Keynote: You're Insufficiently Persuasive

Communication

Sandi Metz

@skmetz

#team-dynamics

#psychological-safety

#collaboration

#motivation

#communication

#developer-experience

Keynote: You're Insufficiently Persuasive

by Sandi Metz

In her keynote at RubyConf 2017, Sandi Metz addresses the theme of persuasion, particularly in the context of programmer unhappiness stemming from interpersonal issues. She begins by discussing the conference atmosphere and the importance of gratitude towards those organizing the event. Metz shares insights from her extensive experience in programming and her observations on the factors contributing to programmer discontent. Drawing from a study that identifies common causes of unhappiness, she highlights how feelings of being stuck, inadequate, or frustrated with colleagues often result from poor communication and collaboration. Metz discusses the psychological principles of persuasion as articulated by Robert Cialdini in his book "Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion," outlining six categories of persuasive tactics: 1. Reciprocity, 2. Consistency, 3. Social Proof, 4. Authority, 5. Liking, and 6. Scarcity. She contrasts Cialdini's perspective with that of Dale Carnegie, advocating for a more empathetic approach focused on understanding others' motivations. Bringing in research from Daniel Pink, she emphasizes the importance of autonomy, mastery, and purpose in fostering motivation within teams. Furthermore, she references Google's Project Aristotle, which identified the significance of conversational turn-taking and social sensitivity in high-performing teams. Metz concludes with the crucial takeaway that successful teamwork relies on cultivating psychological safety and treating each other with respect. Ultimately, she encourages attendees to improve their own interactions to build stronger teams, underlining that everyone has the power to influence positive collaborative efforts.

00:00:10.669 Good morning! Wow! Okay, so I warned the sound guys that the sound was always set for really big men and they should make sure they turn me up. And they did, right?

00:00:23.910 So, Harry, if you're sitting next to an empty seat, scoot in. We do have people coming in from the back, and they are all as tired as you are—they stayed out too late. The people who are late probably deserve our sympathy, so let's make a seat for them.

00:00:42.000 Before I get going, I really want to say a few things about us. Don't you love Ruby? Don't you love having this conference? I've been away for a year due to life responsibilities, and I haven't actually attended a conference in over a year. There's something so wonderful about getting off the plane, looking around the airport, and recognizing that these people are nerds. You can tell!

00:01:03.450 You can spot them in the taxi cab line. You think, 'Maybe I should get them into our cab.' Then you get to the lobby, and it's like you can have any conversation you want with anybody without boring anyone. It’s totally going to happen.

00:01:21.719 I know it costs money to come here, and the money doesn't really pay for everything. But I feel like the sponsors have been sufficiently thanked, and you should probably go to all the booths and thank them. However, there's one thing I've heard over and over again from this stage.

00:01:33.420 Someone like Marty will model it for me. Will you stand up, Marty? How many times have you been told that if you have a problem, you should seek out someone in a blue shirt? Some of you may have done that. But I think there's another important thing we need to do for all the people in the blue shirts.

00:02:14.099 I want to give you one assignment: after you leave here today, go out in the hall and find someone in one of these shirts, shake their hand, and thank them. It’s a lot of work, and most of those people you may not know by name. So ask them for their name, shake their hand, and tell them how much you appreciate all the hard work they've done to make this happen.

00:02:30.540 Alright, so there we go. I'm sorry, my keynotes always make me laugh. I'm going to be the one to bring this to your attention.

00:02:36.420 But I fear that you are unhappy. Most of your unhappiness stems from dealing with other people, and I have two reasons for thinking this. One is that I wrote code for a longer period of time than most of your lives, and now I travel and teach. I dip in and out of programming shops ten or twelve times a year, so I see unhappiness on the ground.

00:02:52.349 This is one reason I believe that you’re unhappy. I also believe you're unhappy because of a recent study released this summer about a distribution of causes for programmer unhappiness.

00:03:00.719 They harvested half a million email addresses from GitHub and randomly selected 33,000 people to send surveys. They ended up with 1,300 responses and identified 219 specific reasons for unhappiness. They sent these 219 codes back to the same group and had them rank which ones caused them unhappiness.

00:03:21.150 They received over 2,200 references to these codes. Of course, that averages out to about ten votes per unhappiness code. However, it turns out the distribution is not even. Here are the top ten causes of programmer unhappiness: feeling stuck, poor quality code, underperforming colleagues, feelings of inadequacy, and boredom.

00:03:34.439 I've found this list super interesting. Notice how they categorized some causes as internal and some as external. I’m not all that interested in the internal issues; I agree they are important, but they're not the focus of this talk. I’ll get rid of them. I also don’t buy that boredom is external, so I’ll get rid of that, too. We’re left with six key factors. These account for a large proportion of the reported reasons for unhappiness, and if you examine them closely, you might come to believe, as I do, that the root cause of all these issues is other people.

00:05:01.229 It’s what we’re saying: other people can be so annoying! You probably know how to fix all these things; you have ideas. But it’s other people who keep making mistakes and causing pain that rolls downhill to you. If only they would behave the way you want them to behave, everything would be better. If you’ve tried to get people to behave the way you want and have failed despite your best efforts, this is obviously a problem of persuasion.

00:05:39.509 Now, I must confess that I have a degree in psychology, and this is something from which one never recovers. It has profoundly shaped how I perceive the world. Thus, when I see groups of people struggling to reach an agreement due to unhappiness, I see it as a problem of persuasion. And this observation makes me sad.

