Category Archives: Psychology

Anyone who has ever gone to the grocery store knows this scenario well: you turn the corner of the breakfast foods aisle and find yourself confronted with hundreds of different types of cereal. Cheerios alone have over eleven different flavor options (not even considering size variations!), including original, honey nut, honey nut medley crunch, apple cinnamon, banana nut, frosted, chocolate, multi-grain, multi-grain peanut butter, Dulce de Leche, and cinnamon burst. For the average shopper, so many products on a shelf are bound to trigger a headache unless they walk in knowing precisely what they need.

IS MORE REALLY BETTER?

In 2000, researchers Sheena Iyengar & Mark Lepper set out to explore the belief that the more options we have, the better. In a series of experiments conducted in both field and laboratory settings, they found that individuals are more likely to purchase a product (specifically jam) when offered a limited array of 6 choices, rather than a wide array of 30 choices. Moreover, the participants reported greater subsequent satisfaction with their selections when their choices were limited. Think long-term customer retention.

According to a psychology professor and author of “The Paradox of Choice” (HarperCollins, 2003) Barry Collins, an abundance of options can cause a buyer to experience decision paralysis and not make a decision at all. Or they might make a rash decision based on what is easiest to evaluate, rather than what is important and necessary, triggering buyer’s remorse.

FOUR MAIN PSYCHOLOGICAL MECHANISMS UNDERLYING “THE PARADOX OF CHOICE”.

1. Regret: The concept of post-decisional regret states that feeling regret increases with the number of options that we have to turn down. We assume a personal responsibility for making a bad choice and find it easier to replay in our minds what may have occurred had we chosen another option.
2. Opportunity Costs: When making a decision, we are inherently suffering an opportunity cost for not choosing the options we left behind. Our brain requires that we produce reasons why we didn’t go with each of the other options, causing psychological stress.
3. Expectations: As the number of choices increase, so do our expectations to find the perfect option. With higher expectations, we subject ourselves to higher levels of disappointment.
4. Social Comparison: With more options, we are more likely to compare what we have with what others, theoretically, could have, therefore increasing our likelihood of simply comparing ourselves to others.

Barry Collins argues that having some choice is good, as it allows people to recognize their preferences and choose on their own volition. However, when too many choices are introduced, psychological satisfaction with that choice can go in the opposite direction. This also pertains to the people behind the purchasing decisions made for companies. At SBR, we were interested in applying this knowledge in a practical way to help our clients increase sales and drive revenue.

TOO MANY CHOICES CAN RESULT IN LOWER SALES.

This excerpt from Barry Collin’s TED Talk reveals the impact that too many choices can have on sales:

“A colleague of mine got access to investment records from Vanguard, the gigantic mutual fund company of about a million employees and about 2,000 different workplaces. And what she found is that for every 10 mutual funds the employer offered, the rate of participation went down two percent. You offer 50 funds — 10 percent fewer employees participate than if you only offer five. Why? Because with 50 funds to choose from, it’s so damn hard to decide which fund to choose, that you’ll just put it off until tomorrow. And then tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow, and of course tomorrow never comes. Understand that not only does this mean that people are going to have to eat dog food when they retire because they don’t have enough money to put away, it also means that making the decision is so hard that they pass up significant matching money from the employer. By not participating, they are passing up as much as $5,000 a year from the employer, who would happily match their contribution.”

YOUR SALES TEAM CAN ELIMINATE DECISION PARALYSIS.

Salespeople can mitigate challenges caused by an excessive number of options. How? They can target this psychological process by identifying customer’s preferences and present them with a narrower selection from which they may choose. Rather than “product dumping,” and simply listing all of the features of a variety of products, a sales person must narrow the set of options, and present them in a digestible way.

Naturally, they must first determine what the customer’s needs are (by asking directional questions) and then recommend the product(s) that fit their specific requirements. To further ease the decision-making process, storytelling techniques can be used to help the customer imagine how this product will improve their life or their company.

