Book Review: Influence is Your Superpower with Jason Erlich
In this episode, we’re joined by Jason Erlich, an employment lawyer out in California, and we talk about a book we both read called “Influence is Your Superpower: The Science of Winning Hearts, Sparking Change, and Making Good Things Happen.” The author, Zoe Chance, put a lot of her research into this book about influence and the psychology of influence. As trial lawyers, this is a useful and thoughtful book on motivation and persuasion. Many of the concepts transition easily into courtroom and the running of a law practice.
Most people feel very uncomfortable trying to influence others. Zoe Chance provides examples and research that influence comes down to brain science and how we are wired as humans. Her book gives us an understanding of how our brains work and how we can apply some of her ideas, as trial lawyers, in talking to jurors, opposing counsel, mediators, or whoever else. It’s also interesting how this could be applied in your personal life.
It’s always coming from a frame of good influence. She talks a lot about her class and what she has her class do, including a couple of experiments that they do. So it’s a very fun, light read where you will also find some interesting and applicable concepts.
In this episode, you will hear:
- The gator brain vs the judge brain
- How to deal with a juror who disagrees with you
- How to deal with a juror who is bad for you
- The importance of focus groups in detecting a liar
- How to deal with disagreement in focus groups
- How we say things and ask people
Subscribe and Review
Have you subscribed to our podcast? We’d love for you to subscribe if you haven’t yet.
We’d love it even more if you could drop a review or 5-star rating over on Apple Podcasts. Simply select “Ratings and Reviews” and “Write a Review” then a quick line with your favorite part of the episode. It only takes a second and it helps spread the word about the podcast.
Supporting Resources:
Learn more about the author Zoe Chance: www.ZoeChance.com
Purchase the book Influence is Your SuperPower: The Science of Winning Hearts, Sparking Change, and Making Good Things Happen
Big Thanks to Guest Jason Erlich!
If you would like to learn more about Jason and his practice please visit his website: https://erlich.lawyer/attorneys/jason-erlich/
If you have questions or a particularly challenging client preparation, email Elizabeth directly for assistance: elizabeth@larricklawfirm.com.
Episode Credits:
If you like this podcast and are thinking of creating your own, consider talking to my producer, Emerald City Productions. They helped me grow and produce the podcast you are listening to right now. Find out more at https://emeraldcitypro.com Let them know I sent you.
Episode Transcript:
Elizabeth Larrick: Hi there, Elizabeth here. I wanted to pop in real fast before our episode starts to introduce our guest who you’ve heard me speak with before, Jason Erlich, who is an employment lawyer out in California. If you have any questions for Jason or if you have an employment matter in [00:01:00] California, his contact will be in the show notes as it was before.
He was on in February to talk about direct exam for clients. So we’re going to use this episode to talk about a book we both read about influences your superpower. Hope you enjoy. Hello, and welcome back to the podcast. I’m excited to have Jason join us again from California. Hello, Jason.
Jason Erlich: Hi, Elizabeth.
Thanks for having me back.
Elizabeth Larrick: Yeah. We wanted to bring Jason back because I want to do a book review today. So the book we’re going to review today is influence is your superpower by Zoe chance. I was turned on to this book by one of my business coaches, Ernie Svensson, Ernie, the attorney. I talked about him quite a bit, but.
He was turned on to it by a review by Robert Cialdini, who wrote Influence. And Zoe Chance has just built a little more on that concept. She teaches at the Yale School of Business. She’s got a doctorate in marketing. She’s worked at Mattel. She’s worked for Google, lots of big companies. And she’s basically [00:02:00] kind of put a lot of her research into this book.
About influence and psychology of influence. And I think it’s going to be really helpful for everybody out there listening because we’re all trial lawyers. We’ve got to deal with jurors. We’ve got clients. We’ve influence adjusters. This was a great book for me. But before I get into it, Jason, I’m going to ask you, what were your thoughts about the book?
