In this episode of Friends, Chandler is
trying to persuade Rachel to unlock the handcuffs attaching him to the chair in
her boss’s office. He uses several negotiation techniques that start with him
asking her to come into the room,
‘Rachel, could I see you for a moment?’
This is called the foot in the door
technique which involves getting someone to comply with a large request by
making them comply to a small request first. Taylor and Booth-Butterfield (1993) found that people who signed a
petition against drink driving were more likely to accept the offer of being
called a taxi home whilst inebriated than people who did not sign the petition. Through getting Rachel to make a
commitment by asking her to come into the office first, Chandler increases the
chances of Rachel agreeing to release him.
Chandler also gives a reason for why he
should be set free, ‘she could be gone for hours,’ which further increases the
chances of compliance. Langer, Blank and
Chanowitz (1978) found that simply giving a reason for a request to use the
photocopier significantly increased the rate of compliance, even if the reason
was as arbitrary as ‘because I have to make copies.’ Therefore, by justifying
his request, Chandler increases the likelihood that Rachel will set him free.
Hearing this request, Rachel calculates
his alternatives as well as her own and asks for reciprocal concessions in
answer to the request, such as ‘you never see Joanna again!’ When Chandler
agrees to the concessions, Rachel releases him from the handcuffs.
Soon after releasing him, Rachel
realises that if her boss finds out that she went into her office, she could
lose her job. This means that she needs Chandler to stay handcuffed to the
chair to make it look like she has not been in the room and so she tries to
persuade him to sit back down. She then starts to offer a number of concessions
that she believes Chandler may want in exchange for being handcuffed to the
chair again. Research has shown that frequency often trumps quality in
negotiation situations. Alba and Marmorstein (1987), for example, found that
the mere number of positive attributes leads to leads to a perceived sense of
better quality. By providing a number of concessions, such as ‘what if I clean
your bathroom for a month’ and ‘I’ll squeeze you fresh orange juice every
morning,’ Rachel thereby increases the chances of Chandler agreeing to be
handcuffed to the chair once more.
However, Chandler makes it quite clear
that all that matters to him is his ‘FREEDOM!’ In one last attempt, Rachel
attempts to ascertain Chandler’s interests and how he values them whilst
identifying what she herself has to offer. So what could be better than
freedom? Everyone knowing that you are very… ahem… well-endowed of course! By
offering to spread this ‘generous’ rumour, Rachel creates value and trades it
for something that she wants and values more – handcuffing him to the chair and
thus keeping her job – so everyone’s a winner!
Alexandra Hampstead
References
Alba, J. W.,
& Marmorstein, H. (1987). The effects of frequency knowledge on consumer
decision making. Journal of Consumer
Research, 14, 14-25.
Langer, E., Blank, A., & Chanowitz, B. (1978). The mindlessness of ostensibly thoughtful action: The role of 'placebic' information in interpersonal interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 635-642.
Taylor, T., & Booth-Butterfield, S. (1993). Getting a foot in the door with drinking and driving: A field study of healthy influence. Communication Research Reports, 10, 95-101.
Langer, E., Blank, A., & Chanowitz, B. (1978). The mindlessness of ostensibly thoughtful action: The role of 'placebic' information in interpersonal interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 635-642.
Taylor, T., & Booth-Butterfield, S. (1993). Getting a foot in the door with drinking and driving: A field study of healthy influence. Communication Research Reports, 10, 95-101.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.