We're more likely to agree to a small request after first rejecting a larger one
Seeing the other party shift to a more reasonable negotiation position makes us do the same, especially if they’re realistic and physically present.
Ebster & Neumayr (2008). Applying the door-in-the-face compliance technique to retailing. The Int’l Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research.
Impact
The study
The studies
375 mountain hikers were approached as they passed a cheese sales counter and asked to buy a large piece, with all rejecting it. They were then offered a piece half in size and cost and split into 4 groups: 1 - Simple DITF; 2 - a verbal concession that large was too big; 3 - credibility by wearing a traditional uniform; and 4 - 2+3 combined.
Purchases were much higher with DITF, especially carried out by a credible salesperson conceding verbally.
375 mountain hikers were approached as they passed a cheese sales counter and asked to buy a large piece, with all rejecting it. They were then offered a piece half in size and cost and split into 4 groups: 1 - Simple DITF; 2 - a verbal concession that large was too big; 3 - credibility by wearing a traditional uniform; and 4 - 2+3 combined.
Purchases were much higher with DITF, especially carried out by a credible salesperson conceding verbally.
Ebster & Neumayr (2008). Applying the door-in-the-face compliance technique to retailing. The Int’l Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research.
Jerome's Expert View
Key Takeaways
Verbally emphasize the concession of the target request over the initial one. This is vital - hearing the salesperson empathize and adjust their request is required for the consumer to reciprocate and accept.
Only use in physical sales situations. It’s unlikely to work where there is no direct contact between buyer and seller (e.g. online auctions), due to the lack of verbal concession and face-to-face interaction. It’s best used in an in-person context where negotiation is key (car showrooms, charitable giving, B2B contracts etc).
Sizes matter. Don’t make your initial request too high, as consumers will use it to justify their rejection of the target request (Wang et al, 1989). Also ensure that the reduction of the target feels significant enough for the consumer to justify a decision change.
Boundary conditions
Future questions
We're more likely to agree to a small request after first rejecting a larger one
Seeing the other party shift to a more reasonable negotiation position makes us do the same, especially if they’re realistic and physically present.
Ebster & Neumayr (2008). Applying the door-in-the-face compliance technique to retailing. The Int’l Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research.
The study
Impact
The study
The studies
375 mountain hikers were approached as they passed a cheese sales counter and asked to buy a large piece, with all rejecting it. They were then offered a piece half in size and cost and split into 4 groups: 1 - Simple DITF; 2 - a verbal concession that large was too big; 3 - credibility by wearing a traditional uniform; and 4 - 2+3 combined.
Purchases were much higher with DITF, especially carried out by a credible salesperson conceding verbally.
375 mountain hikers were approached as they passed a cheese sales counter and asked to buy a large piece, with all rejecting it. They were then offered a piece half in size and cost and split into 4 groups: 1 - Simple DITF; 2 - a verbal concession that large was too big; 3 - credibility by wearing a traditional uniform; and 4 - 2+3 combined.
Purchases were much higher with DITF, especially carried out by a credible salesperson conceding verbally.
Jerome's Expert View
Key Takeaways
Verbally emphasize the concession of the target request over the initial one. This is vital - hearing the salesperson empathize and adjust their request is required for the consumer to reciprocate and accept.
Only use in physical sales situations. It’s unlikely to work where there is no direct contact between buyer and seller (e.g. online auctions), due to the lack of verbal concession and face-to-face interaction. It’s best used in an in-person context where negotiation is key (car showrooms, charitable giving, B2B contracts etc).
Sizes matter. Don’t make your initial request too high, as consumers will use it to justify their rejection of the target request (Wang et al, 1989). Also ensure that the reduction of the target feels significant enough for the consumer to justify a decision change.
Boundary conditions
Future questions
Ebster & Neumayr (2008). Applying the door-in-the-face compliance technique to retailing. The Int’l Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research.
We're more likely to agree to a small request after first rejecting a larger one
Seeing the other party shift to a more reasonable negotiation position makes us do the same, especially if they’re realistic and physically present.
The study
375 mountain hikers were approached as they passed a cheese sales counter and asked to buy a large piece, with all rejecting it. They were then offered a piece half in size and cost and split into 4 groups: 1 - Simple DITF; 2 - a verbal concession that large was too big; 3 - credibility by wearing a traditional uniform; and 4 - 2+3 combined.
Purchases were much higher with DITF, especially carried out by a credible salesperson conceding verbally.
Ebster & Neumayr (2008). Applying the door-in-the-face compliance technique to retailing. The Int’l Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research.
Scarcity
We value things more when they’re in limited supply
Social Proof
We copy the behaviors of others, especially in unfamiliar situations
Prospect Theory
A loss hurts more than an equal gain feels good
Reciprocity
We’re hardwired to return kindness received
Framing
We make very different decisions based on how a fact is presented
Loss Aversion
We feel more negative when losing something than positive when we get it
Self-Expression
We constantly seek out ways to communicate our identity to others
Default Effect
We tend to accept the option pre-chosen for us
Priming
Our decisions are shaped by memories recalled from things just seen or heard
Anchoring
What we see first affects our judgement of everything thereafter
Scarcity
We value things more when they’re in limited supply
Social Proof
We copy the behaviors of others, especially in unfamiliar situations
Prospect Theory
A loss hurts more than an equal gain feels good
Reciprocity
We’re hardwired to return kindness received
Framing
We make very different decisions based on how a fact is presented
Loss Aversion
We feel more negative when losing something than positive when we get it
Self-Expression
We constantly seek out ways to communicate our identity to others
Default Effect
We tend to accept the option pre-chosen for us
Priming
Our decisions are shaped by memories recalled from things just seen or heard
Anchoring
What we see first affects our judgement of everything thereafter