Jason Erlich: What I found most engaging with the book was This idea that first when I read it, she was coming from a marketing perspective. And I thought I’m a little wary of marketing and that kind of world. But then as I started to dive into it, she really says, look, nobody likes to be influenced and nobody likes to feel manipulated or taken advantage of.
And so we have this sort of automatic bias against being influenced and also that. We feel very uncomfortable or most people feel very uncomfortable trying to influence others. [00:03:00] And so when I really started to then, of course, kept reading it and was intrigued by her approach and her ideas is that she’s saying, look, this is brain science.
This isn’t anything. That is new. People have been studying this type of how our brains work for the last 30 and 40 years. And once you started to quote from books that I’ve read, mostly the thinking fast and slow by Daniel Kahneman, which was a fantastic book over 10 years ago now, I started to give her a chance and I said, okay, I think she has some interesting things to say.
And a lot of what came out of my reading of the book was. This makes sense. This is how our brains work. And this is how we can apply some of her thoughts to both work as a trial lawyer in talking to jurors, talking to opposing counsel, even talking to mediators or whoever else were coming and even our clients as well as okay.
Interesting. How this could be applied in your personal life. That’s my first.
Elizabeth Larrick: And she’s got, [00:04:00] what I always appreciate is she’s got some pretty broad concepts, but she’s got all kinds of other research that’s packed in there. And it always is coming from a frame of good influence. And she talks a little about the dark arts and like the ways that people have used in the past that have then created our weariness.
Like you said, like you immediately thought it was a marketing book and like, Wait a second. I’m not hold on here. I’m not going to be influenced by you. I love to a couple of the frames because she talks a lot about her class and what she has her class do and a couple of experiments that they do. So it’s a very fun, light read.
It’s not super heady, which I mean, respectfully thinking fast and slow can be a little bit, can be a little bit thick and a little bit heady. This is very light. And I thought she was a great teacher of a lot of concepts she had in there.
Jason Erlich: Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, no, you’re right. She does have that example of how do you trade up so that she gives her students a project and I don’t [00:05:00] remember exactly what they start with, but they start with some trinket, and then they trade up and then ultimately somebody ends up with a car or some sort of Cadillac or something like that so yeah it’s an interesting thought experiment that she gives her students of like how can you go from a small trinket Up to a car or a large item.
Elizabeth Larrick: And I think everybody starts in the class with something like you said, like a paperclip or a pen. And then their job is to go out and then literally take that object and trade it up with somebody else. And it’s like, how do you get somebody to do that? Just perceive value exchange. And she talks about in one particular class, they had some very ambitious individuals who.
Wentz got this long line of dry cleaner to this, to painting, to ultimately getting a car, which they then donated to a woman who didn’t have a car. And so it was just like this amazing experiment, but she was like, that’s. How our brains [00:06:00] work like that. And it’s just a simple game. It was just really, she’s got some cool examples like that for sure.
Jason Erlich: Absolutely. Yes.
Elizabeth Larrick: But what I really wanted us to focus on today is she has a great conversation in the beginning of her book, talking about kind of the two sides of the brain or the gator brain and the judge brain. And Jason and I are disciples of the edge trial strategy. Was before reptile. So I was going to get your kind of feedback on her thoughts and how she approached that gator brain judge brain.
Jason Erlich: Yeah, I think what she’s trying to make it simple and she’s building on a long history of science and experiments led by behavioral economists and psychologists. And so she really simplifies it as the gator brain is the lower conscious. And it’s always monitoring our environment for threats and opportunities.
And it’s part of our brain that really is based in emotion [00:07:00] and based in quick judgments, pattern recognition, because it kept us safe. And so she uses the idea and she gives this example of a gator, literally an alligator, if you thought tossed a piece of meat. Or to the alligator that’s outside of his or her bite zone.
It just ignores it. It like doesn’t have the energy. It doesn’t care. It won’t go for the meat and that that sort of brain is evolved with us over the millennia today. And then on the other side is this sort of judge brain that is sort of the conscious and rational brain that requires concentration. We don’t want to use it because.
