When you say you’re not sure about the billboard study — is it that you’re not sure it’s a valid study or you’re not sure it’s relevant? (Reference: Freedman, J.L., and S.C. Fraser. “Compliance without Pressure: The Foot in the Door Technique.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 4 (1966): 195-203.) The question is what led to the compliance and the willingness to act in a way that appears different. Was it the 3″ sign due to a change in self-image? Was it that all their neighbors agreed to signs too? Not sure – to me it’s about the act of agreeing and how that changes how we behave in the world.

cheers, rani

considering sharing it with students and colleagues. not sure i buy the small safe driver thing leading to a house obscuring big one, but i’m fairly sure that that’s not the point.
hmm
thanks

But probably easier with POWs than husbands! Good luck.

When talking about small commitments I was thinking about something slightly different. It’s about how you influence people to take on a new *self-image*, which then leads to larger commitments. How do I get my husband to take on the self-image of an organized (and therefore neat) person – and clean up that set of unopened boxes and stuff? Psychologically, perhaps it is the same thing.

I find the PoW example fascinating. The Chinese started small, and built up gradually, using small acts of commitment to break down the resistance of the American soldiers. It was one of the most effective campaigns during WWII to win the hearts and minds of American PoWs, that lasted *after* the war. It’s brainwashing when we are not honest about our intentions. When we are transparent — is it the same thing? I think not.

I’m still mulling over this idea of influence …and integrity.

Great comments! thanks for the conversation.

Loving your sense of humour here; although full disclosure: I’m also a messy husband. You’ll need to talk to my wife to see how to deal with this problem.

Your suggestion of inviting learners to make small commitments and then try out small things makes sense in that they need to walk before they run. The learning design needs to be Sequenced from simple to complex, from group supported to individual, etc. and to maintain a good balance between Safety and Challenge. But I’m not sure that it is a matter of brainwashing (as per the POW example), as they ultimately must decide what is useful to them in the workshop and what is not (back to the principle of adult learners as Subjects of their own learning). Rather I see it as a process of bridging their expectations with yours, building on their motivations and inviting them to try out something new.

A good place to start is in understanding why they are at your learning event in the first place. Where possible, I check in with them before the event through some sort of Learning Needs and Resources Assessment (LNRA (http://www.learningcycle/blog/2010/2/10/12-reasons-why-eleanor-ray-is-a-facilitators-best-friend.html) — e.g. via a phone call, email exchange or short online survey) to ask them about:

a. their experience with the topic (+/-),
b. why they are coming (i.e. this can range from “I’ve been waiting for this workshop all my life” or “my parole officer sent me….”),
c. what challenges they are facing re: this topic in in their work
d. their feedback on the proposed program for the workshop.
e. what else I can do to make this a good learning experience for them.

I find that the information that I get from this sort of LNRA really helps me understands their different motivations for attending, a sense of their prior experience / interest they are bringing and the Generative Themes that are common across the group. This insight helps me create a design that meets their needs, while also fulfilling my goals for the event and those of the client.

At the beginning of the workshop, I also invite them to review the agenda and Achievement-Based Objectives that I’ve put together for them and then name _their_ personal learning expectations for this program. This lets me double check what I heard in the LNRA, pick up any people I didn’t connect with before, and capture any new expectations that have arisen since the LNRA. It also helps them to hear from each other to check their own goals and motivations. Often this information just confirms that what I’ve designed is on target, but other times it names some expectations that I hadn’t anticipated. If so, I then do what I can to meet these needs (e.g. through supplemental materials) and to adjust the program to their needs as we go . We always review these at the end to see how well we met them. And we also do regular learning synthesis and check-in tasks throughout the session to make sure that we’re on track.

But even with all of this checking in, there are always a people who demonstrate Resistance. How I react depends on what kind of resistance it is. If it is resistance to the learning process (e.g. learning styles, pace, group work that exhausts the introverts, language, etc.), I adjust the program. If it is resistance to the topic, I celebrate it because it means they are engaged (as long as that resistance is respectful). The challenge then is to meet that resistance and take it as an opportunity to engage in a deeper dialogue.

Great blog! Looking forward to hearing more.