Why You Shouldn't Say "You're
Welcome"
The script is so deeply ingrained
that you don’t even need to think about it. When you do a favor, and someone
says “thank you,” the automatic response is “you’re welcome.” It’s a basic rule
of politeness, and it signals that you accept the expression of gratitude—or
that you were happy to help.
ponse
is far more enchanting than the perfunctory ‘You’re welcome.’ ”
But according to one leading
psychologist, this isn’t the best choice of words. After four decades of
studying persuasion, Influence author Robert Cialdini has
come to see “you’re welcome” as a missed opportunity. “There is a moment of
power that we are all afforded as soon as someone has said ‘thank you,’”
Cialdini explains. To capitalize on this
power, he recommends an unconventional reply:
“I know you’d do the same
for me.”
There
are at least three potential advantages of this response. First, it conveys
that we have the type of relationship where we can ask each other for favors
and help each other without keeping score. Second, it communicates confidence
that you’re the kind of person who’s willing to help others. Third, it
activates the norm of reciprocity, making sure that you feel obligated to pay
the favor back in the future.
As
Guy Kawasaki writes in Enchantment, “Cialdini’s phrase tells
the person who received your favor that someday you may need help, too, and it
also signals to the person that you believe she is honorable and someone who
will reciprocate. If this is the spirit in which you’re saying it, your
response is far more enchanting than the perfunctory ‘You’re welcome.’ ”
Although
the logic is compelling, and I’m a longtime admirer of Cialdini’s work, I’ve
never felt comfortable saying this phrase out loud. At first I thought I was
too attached to politeness rules. How could I leave a “thank you” just hanging
in the air without the proper acknowledgment? Awkward.
That
explanation fell apart, though, when I realized I could just combine politeness
with Cialidni’s response: “You’re welcome—I was happy to do it. I know you’d do
the same for me.”
It
didn’t change my mind. The response still left a bad taste in my mouth.
Eventually, I realized the problem was the subtle appeal to reciprocity.
There’s nothing wrong with trading favors or asking others to repay the help
you’ve given, but when I chose to help people, I wanted to do it without
strings attached. I didn’t want to leave them feeling like they owed me. So I
stuck with the familiar, banal “you’re welcome,” which was mildly
dissatisfying. Why do we utter this strange phrase?
In
English, it’s a relatively new arrival. Over the past century, “you’re welcome”
has evolved to connote that it’s my pleasure to help you or “you are welcome to my
help,” which we tend to say more directly in other languages like Spanish and
French (“the pleasure is mine,” “it was nothing,” “no problem”). Is there a
better alternative?
I
stumbled upon an answer after meeting Adam Rifkin, a serial entrepreneur who
was named Fortune’s best networker. He goes out of his way to help a
staggering number of people, doing countless five-minute favors—making introductions,
giving feedback, and recommending and recognizing others. After Rifkin does you
a favor, it’s common for him to reach out and ask for your help in return.
At
first, it seems like he’s just following the norm of reciprocity: since he
helped you, you owe him. But there’s a twist: he doesn’t ask you to help him.
Instead, he asks you to help him help someone else.
Rifkin
is more concerned about people paying it forward than paying it back. In his
view, every favor that he does is an opportunity to encourage other people to
act more generously. That way, a broader range of people can benefit from his
contributions.
After
watching Rifkin in action, it dawned on me that Cialdini’s line could be
adapted. Instead of “I know you’d do the same for me,” how about this response?
“I
know you’ll do the same for someone else.”
Just
like Cialdini’s reply, it affirms your character as a person who’s happy to be
helpful. Unlike his version, it doesn’t deliver the implicit message that
you’re indebted to me, and I’m waiting for you to repay it.
It’s
just a sentence, but the underlying values have the potential to fundamentally
change the way that people interact. In traditional direct reciprocity, people
trade favors back and forth in pairs. In contrast, Rifkin’s approach is called
generalized reciprocity. As described by political scientist Robert Putnam in Bowling Alone, “I’ll do this for you
without expecting anything specific back from you, in the confident expectation
that someone else will do something for me down the road.”
If
you follow this approach, when you really need help, you have access to a
broader range of potential givers. If you stick to direct reciprocity, you can
only ask people you’ve helped in the past or might be able to help in the
future. In generalized reciprocity, you can extend your request to a wider
network: since you’ve given without strings attached, other people are more
inclined to do the same. In fact, social scientists James Fowler and Nicholas
Christakis have conducted experiments showing that acts of giving often spread “up to
three degrees of separation (from person to person to person).”
So
next time someone expresses appreciation for your help, it might be worth
stretching beyond politeness to ask them to pay it forward. I know you’ll do
that for someone else. http://www.linkedin.com/today/post/article/20131112175357-69244073-why-you-shouldn-t-say-you-re-welcome
No comments:
Post a Comment