We have limited resources, limited mental resources. So we take our, we don’t want to use that part of our brain and that’s calculating and strategizing and interpreting and making really hard decisions. So it’s a really simple explanation that she gives that for a kind of fairly complex part of our brains.
Elizabeth Larrick: And I like the way, one of the examples that she gives too is, [00:08:00] I’m going to make up the percentages here. 90 percent of the time we’re using our gator brain. These are fast, automatic, habit, done it before, automatic decisions. And the judge is about, gets to make about 10 percent of decisions. And she talks about going to the grocery store.
Like you don’t analyze every single purchase that you, or every single thing you put in your cart, you’d be there all day doing grocery. You’re using your gator to get, Oh, Hey, that’s on sale. That’s on sale. Oh, Hey, do that. And she said, that’s what we do most of the time. And when we go to actually use our conscious brain, use our judge.
Even then it’s information that’s filtered through the gator. So it’s very, still this very kind of emotional information. And a lot of it is confirmation bias. So it’s already based on a belief that we have, and even though we’re deliberating, trying to take both sides and be very logical about it, it’s still filtered through our gator emotional brains.
Jason Erlich: Yeah, it’s absolutely fascinating because if that’s the case, if 90 percent of our [00:09:00] decisions and actions and behaviors aren’t even at the conscious level, but we are so confident that it is at the conscious level that we are rational. Our will is taking, we are making conscious rational decisions and it’s our sense of our act of will.
And we’re very confident. That’s the judge part that sort of plays in that sort of overlays and makes us believe that this is a. Intentional act that I’m making a decision about when in reality, it’s not, it’s unconscious, it’s the gator brain that’s driving your decisions.
Elizabeth Larrick: And
Jason Erlich: it’s challenging as a person, because even if I know that, I don’t have a sense that I can control that.
So it’s a fascinating process of even as you’re going through your life, that you think you’re making conscious, rational decisions, but we’re not.
Elizabeth Larrick: And I think that forming a habit, there’s all these books and not forming of habit takes 21 days, 30 days. And when I think about like, there’s no way trying to reprogram this brain to do [00:10:00] maybe a habit that you already had, and you’re trying to make a healthy habit.
And they have all kinds of tips and tricks to make it easy and stuff, but it’s truly just kind of like how many decisions. And then it goes back to who’s influencing my gator brain. And one of the things. I hear a lot about, and especially when it comes to our profession as lawyers, we have a lot of already built in emotions when it comes to what a lawyer is supposed to be and our mindsets and changing those things is difficult and hard.
And let me just give an example with witness prep. That concept of preparing a client for testimony Has come into a box and that’s what we all, Oh, that’s what we learned. We, and so changing that is a threat to people taking their time, everything else. And so introducing a new concept is definitely something where it’s like, okay, we know what we’re up against here.
And that’s half the battle is just knowing what’s in the Gator brain or space. And we were talking about getting ready or talking about this episode. What does this mean as a trial [00:11:00] lawyer? Jury selection is a great example of this because everybody walks in and they’re in full gator mode. Right? They do not want to be there.
We’re a threat. Everybody’s a threat. We’ve taken their time. We can make them stay longer. And I think there are people who just, they never get out of that. Then those are people you just don’t want on the jury. What are your thoughts on that?
Jason Erlich: Yeah, no, I think she has some really interesting ideas that apply to jury selection in the process.
Absolutely. If everyone is coming in and they don’t want to be there, they’re going to feel under threat because it’s a room full of lawyers and a judge who are there to cross examine them, make them look silly or stupid, put words in their mouth. And so absolutely that they’re on high alert to. Be it the threat, like I’m looking around this room.
I don’t know these other people. These are strangers to me. And so how do I protect myself? I stay closed in. I don’t talk to anybody. I read my book, all of the things that we see when jurors first [00:12:00] come into a room for that day of jury selection. But one thing that did jump out to me is she talks a little bit about influence as Influence is not going to change people’s minds.