With a smaller selection of defined options, the buying experience will be less psychologically taxing, and more profitable for the organization. Not only will the customer be more satisfied with your company, but also with themselves for coming to a conclusion seemingly on their own. Win-win. Click here to learn how SBR has catapulted sales performance and results for our clients.

In a 2004 study, researchers assigned participants to consume a snack – either chocolate or prune juice. Half of the participants consumed the snack immediately, while the others had to wait 30 minutes before consuming. Those who ate chocolate enjoyed the product more when they had to wait 30 minutes before tasting it, while those who drank prune juice disliked it even more when they had to wait.

This teaches us an important lesson about emotion – for a positive experience, a delay will increase enjoyment. However, for more negative experiences it is better to, as Nike says “Just Do It” because a delay will intensify the negative emotions when you finally get around to doing it.

In health insurance, it is rare to find someone who equates the annual hunt for adequate health insurance coverage to eating a delicious piece of rich dark chocolate. We know that consumers frequently wait until the final days of AEP (Annual Enrollment Period) to select a health plan. Can health care professionals leverage this knowledge about delays to help members feel more satisfied with their decision at the end of AEP?

Health insurance carriers want prospects and members to have a positive AEP experience – increasing retention and satisfaction. Frequently viewed as a negative experience, putting off a healthcare purchase will surely guarantee an even more extreme response. Health carriers can remedy this by encouraging consumers to sign up early – get the process over with!

The key to successfully changing attitudes about AEP is communication. Reach out to prospects and members early on. Communicate that being an “early bird” will allow for a painless process, guaranteed to be satisfying because your team will support them along the way. While some of the regulations limit offering incentives, you can market the psychological benefit, a value in and of itself. Although members may not recognize the immediate advantages of avoiding delay, they are sure to look back on the selection process more favorably than they would have if they procrastinated.

Does your marketing and sales communication encourage prospects and members to complete the AEP plan selection process early, while emphasizing the ease of purchase? Use your next marketing campaign to inspire consumers to avoid delaying…another way to help boost member satisfaction.

Multitasking has been under scientific scrutiny since the 1960’s. Diverse and web-centric channels for work and play have questioned the brain’s ability to do more than one thing at a time. MIT neuroscientist Earl Miller explains that, “When people think they’re multitasking, they’re actually just switching from one task to another very rapidly. And every time they do, there’s a cognitive cost in doing so.”

There is no better proof that multitasking – or, rather, the attempt to multitask – is alive and well than the contact center industry. If you spend any time peering over the cubicles of call center agents, moving between two or more computer screens, jotting down notes, and plugging digits into their calculator, you have to wonder, what’s all the fuss about? They seem to be multitasking whizzes! (Side note: In one Rapid Ethnographic study of a call center, SBR found that agents migrated between an average of two computer screens and seven different windows during a single call!)

When production value is prized above salesmanship or consumer engagement, the most effective call center agents have to become adept at managing multiple activities in quick succession. The problem is that most companies want call center agents to engage with consumers. The skills required to do so are inherently at odds with mechanical dexterity. You can easily determine whether agents are more focused on the computer than the consumer by the amount of “dead air” during a call. Such is the dilemma for the modern call center.

One big issue is that when people try to multitask, they make more mistakes. Worse yet, when agents switch between different activities, they could be losing the very skills needed to sell and/or support consumers. Researchers at the UK’s University of Sussex found that frequent multitaskers had less brain density in the areas that control cognition and emotional resilience. Sure, an agent might do okay for the first few minutes of their day, but they will soon get burned-out and bummed-out, lose focus, interest and overall job satisfaction. What to do?