00:06:00.069 This shouldn’t happen because, in truth, humans are hardwired to be persuadable. Consider early humans: the world was scary and dark, and those who could collaborate were more likely to survive and reproduce. Evolution has favored us for cooperation, and when people can’t get along, there’s a fundamental systemic failure in our interactions. There’s extensive research on how persuadable we are, and I will take you through several perspectives on how persuasion operates.

00:06:28.069 One perspective comes from a guy named Robert Cialdini, who wrote the book "Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion." This book has sold over three million copies. I have a book, but it will never reach such sales! Cialdini groups forms of persuasion into six categories and develops a framework to discuss them. I’ll go through those categories with you now.

00:07:25.080 The first category of persuasion is Reciprocity. The principle here suggests that if I give you something, you feel obliged to return the favor, even if I ask for something larger in return. This principle saddles us with future obligations, which is fascinating evolutionarily because it shows how well we can work together. However, it is also easy for this concept to be exploited.

00:07:50.740 Take the Hare Krishnas from the 1980s, for instance. They had a fundraising tactic where they would give away flowers and then ask for donations. People didn’t want the flowers, yet once they received one, it became hard to refuse a donation. This is a classic exploitation of the reciprocity principle. In 1992, public pressure against this manipulation led to a case that banned solicitation like this in public spaces in America.

00:08:44.200 The second rule is about consistency. We have a strong desire to appear consistent with past statements. This often comes into play during holidays. For example, when your child begs you for a toy that ends up being unavailable for Christmas, they come back after the holidays and ask again, reminding you that you promised. Businesses exploit this by strategically making their products unavailable at certain times.

00:09:02.110 The third rule is about social proof. It suggests that in uncertain situations, we tend to do what others do. I can illustrate this from a biking experience: when you're out in the woods, away from the road, and need a break, you direct your friends to look the other way when cars pass. This illustrates how social proof works; it influences our behavior based on observing others.

00:09:55.370 The fourth rule is Authority. Authority comes in two forms: the kind exhibited by individuals in uniforms, like judges or police, and expert authority, where we trust experts because of their roles in society. The fifth rule is liking—as it turns out, if people like you, they're more likely to adhere to your requests. People tend to like others who are similar to them or have had positive interactions with them.

00:10:57.000 Lastly, we have scarcity, which makes us value things more when they are fewer in number. For instance, Amazon often tells us when stock is low because scarcity drives desire. This principle explains why when you are waiting for a prime parking spot, it feels like time slows down, as the space becomes more coveted when people see others vying for it.

00:12:15.140 Cialdini describes these six properties as weapons of influence, not just as traits of human cooperation. I dislike this viewpoint and am seeking a different perspective. Dale Carnegie's book, "How to Win Friends and Influence People," comes to mind. Carnegie's work emphasizes personal behavior rather than manipulating others from a perspective of exploitation.

00:13:24.310 Carnegie’s principles focus on how changing your behavior can help influence others effectively. This is more appealing than the weaponized viewpoint. You must appreciate that we often blame others’ behaviors for our unhappiness. We often label their actions as evil or intent to harm.

00:14:00.645 But I contend that most people share the same goals and aspirations! It is possible that we are more alike than we are different, and the viciousness of our disagreements masks our commonalities. We can approach these conflicts constructively by understanding each other's motivations better.

00:14:43.720 In 2010, Daniel Pink published research on motivations. He found that when tasks are mechanical, monetary incentives work, but creative tasks reverse that effect. True motivation arises from autonomy, mastery, and purpose—essential elements that provide a sense of control, improvement, and meaning.

00:15:28.490 If these motivations are universal, conflicts must be rooted in strategy rather than values. If we desire the same outcomes but choose different means, then we can move towards collaboration instead of mere persuasion. It is essential to facilitate a more productive teamwork environment.

00:16:18.000 This leads us to Google’s Project Aristotle, which aimed to identify qualities of successful teams. Despite examining personality types, interactions, and socializing habits, Google found that no discernible pattern existed among high-performing teams.

00:17:10.760 Ultimately, they identified two key behaviors: equal proportions of conversational turn-taking and average social sensitivity. A safe team environment encourages participation, trust, and empathy, essential for developing effective teamwork.

00:18:05.080 Remember, the foundation of a successful team relies on how team members treat each other. You can set the tone for discussions; for instance, words about the future focusing on solutions hold more power than past-focused blame. If you face conflicts, hold strong opinions yet keep them flexible. Identify yourself but avoid rigidity.

00:18:53.900 Carnegie’s principles advocate warmth and a focus on the future, cultivating psychological safety. Yet, we often wonder why we fail to create safe spaces for honest dialogue. Often, fear comes into play—fear of vulnerability and being judged. Recognizing that fear is part of the human condition is essential.

00:19:43.080 Despite that fear, we need to understand that we are good enough. Our pasts do not define our futures. If you face fixed situations, acknowledge it, yet in communication issues, the most effective way forward may be adjusting yourself. Utilize tools of persuasion to strengthen team dynamics and foster psychological safety.

00:20:29.220 Remember, a good team is always stronger than any one individual. To build your best team, you must reach inside and uncover your best self. Thank you.

See Slides on speakerdeck.com

RubyConf 2017