You’re not going to convince somebody who already has a view to change their mind. Instead, what I found most engaging was this idea of gathering enthusiastic allies to find, empower, and motivate them will get you much further along to overcome any sort of resistance. So that really resonated with me of like, when we’re doing jury selection, It’s finding those enthusiastic allies, which is who are those people that you can talk to who will be your allies and hopefully in the end of the day be that ally in the jury room when they’re making the decision.
Elizabeth Larrick: I think that is a an extremely strong point let’s emphasize it one more time. I see so many times when lawyers go into jury selection, and they’ll ask a question and they’ll [00:13:00] get the opposite answer they want, and instead of. Absorbing or thank you or tell me more like they dig in. What if you had this back?
What if you had this thing? And it’s, Hey, you’re not going to change their mind. You’ve got, like you said, go find those enthusiastic allies.
Jason Erlich: Yeah. I don’t mean to jump on you, Elizabeth to cut you off, but because their gator brain is kicking in. The lawyer’s gator brain is kicking in, right? That person is a threat.
That person is going to turn and pour that case out. So I need to convince that person to change their mind because my case is at jeopardy. My, my win is at threat. And if this person is badger or who’s antagonistic to your case or your ideas is speaking out the unspoken, my gosh, we have to stop that person.
Let me shut them down. Let me ignore them, whatever it might be to make that threat go away.
Elizabeth Larrick: Absolutely. And I would suggest one alternative. And I was talking to a lawyer [00:14:00] this week. She was practicing jury selection in a focus group. And I said, you get somebody that’s got an opposite view or somebody who you think you’d be able to get, excuse off the jury.
Here’s what you would practice, right? Oh, you came in with that belief. Oh, you calm down your gator and channel that into like securing them either to get off or getting any of the other people who may agree with them. And how do you calm your gator? So you can keep going confidently around the room and jury selection, because You don’t want to get thrown off or spend all your time trying to convince this one person, then how are you influencing everybody else on the panel?
At this point, they’re going to be like, hold on a second. Is that how I’m going to be treated? If I give my opinion and what if I don’t agree with you?
Jason Erlich: That’s what that’s right.
Elizabeth Larrick: And it really
Jason Erlich: comes to the idea that we as lawyers are there to exaggerate manipulate lie perhaps on them [00:15:00] into something. And so, if we’ve already got that knowledge and that is how we are perceived.
By many, not all, but many, then how do we change that view, or at least present ourselves in a way that doesn’t cause that, and it’s not going to be the first person you talk to, it’s going to take some time, of course, but lay, laying out the facts, being a teacher, not exaggerating in the way that then, okay, this threat detection of this lawyer who’s going to try to, I know they’re up to something, is going to calm down and they’re going to be able to listen to the case and hear the evidence.
Elizabeth Larrick: Because otherwise, if you even lean just a little bit towards what they’re expecting of this greedy, Oh, confirmation bias right there. Oh, nope. Told you couldn’t be trusted. You know, it’s just like, ah, and you may not ever get back through to get them to open up and listen. So I appreciate the way she framed and talked about it and thinking about the trial [00:16:00] strategy and one of the things that I’ve learned.
I think keeps going through trial is if you had somebody who didn’t 100 percent agree with you and they end up on the panel, like, how can you keep continuing to try to, you know, when I say influence me, but you’ve got to keep talking to that person and keep talking to their. Particular brain to kind of, like you said, ease down and that way you have your allies in there who are going to come back in because again, you frame the case in a way that you know what your allies want to hear and what the evidence kind of supports in their brain.
Jason Erlich: Yeah, I think, yeah, and that’s, that is a challenge when talking about this book because that word influence almost seems like a four letter word that it’s a manipulative process. It’s a. On it’s a, and what you really throw home for me, the idea is that influence is what we do all the time. We have learned it because as babies, as small children, we needed to influence mom and dad to [00:17:00] protect us and to care for us.