• Experience the agent environment firsthand. Automation can help, but should be built with and for the agent. Too often call center tools are created in a vacuum, often by technical geniuses that know little about or invest no time in appreciating the day-to-day work of a call center agent. An intimate understanding of the job starts with an immersive assessment (our method of choice is Rapid Ethnography) to get an inside look into the agent’s environment. At this point it’s possible to design technological solutions that can do more of the heavy lifting, so agents can focus on the caller.
• Measure the impact of multitasking on performance. The attempt to multitask is a big time-waster. If you gauge the average amount of time wasted in searching around for information while on the phone you can quickly track the cost associated with multitasking, not to mention the impact it has on the consumer experience.
• Give agents a chance to recharge. Psychology says that there is a limit to optimal performance and we all have a set point at which all goes south. The best breathers engage the creative part of our brains. If you have or manage a call center, consider a break station that includes games such as pool tables, adult coloring books (all the rage) and other “toys” that help agents switch gears. Even if you can’t set aside a large dedicated space, give agents portable care packages that they can take to the cafeteria.

The modern call center is a motley environment where human-centered communication, technological agility, and product knowledge converge to form the “ideal” agent. But humans are limited and for long-term agent retention and satisfaction, consider how you can create an ecosystem where performance is based on realistic factors. Folks on the receiving end of the call will thank you and so will your bottom line.

Anyone who has spent time around kids knows that the incessant “Why” query is applied to just about everything. But asking “Why” isn’t just a way to annoy adults. It’s their natural inclination to better understand the world around them using storytelling, a form of communication hardwired in our brains.

Sanden Totten is co-creator of a new podcast, “Brains On!”, which has kids asking their most burning questions about culture, science, art and the like. Totten came upon the idea that kids can be the perfect journalistic tool by observing the way adults responded to them.

On WNYC’s “The Takeaway”, Totten mentioned that scientists spoke differently when talking to adults vs. kids. For example, when explaining El Niño to an adult, scientists might say,“Part of the ocean that we call ‘Niño 3.4’ heats up two degrees above average…”

But when kids asked the scientists the very same question, they turned up their storytelling mojo: “El Niño is basically a weather phenomenon that happens when part of the ocean gets really hot and it messes with all of the wind patterns and sends storms to places they normally wouldn’t be.” Bingo! By giving the microphone to kids, the great questions about the world were not only put within their storytelling context, adult comprehension was boosted as well.

For over a decade now, SBR has helped complex product organizations (like health insurance and financial services) create marketing communications that better reach their consumer audiences. During this time we have tested numerous communications against standard industry barometers like health literacy, which measures a person’s ability to read and understand health-related information. But simply writing communications at a certain grade level doesn’t mean that they are compelling.

When you’re selling something as banal as light fixtures or as complex as health insurance, creativity is often replaced with a product description. Instead of product dumping or feature selling (listing product features one by one), use stories to add both an emotive component to common products and help consumers understand how a product could support them. For example, instead of listing the features of a health insurance plan (deductibles, copays, premiums) create a story about how the consumer will use the product: “When you go to your local pharmacy, you’ll show your membership card to the pharmacist, pay the prescription copay of $10, and then you’ll be on your way.”

You can also use kids to test the relative persuasiveness of your marketing speak. If they can understand it and are maybe even intrigued by it, chances are your adult consumers will as well.

Honoring Valentine’s Day is our chance to say how much we ❤ and appreciate our clients, colleagues and friends. We are not alone. With people in the U.S. spending some $18.9 billion on chocolates, extravagant arrangements and the standard Hallmark card, Valentine’s Day is no joke for businesses big and small. Team SBR dug up some interesting factoids about this holiday to consider what it says about consumer behavior and corporate response.

Artificial Affection

A startling 15% of women will send themselves flowers on Valentine’s Day. Which begs the question, why do we care so much about what other people think? In research, we call this “social desirability bias,” the tendency to report more favorably than your behavior or belief actually suggest. This is one reason why we opt to pair survey research with observational qualitative methods like ethnography to marry what people say they do with what they actually do.

Move Over, Friendsgiving
In Finland Valentine’s Day is called Ystävänpäivä, meaning “Friend’s Day” where they celebrate friends more than significant others. It’s with this sentiment that SBR celebrates as well because building engagement in employees is vital for both our clients and within our own company. A Gallop poll found that workplace friendships could improve employee satisfaction by as much as 50%, noting that camaraderie means more than just lunchtime pal-chats. Creating a workforce built upon communal goals, active participation and a broader sense of purpose are integral to this friendship model.

