From the Mediation Matters Blog of Steve Mehta.
There has been substantial research on the issue of favors and likelihood of increasing compliance. In addition, there is also a lot of research on the effect of an apology after a transgression. But there has been very little research on what effect, if any, an apology has on increasing compliance when there is no transgression.
Researcher Ryan Goei and others researched the “effects of favor and apology on compliance and to explain any potential effect” relating to indebtedness, liking or gratitude. The researchers explained that research has clearly shown that doing someone a favor will increase the likelihood that the other person will comply with a request of yours. Moreover, apologies are intended to acknowledge responsibility and regret for a violation.
In this experiment, the researchers tested the effect of an apology for not providing an unsolicited favor to a stranger. The experimenters left the room in which the subject was present. A few minutes later, the experimenter would return with a drink and then either make no comment regarding not bringing the other person a drink, would bring a drink, or would make an apology for not having brought the subject a drink (even though it was not requested by the subject). Later in the experiment, the researchers would ask the subject to buy a raffle ticket.
The researchers found as follows:
According to the authors, “apology might be used to augment compliance rates without suffering the tangible cost of providing a favor – one need only to apologize for not having done a favor.” The authors did not that the research needs further support and testing before they can make concrete conclusions.
Applying the Research
Negotiators know that liking will have a substantial effect on whether a person is likely to do something that has been requested. This research also makes it clear that it is not reciprocity as much as liking and gratitude. The negotiator must think about what he or she is asking and focus on what emotion (liking or gratitude) will be the right emotion to elicit.
Second, if you can find a way to apologize to the other person for something that is not a transgression, you may be able to increase your negotiating position. For example, you could consider going to get a coffee with your negotiating opponent and apologizing for not buying the coffee. Or you could apologize for not calling to share a ride with the opponent. The apology must relate to something that you didn’t have to do in the first place. But on the other hand, if you do something that will create the need for an apology, then the apology may not have the desired effect.
Goei, R, Roberto, A, Meyer, G & Carlyle, K, The Effects of Favor and Apology on Compliance, Communication Research, 2007; 34: 575.
This article first appeared on the Securities Arbitration Alert ('SAA') blog, here. FINRA’s Office of Dispute Resolution Services (“DRS”) has again administratively postponed all in-person arbitration and mediation hearings, and...By George Friedman