Without some sort of influence, we would not have survived. We wouldn’t have made it to adulthood. So the idea that we’re influencing is like more in my idea that it’s just. I’m teaching. I’m not trying to manipulate you or I’m not trying to make you think something different or use the dark arts. It’s more, let’s teach.
And so to your question, or your example of like, how do you deal with a juror that might be bad for you and might be saying, expressing views that are, you’re concerned about, but you’re, you have to live with that person. Yeah. I think one of the best ways is to present the case facts that show that your case isn’t what they believe to be the case.
An employment law case where they have, let’s say a positive view of HR, or they think that the HR persons are there to help everyone. And when you start to then show that [00:18:00] in this case, the human resources, people didn’t help the client didn’t help the plaintiff and let that person twist in the wind and let them out to dry when they came for help, and then you start to show that.
Okay, yes, this juror has a positive view of human resources, but they can still keep that positive view. But in this case, and in this situation, HR failed the plaintiff’s employee.
Elizabeth Larrick: I think that kind of also goes back a little bit with edge reptile teaching about when people have expectations. And it’s okay if they’re good or they’re bad, but nailing to know what it is, like you said, you got to aim for it to know which way to influence them.
So to speak, I do appreciate, like you said, he’s trying to ease down off of this persuasion, right? Into more of like influence. And she talks a lot about one of the things that we, Are really bad at as humans is spotting lies. She totally debunks that [00:19:00] there’ve been thousands and thousands and hundreds of thousands of studies on hundreds of thousands of people that say, basically, no, we can’t do it.
Like we’re 5 percent better than random chance, which is, that’s right.
Jason Erlich: The worst part of, or not the worst incredibly challenging part is we think we’re really good at it. We are extremely confident in our assessment that somebody is a liar, yet, as you said, like, that it’s a no better than a flip of a coin.
I think she even said that even experts are only do 10 percent better than a random flip of a coin. So yeah. And if we’re really bad at spotting liars, yet we think we’re really good at it and everyone’s quite confident that they are, how do we address that in trial? I had some thoughts. I don’t know if you had some, but I was just thinking about this.
It was that. Oh, okay. If I am focus grouping my case and I’m talking to jurors and I show them clips of a witness and the testimony and they come at me and they say this person’s a [00:20:00] liar. Why? What did you see? Because going back to those snap judgments, those, she called, she even talked about this thing called thin slices, thin slices of body language, tone of voice, faces, thin slices of body language, tone of voice, faces, Thank you.
They conveyed valuable information. That’s the gator brain that then what’s if that’s true, which I think it is, then that that says this person is a liar because there’s a moment in time, a very thin slice that the body at language or tone of voice. So then, okay, how do we then either use it to our advantage to undermine credibility, see this person’s a liar or to flip it and say, no, this person can be believable and make those small changes that we need to with our witnesses.
Elizabeth Larrick: Yeah. And I think for me, when I was reading that was, and I get, when we do focus groups all the time, like quite a bit, people say, we’ve got this person and they’re a total liar. And I’m like, How good is it? Because you may think it’s really obvious and other people and focus groups are just like, they don’t get it.[00:21:00]
We talk about, you have got to get it. It has got to be crystal stinking clear. It can’t be a hunch because someone’s hunch could go the opposite way. So it means like you got to have it documented and it’s confirmed and then reconfirmed. And practicing it with focus groups, I think significantly helps you gain that.
Okay. We’ve got, it’s clear enough. We’re not going on a hunch and, or the opposite where it’s just, let’s say it’s your client and the focus group hunch is like, they’re lying. Are they’re creating a scheme or whatever kind of conspiracy to do all this medical care or deceive their employer. And then it’s just kind of like, okay, if that’s the hunch, like we got to go the other way.
Again, same thing, like be sure and make sure that person with Evidence outside of just the witness to confirm it. And even when, if we have some people like that, especially when I work with clients that way, who there’s been focus groups and that’s a perception is that, Oh, they’re not [00:22:00] really truthful or they’re hiding something.
