakes. Despite the susceptibility to stupid mistakes, the pace of modern life demands that we use shortcuts. We can’t afford the luxury of extended deliberations for each and every decision we make.

We are likely to use shortcuts when we don’t have the time or energy for a complete analysis of the situation. John Stuart Mills died in 1873. He is reputed to have been the last man to know everything there was to know in the world. After eons of slow accumulation, human knowledge has snowballed. We now live in a world where most of the information is less than 15 years old. In certain fields of science knowledge is said to double every eight years. We rely on shortcuts to help us through the day. The key is to wake up at appropriate times when the shortcut leads us astray.

If you have influence stories to share, I’d love to hear them. If you’d like to know more about this fascinating topic, let me hear that, too!

About the Author
http://www.lindarising.org
risingl@acm.org

Linda Rising has a Ph.D. from Arizona State University in the area of object-based design metrics. Her background includes university teaching as well as work in industry in telecommunications, avionics, and strategic weapons systems. She is the author of numerous articles and has published three books: Design Patterns in Communications, The Pattern Almanac 2000, and A Patterns Handbook. She is currently writing a book with Mary Lynn Manns: Introducing Patterns (or any Innovation) into Organizations, to appear in 2003. 

[ Back to Top ]