SCOTT THAYER: Absolutely, Mike, and it is great to be with you again. I think it is extremely crucial that we understand number one, our message that we want to bring across, and then number two, to understand the mentality and mindset of the listener. The best way to do that is to get to know their values, get to know their beliefs, get to know
their attitudes so you can influence their behavior.

DR. SIEGEL: Well, then, let’s take that point. Let’s say you are going to be talking to a group of people about donating money to an organization that helps abused or neglected children, and they work with these children on a regular basis. If you were talking to a group of people in their 20s, primarily unmarried young people, young professionals, if you will, who do not have children themselves, Scott, would you approach them in the same way as you would a group of grandparents who are coming in to sit down and hear you about this issue and you want to get them to donate. Would the presentation to those 2 groups be similar, or would their be differences?

SCOTT THAYER: Simple answer is no, they would be extremely different. I think to the grandparent, you can relate to their emotional side because they have grandkids, and in their mindset, they can picture their grandkids going without who are hungry, maybe who are abused, whereas if you are speaking to a single individual with no kids and you want to appeal to them, you want to, you know, you would go after their greater sense of community and the greater since of their desire to be part of something bigger than what they actually are.

DR SIEGEL: Now that is a very important point, and I think it is pretty obvious in people listening and understand that when you come in, it is not a predesigned presentation, folks, that you want to make be persuasive. It has to be couched in terms of the attitudes, values, and beliefs of your audience. Obviously, if you have a group of young people in their 20s just starting out in their careers, they are going to look at this very differently in terms of donating to a charity that helps abused children than would a group of grandparents. That is an extreme example, but it is to make the point that every group has subtle differences. Even in a one-on-one conversation, there are subtle differences, and each message has to be presented in terms of those values or beliefs or attitudes of that particular person or of that group. But let’s go to the elements of persuasive communication, Scott, and deal with these one at a time. Historically and traditionally, these three have withstood the test of time. First one being source credibility. Give me your thought about what source credibility, see if you can, from that phrase, what do you think that means?

SCOTT THAYER: I would take that, Mike, as meaning the source being the presenter, being the speaker, the one who is trying to persuade. The credibility factor would come in; does the audience really believe that this presenter really knows his stuff, believes his stuff, but not only that, lives out his stuff that he is presenting. So source credibility, I would take that as meaning does the guy who is trying to persuade me really believe and live out what he wants me to do.