Then it’s okay. When we talk about things, you need to pair it with your, I said this, and I followed up with an email kind of conversational, but that, because that needs to be in part of the language that they’re talking about Testament.
Jason Erlich: And because there’s, If they’re no good, the jurors are no good at detecting a liar, but they are very good at believing they know who a liar is.
And it’s okay, let’s find out why, what is it that you’re seeing? And if I think I used to think about this slightly differently, and I didn’t say, I’m no good at detecting a liar. Nobody else is. So I’m just going to let it slide because they’re not going to, nobody can really say who’s a liar and who’s not.
But once I started realizing that I tested things with focus groups and I got the feedback, then that people are not truthful, it’s why. And then you in trial, if you know that information, you can push those [00:23:00] themes, push those ideas that this person can’t be trusted. And here’s why. And that can be a valuable strategy, but you wouldn’t know that until you Tried it, tested it, and found out from a focus group what they think of this person.
Elizabeth Larrick: Yeah, and a lot of this book just really confirmed for me, like, you gotta figure out how things in your case are influencing people before you get there, so that you can be prepared for what you may hear in jury selection, and then be able to use your advantage. Or dispel and debunk along the way. But without doing focus groups, you’re really just guessing, you’re guessing at how people are going to talk to you or react in jury selection.
And you could have a great day at the courthouse with a great panel. And the next day you get stuck with the terrible stinky panel. It’s just not talking like, but you would have experienced that in focus group and also the disagreement. I think. We get so entrenched as lawyers and in our [00:24:00] cases. And that’s a good thing because that’s what makes us a zealous advocate for our clients.
But that can also make you super entrenched when somebody disagrees with you, like we talked about, like, you can’t let it go. You go after it versus if you practice and focus group, like letting that being okay with moving on to that next person, that is a skill. A hundred percent believe that is a skill of just being like.
All right. Cool. I’m going to go to this next person and keep talking to them and gather their information and staying very neutral facing.
Jason Erlich: Absolutely. Absolutely. Yeah. No, I think it’s critical. And until I started doing it myself, I didn’t understand how important it was. I think I would in the past, I would have simply just, I heard a bad response.
From somebody and I just moved on. Like, I just wanted to avoid that problem. If I don’t talk to that person, I can just move on and that the problem is solved, but realizing that [00:25:00] there’s more, you can, there’s a lot more that you can gain and just having that ability to engage that person, even when they seem very hostile, because there’s going to be an outcome that is most likely good for you, which is one they’ll expose their bias, in which case they can get off for cause.
Or you can use that person as the counterpoint, point counterpoint, you know, that I, okay, who agrees with juror number three here on this issue. Oh, let’s see who else might be antagonistic to my case. And if you’re afraid of it, like I used to be, then you would just move on and not know that juror number 12 perfectly agrees with juror number three.
And they’re just going to form a little alliance in the back room there that is going to dump your case.
Elizabeth Larrick: Yeah, and how you handle that as well. Because again, they’re slicing you, right? Like you said, they already have that inclination about you. They already made their Gatorade. You’re threatening them.
And when you just even slightly do something that then confirms it, boom, judges decided, you know what? [00:26:00] Jason’s no good. We’re not going to trust him. This is not good. This is all fake. No matter what else happens. And it’s just, it’s always just, okay, how can we keep that cool, calm. And I always tell people focus groups and getting up in front of a group of strangers is one of the best things I’ve ever done in order just to be a better communicator, to be more understanding, because I learned I don’t always speak as clearly as I do in my mind.
And that’s. One of the things she talks about too in the more applicable, some of the chapters is how we say things, how we ask people, and she talks about one of the things that they know, as far as measuring something that is going to be how successful you will be in getting clients or anything is how easy was it.
I mean, her example was there was a traffic court in New York city that they studied that basically said they did. I can’t remember one reminder of a court date. Yeah. And just [00:27:00] one reminder, like two days before got 40 more percent people to show up versus no reminder. And it was just like, Hey, that one little reminder can significant because it made it easy.