We Just Love Procrastinating
Procrastination plagues the best of us and we reported on how businesses can embrace the human tendency to delay in order to boost sales and better communicate with consumers. It turns out that people procrastinate even for positive things like Valentine’s Day, with nearly half (47%) of men waiting until February 13th or 14th to shop. The relative risk is pretty low when it comes to a box of chocolates (depending on the relative wrath of your significant other). But when you pair procrastination with higher impact items like health insurance, the risk is much greater.

So there you have it. Whether you feel the need to feign love, celebrate friends with the Finns or simply love to procrastinate, we think dedicating an entire day to amour is so worth it.

“Mad Men” came to a close last May but we still find ourselves referencing the series whenever we think about business life in the days of yore. The show had a revolving door of characters that seemed to require a lung or liver transplant as much as new business accounts. But when it comes to its portrayal of the business world, and specifically, the business worker, we ask ourselves: How much has really changed over the past few decades?

We decided to pose this question to Dr. Stephen Byrum, Ph.D., CEO of The Byrum Consulting Group and foremost expert on the Hartman Value Profile. Dr. Byrum has been using the Hartman Value Profile since the 1960s, happened to study under its creator Dr. Hartman and consults for educational institutions, corporations and startups. But before we delve into the details of our conversation, it’s important to mention the basic tenets of the tool. (If you are new to the Hartman Value Profile, you may want to check out an earlier post about the assessment, how it works and why we keep introducing it to clients.) 

In simplest terms, the Hartman Value Profile measures a person’s value judgment on three different dimensions: (1) Systemic or “big picture” judgment; (2) Intrinsic or people judgment; and, (3) Extrinsic or task-based judgment. It analyzes the inextricable correlation between a person’s innate personal attributes and their ability to apply those characteristics to the workplace.

Dr. Byrum helped provide clarity on the moving dynamics of worker culture over the past few decades from thousands of Hartman Value Profile test results fielded in nearly every major industry:

• “Mad Men” era favored leaders with excellent people skills. Decades ago companies put a premium on leaders that had high Intrinsic scores (good judgment when it comes to people). Just think of how much time Roger Sterling and Pete Campbell spent schmoozing clients. “If you went into the agency in Mad Men”, Dr. Byrum explained, “Everything was so very dependent on people being able to be socially acute and establish really good social relationships.” But this social IQ doesn’t necessarily lead to the next big invention. “That emphasis on social skills made people individually successful”, Dr. Byrum cautions, “But was not something that contributed to a person’s ability to predict what the next horizon was going to be.”

• The best leaders connect the dots. What Dr. Byrum knows from administering the Hartman Value Profile is that great leaders actually have consistently high Systemic scores. Meaning, they can scope out a situation and forecast the bigger implication. Strong leaders often have an uncanny ability to piece together seemingly unrelated items to achieve an overall goal. Some of the best leaders we know take time to investigate a challenge and predict implications of their decisions on the whole of the company, not just themselves or their direct reports. They work for the betterment of the brand and the business, and consider consumer engagement an absolute necessity, not just a catchphrase.

• Companies wanted rank-and-file workers with high task management skills; today they expect it from everyone. Companies often sought out employees that had the grit and dedication to complete a specified set of tasks. “In the late 1960s through the 1980s,” Dr. Byrum recalled, “Powerful Extrinsic abilities would carry you through the day if you were in an area that involved a lot of process and tact”. This same trend applies today and is arguably a bigger requirement of everyone in business. It makes sense when we consider that there are fewer people expected to accomplish more work in less time. One of the problems is that being a strong producer of work can cost us in other areas, “Oftentimes is at the expense of social skills and Intrinsic abilities”. Our brains have trouble contemplating implications, seeing big picture dynamics and coming up with creative solutions when we are so overloaded with to-do lists. We look for ways to be better producers but we’re not skilling ourselves for leadership roles and other innovative tracks.

