We Study Billionaires - The Investor’s Podcast Network - TIP616: The Godfather of Influence w/ Dr. Robert Cialdini

Starting point is 00:00:00 You're listening to TIP. On today's episode, I'm joined by Dr. Robert Chaldingy to discuss Charlie Munger's favorite book, which is titled Influence, The Psychology of Persuasion. Dr. Chaldini is a New York Times best-selling author of Influence and Presuasion, and is frequently regarded as the godfather of influence. During this episode, we cover the story of what led Charlie Munger to give a Berkshire A-Share to Dr. Chaldini, how Buffett and Munger use reciprocity to enrich not only the themselves but the world, what Chaldini learned in his personal interactions with Munger,

Starting point is 00:00:35 how the commitment and consistency bias can affect us as investors, why trust is at the foundation of all great business relationships, how we can utilize the principles of influence in an honest and ethical way, why the principle of scarcity is so powerful even in a world full of abundance, how we can guard ourselves against the liking bias when assessing management and much more. It was such an honor having Dr. Chaldeenia on the show, and I hope you enjoy this conversation as much as I did. Celebrating 10 years and more than 150 million downloads. You are listening to the Investors Podcast Network. Since 2014, we studied the financial markets and read the books that influence self-made billionaires the most.

Starting point is 00:01:21 We keep you informed and prepared for the unexpected. Now, for your host, Clay Fink. Welcome to the first. The Investors Podcast. I'm your host, Clay Fink, and boy, do we have a special guest teed up for the audience today as I'm joined by Dr. Robert Chaldeenie? Robert, thank you so much for joining me today. Well, I'm very happy to be with you. I'm looking forward to our conversation. Now, Robert, you had a very close relationship with Charlie Munger, who passed away on November 28th of last year. And in a post, you wrote, I have never had heroes except for Charlie Munger.

Starting point is 00:02:06 So I was curious to start this interview off if you could tell the story of how you met Charlie and what led to him reading your book, Influence, for the first time. My understanding of how he got a hold of it is he told me that a trusted confidant of his, an informant of his, had read the book and sent it to him and said, you really need to take a look at this. It's not about finance. It's not about economics, but it's about human behavior. and that allows us as analysts and investors to do a better job of predicting human behavior and making choices that benefit from that knowledge. That's how we got a whole of it.

Starting point is 00:02:50 And then this was a while ago, back decades now, and I then went to my mailbox knowing none of this and found a legal-sized envelope, and I opened it, and there was a single share of Berkshire A-stock in there with a note from Charlie Munger. Someone I had heard of, of course, but never had any contact with. And he said, in your book influence, your principle of reciprocity, which is that we are obligated to give back to those who have first given us, compensation in return. That's the way the world should work. Well, your book has made us so much money at Berkshire. entitled to this in return. And it was a share of stock. It was about $75,000 at that time. Well, if you're up on this morning's stock market, you know that it's over $600,000 now.

Starting point is 00:03:50 And yes, the best financial decision I've ever made is to hold on to that share. I like to talk more about reciprocity there. Munger and Buffett had said that they had made so much money using this principle. where other people feel obligated to pay back. It's like they're indebted when they've been given something. So are there any examples that come to mind for you where Buffett and Munger, they've used this principle of reciprocity in order to benefit others but also enrich themselves? They do something you see that's very rare in the business world, and that is they tell people, and they feel it that it's their obligation to tell people how they made.

Starting point is 00:04:35 their money, the strategies they use, the approaches they use, the values that they adhere to in order to acquire this kind of wealth that they have achieved. And they give that first. They give that out. So often, what you find is people being very proprietary about the ways that they got to success. What Charlie always told me is that it's the obligation of people who have done well to show others how to do well. That way we have a better functioning and a happier and a wealthier society because we spread the information of how to operate within that society in ways that benefit all concerned.

Starting point is 00:05:18 So I think that's the thing that they're talking about. Giving information, giving steps and procedures that have allowed them. Also, what they do is to give information about mistakes that they've made. They tell us when they have made an error and how they have then acted to prevent that from occurring again. I saw an article that showed that companies in their annual reports that describe a loss as something beyond their control. It was weather conditions or it was an unexpected strike at a manufacturing plant or something associated with supply line disruptions and so on. the COVID, you know, when they do those kinds of things versus those people who describe a negative outcome and attribute it to something inside the company that went wrong. We didn't staff

Starting point is 00:06:14 correctly. We didn't properly think through this initiative that we started. Those companies that assign the problem to themselves have significantly higher stock prices a year later. Because observers say, oh, this is fixable. This isn't beyond their control and they're on it. They're working to create. This is what the people at Berkshire do, what Warren and Charlie do. They say, we messed up here. That will never happen again because we will never do that again. We'll never pay for an acquisition with our shares. No, we're not going to do that anymore. The other thing is that's interesting is Warren does this. He likes making those admissions very early in his annual report. First or second page of what went wrong,

Starting point is 00:07:08 that structures for the observer, for the reader, something else that's a powerful principle of persuasion. These are credible sources of information. If they will tell us honestly of what they did poorly, then I want to listen when they tell us what they did well, because that's going to be honest too. They're not pulling any blankets of positivity over our eyes when they tell us about good choices they made because they've established themselves as honest sources of information by being willing to talk about their failures. Now we believe them more. You know, there's a wall of incredulity between a messenger and a recipient of the message, right? to what extent should I believe this person, right?

Starting point is 00:07:59 And one of the things that tears down that wall is trust, is evidence of trustworthiness. And both Charlie and Warren have that in spades. And they're not only brilliant financial analysts and investors. They're brilliant communicators about how good they are as financial investors. They make us register the truth of what they're recommending by first showing us their credibility. I mean, it's just brilliant and rare. That's right.