Oh yeah. Okay. That’s the other thing too, is don’t make it hard for jurors to go along with you. Like when you complicate it, you make it difficult. When it gets difficult, they’re more likely to be like, no, I don’t think so. So we want to make it easy. That means we got to make it clear you some of the things she was talking about.
Jason Erlich: Yeah, absolutely. No, I think that was what stood out to me. She had this statement that the people tend to take the path of least resistance. People take the path of least resistance. And if the simple case and the simple story is the path of least resistance, then they will follow it. And so if we make our cases simple, uncomplicated, then the gator is leading it and it’s going along and the judge is asleep, which the judge isn’t really even, the judge thinks that he or she is in charge, but it really it’s the gator [00:28:00] that’s driving it.
So I think that simplicity part really. That did drive home for me about how to truly explain our cases in a way that will activate people’s in a way that will lead them to our side
Elizabeth Larrick: and make it pass an easy path right safety rules, a checklist, right, a visual aid that tells the whole thing so you don’t have to go in there and describe it.
That’s half the battle. I think sometimes with lawyers is we do want to complicate it and then just we just lose people. Any other closing thoughts or any other things from the book you want to talk about?
Jason Erlich: Yeah, I think she makes this a very accessible book. As she said, like, you don’t have to read it page one to the last page.
You can jump into chapters. I thought you had some really good chapters on, again, the dark arts and why the dark arts and how people have used it and to try to manipulate cults and get with Ponzi schemes and get rich quick schemes and all those things and how people have, [00:29:00] have used this gator brain in this.
So it’s a nice reminder of why you can just quickly see the wrong way to take the. This idea of her books and she, then she has a book about women and women’s challenges in dealing with influence. As she says, negotiating while female, because she talks a lot about negotiation and negotiation strategy.
So I thought that was fantastic because there are biases and gender disadvantages that you have to, and not as women have to overcome. So there’s little bits of the book that can just appeal to different people, different points.
Elizabeth Larrick: Yeah. And I also thought you started out saying it too. There’s stuff that this could help in my personal life.
And one of the things she talks about is she did this, it worked with Google trying to make their campus, this giant campus to make it have healthier alternatives and have their employees be a little bit healthier. And they just talked about really simple things. Like one of them was like, They just changed like how the M& M’s were dispensed, [00:30:00] something so simple where it was like, at first they gave you a cup and they, everybody always filled their cup up.
And what she did was like, then she translated that to what would that mean for, so she said, if you do that, you know, basically that translated to a pound of fat a year. And then they changed it into these little pre packaged packages that had half of what a cuff. And then it was just like, yeah, everybody ate less.
So it’s just, it’s little things like that. She talks about where it’s just, this is not dark arts. This is about. We’re working with the brain you’ve got on positioning things. And remember, we’re trying to make it easy on ourselves and it’s little bitty things like that, where it’s okay. It’s not impossible.
I can work with this crazy gator brain in my personal life, but also, you know, knowing when we’re facing, even when we’re trying to have somebody sign up. What it is that they, what they need in the path of least resistance. And it’s, that’s why sometimes people who all they have to do is pick up a phone and somebody shows up at their house, [00:31:00] that’s really easy versus, Oh, I need you to come down to my office.
Now we have zoom as an alternative, but it’s just, it’s. So many little examples, like we’ll start popping up as you read the book, but either way, I totally would recommend the book. She also has on, she has a website. We’ll put show notes. We’ll have the link to the book and her website. And she has a lot of really great videos on YouTube as well, talking about the stuff and re explaining it.
And it’s helpful just to keep replugging through it because It’s a good reminder of, Oh, that’s right. You got to keep doing that. Awesome. Jason, thank you so much for joining us again and coming in and reviewing the book.
Jason Erlich: Thank you again, Elizabeth. It’s always a pleasure. Enjoy talking about these issues.
Elizabeth Larrick: Awesome. All right. Thank you all for listening. If you enjoy the podcast, please rate and review on your favorite listening app. And until next time, thank [00:32:00] you.