Persuasion vs. influence

We use the words interchangeably yet they are not the same.

Persuasion is the use of of words to make a compelling argument. It is often delivered through direct approach.

Anyone can try to be persuasive. We attempt to persuade people every day, in situations from sharing facts, our opinions, and preferences. Persuasion can be part of negotiation; a job interview is an attempt to convince someone they want us for the job. Asking for mentorship is often making a compelling pitch as to what a mutually beneficial relationship could bring.  Written or oral, carefully crafted or off the cuff, persuasion happens every day.  Persuasion is communication.

Influence is a combination of social status, power, relationships, trust, track record and other items that create brand. Influence is usually felt indirectly and over time.

Influencers are sought in the work place as mentors, project fixers and thought leaders. It takes more than a network to become an influencer. Influence implies excellent communication, strong relationships, forward thinking and credibility / trust.  Influence can be used to manipulate or to create bias.

Both persuasion and influence can be affected by word choice, biases, relationships, power/ control, and communication style.

Talk with your mentoring partner. Think of the difference as you expand or share your network. Build your skills in these arenas.

Enabling or controlling?

There are lots of rules and guidelines out there. Every day we each contribute a few more.. at home, at work, for ourselves and our communities. Beyond examining if our choice is being driven from fear or passion, the next step is to ask if the outcome is best served by something that enables or controls...

We can't have both. We've all been on projects with governance that was not clearly one or the other and folks often were confused as to how to make a decision and what the change really looked like.

So what's the difference?

Control: Be home by 11 pm.
Enable: Default is to be home by 11 pm unless there is prior agreement by both parties on a different time.

First one is finite and sets a clear boundary. Sometimes we need that. Sometimes we hate being treated like children and will push the boundary or ignore it.
Second one allows both parties (parent & child) to enable discussion, negotiation for earlier or later if the default will not work in a given circumstance.

Control: Thou shalt not kill.
Enable: Thou shall love, respect and protect each other.

Again, first one sets a boundary we all feel happier having. But it only eliminates one specific behaviour, leaving loopholes that many have exploited over the centuries. Which created more controls. Which had loopholes....  And it doesn't enable new behaviours in place of the one behaviour denied.

Control: Don't push that red button.
Enable: The following circumstances will require pushing the red button.

Control: Fill out this form on X.
Enable: Ensure X is fully documented.

Control:  I will not eat sugar.
Enable: I will make healthy food choices.

There is a place for controls. (Stop at the stop sign...) And one for enablers. However, their very nature means you must select which tone you need to set for your project, family, self, etc.

I prefer enabling governance (unless I'm Audit...) because people being people would prefer to feel like their judgment matters. Plus, there will always be a loophole; I'd rather it be a discussion than a rebellion.