• Between the 1960s and 2015, stress has increased precipitously in every industry and at every level. In the closing scene of “Mad Men”, the fictional McCann Erickson agency created the groundbreaking Coca-Cola “Hilltop” advertisement following a serene shot of Don Draper meditating. The focus on the search for deeper meaning and balance is perhaps one of necessity today. The Hartman Value Profile looks both at an individual’s work-side and self-side judgments, as well as the balance between the two. Dr. Byrum has analyzed thousands of results and witnessed a notable dip in people’s self-side scores across the board. In short, we have become more off-balance and more stressed in our personal lives. About 80% of people have lower self-side scores than work-side scores today, compared to about 60% with the same lack of balance in the 1970s. Dr. Byrum suggests that if we dropped Don Draper in 2015, his life and transgressions would not be that much of a shocker today because our lives are so out of balance: “I think if you went back to that period, most people’s lives were not like that. But if you come forward to present-day, you have large numbers of people whose personal lives have gotten as troublesome to the point where I don’t think Don Draper’s character would be much of an aberration in my neighborhood today.”

It is difficult, if not impossible, to keep your personal life from spilling over into your work life. The fact that our personal lives have become more stressed means that our work performance has been impacted as well. Consider the Harvard Business Review’s recent take on the impact of long work hours: chronic overwork diminishes productivity in the long term. The fact that the article mentions an 80-hour workweek is very telling of the dramatic shift towards work-side dominance.

Team SBR periodically takes the Hartman Value Profile to identify movement between the three dimensions of judgment. We love when the results show greater equilibrium amongst the three dimensions (System / Extrinsic / Intrinsic). It is usually a welcome sign that getting a good night’s sleep, taking an extra Yoga class and respecting our own personal time actually makes us better stewards of success for ourselves and our clients.

To learn more about Dr. Byrum, visit Judgment Index and the Robert S. Hartman Institute. 

There are a number of creations from the 1980s that we would prefer to keep locked in the antiquity closet (shoulder pads and side ponytails come to mind). But our heart still sings for a simple video game brought to the U.S. in 1984: Tetris. Something about stacking those mini-blocks into cubed corners keeps us hypnotized for hours.

The simplicity of Tetris is actually based on a more complex phenomenon from human psychology. Scientists have found that the game can help in numerous ways, everything from keeping you on a diet to helping with cognitive capacity (which in turn impacts learning and development). But we were curious about Tetris’ scientific suggestions when it comes to breaking through procrastination plateaus.

The answer lies in something called the Zeigarnik Effect. In the 1930s, Russian psychologist Bluma Zeigarnik observed that waiters remembered customers’ orders until the moment they delivered their food and drinks. Conversely, they forgot the orders once delivery was complete. This observation and the studies that followed concluded that humans have an unconscious need to finish what we start. Our brain basically hangs onto the information until it’s completed.

Tetris plays off the Zeigarnik Effect by creating an inherently unending pursuit. Its addictive nature has to do with the simple fact that there is a constant delivery of new blocks, increasing in speed, feeding our unresolved need to stack them. Whether or not we are aware of it, the re-feeding of blocks keeps us attuned and engaged, what one psychologist called, a “World of perpetual uncompleted tasks”. In the most simple terms, tasks stay in our minds until complete.

From a productivity standpoint, this is great news. We are much more likely to move towards work resolution just by getting started rather than contemplating when and how we will begin. This shows that getting started is not just half the battle, it is the battle. Our mental demand for conclusion will do the work to move us towards resolution.

Consider for a moment walking into your office on a Monday morning and opening up your to-do list for the day. You read through your list, feeling a little less confident than when you walked in a few minutes before. So much to do! Where to begin?

Instead of becoming stalled in a formidable list of tasks, taking on just one at a time will more likely help you complete your tasks. What’s more, just getting started with one small task (e.g. respond to an email, return a call to a colleague, etc.) can help you work through the broader list as a whole.

If you are stuck in procrastination hell and feel like you cannot get out, open Tetris to retrain your neurons towards enhanced performance. Just watch the clock so you don’t squander the entire day trying to beat your highest score.