Starting point is 00:08:37 I think you're on the dot on the point of pointing out your mistakes. Even decades later, you mentioned the point of issuing shares that brings it to mind Dexter's shoe. I think it was 1992 where that investment definitely did not go well. But it's been mentioned many, many times. and it hasn't faded away from his memory, and he makes sure it hasn't faded from the memory of his partners either. And there's something to that that really builds trust. And I think it really develops something where when you see these guys, you know what you're getting. They're not trying to hide anything. And exactly how they're performing, they're going to tell you how it is.

Starting point is 00:09:10 And even in their best years, they're very quick to point out their mistakes of the past. But I wanted to turn back to Charlie here. You've stated that Charlie was a capitalist to the bone. But he advocated for a rarefied form, which was inclusive capitalism. I'm very curious to hear what this term inclusive capitalism means to you. There was another thing that impressed me to my core about him. He said to me once, the reason one major rationale for accumulating wealth is to have it available for those people who don't have. it in times of trouble. So it's not self-aggrandizing. It's not the idea of I accumulate wealth for my own purposes, for my own ego, whatever. It's no, to have it available and to include

Starting point is 00:10:06 others in those resources. That's a rationale for generating it in the first place that is so entirely morally responsible and commendable. You know, it's, it's a great indication of how Charlie thought about succeeding. He wanted to have the wherewithal to help others succeed in times of trouble when they were in a predicament. Speaking of including others, it was brought to my attention that you were a house guest for Charlie and Nancy a number of times, and Charlie had this way of, you know, not only sharing with the world at the Berkshire meeting and bringing in tens of thousands of people into this arena, but there's many times I've seen pictures of, you know, he'd invite guests to his house to have dinner and, you know, have small gatherings and just share what he's learned

Starting point is 00:11:00 throughout his life. And even just before his passing, I know he was doing this exact thing. You know, he was bringing people together and just surrounding himself by people he really liked. So maybe you could talk about some of those personal interactions you've had and maybe some of the things you've learned in those interactions. In that particular situation, he was going to be giving a major address at Caltech. And he invited me as his guest and asked me to come and spend the night before at his place. And I have to tell you, that was intimidating. Not the surrounding, it wasn't some palatial mansion.

Starting point is 00:11:35 It was a very wonderful and beautifully furnished plenty of great artwork and so on around. But it was intimidating because there I was on the, on the, the home grounds of this man who was a mentor to me, a hero to me. And so I was always walking on thin ice, I thought, you know, I had to do everything right to make every change. They had me stay in a beautiful guest room. And I didn't even want to ruffle the covers. I didn't want to mess anything up. I'm trying to figure, how do I sleep without touching the sheets? You know, So we then went to the address and we talked about things that we both recognize would be important in human behavior and making choices that lent themselves to final good decisions.

Starting point is 00:12:32 And we both hit upon in a conversation on the drive over there, the importance of considering the opposite of what you are intending to achieve. That is, always think, now what would happen to us if this doesn't work? What would be the damages associated with that mistake? And be sure you've recognized them because it might not work. Nothing certain. This might not work. And you have to think about not just what the enhancements would be if it did work to your life.

Starting point is 00:13:06 What would be the problematic aspects that would apply if it didn't? And sometimes if you haven't thought about those, you're making a judgment that is incomplete. You haven't really thought it completely through. And I remember that ride and that conversation as very important to me because he's right. When I would make a choice, I would think mostly about the benefits, the advantages that would accrue if it was successful, if it was a good choice, not about what the damage is. that might accrue if it went south. That was one thing.

Starting point is 00:13:47 I remember another thing that he said. He was talking in his afterwards. There was a Q&A. And he was talking, he kind of pointed to me and he said, you know, there's this principle of commitment and consistency. And this is inherent in another mistake that we often see people make. When they have a favorite approach, a favorite way of doing things or a particular tool that they want to advance.

Starting point is 00:14:14 And he said, you know, there's this saying, when you're committed to a hammer, the whole world looks like a nail, right? And he pointed to me, and I said, yeah, and the more you've paid for that hammer, the more nail-like the world appears. And that's the first time I ever made him laugh out loud where he leaned back and roared.

Starting point is 00:14:40 But I think what he's recognizing is that we can get trapped by certain kinds of commitments that we make. And we really have to vet them fully before we go all in with those kinds of commitments. Let's take a quick break and hear from today's sponsors. All right. I want you guys to imagine spending three days in Oslo at the height of the summer. You've got long days of daylight, incredible food, floating saunas on the Oslo Fjord. and every conversation you have is with people who are actually shaping the future. That's what the Oslo Freedom Forum is.

Starting point is 00:15:15 From June 1st through the 3rd, 2026, the Oslo Freedom Forum is entering its 18th year, bringing together activists, technologists, journalists, investors, and builders from all over the the world, many of them operating on the front lines of history. This is where you hear firsthand stories from people using Bitcoin to survive currency collapse, using AI to expose human rights abuses. and building technology under censorship and authoritarian pressures. These aren't abstract ideas. These are tools real people are using right now.

Starting point is 00:15:47 You'll be in the room with about 2,000 extraordinary individuals, dissidents, founders, philanthropists, policymakers, the kind of people you don't just listen to but end up having dinner with. Over three days, you'll experience powerful mainstage talks, hands-on workshops on freedom tech, and financial sovereignty, immersive art installations, and conversational. conversations that continue long after the sessions end. And it's all happening in Oslo in June. If this sounds like your kind of room, well, you're in luck because you can attend in person. Standard and patron passes are available at Osloof Freedom Forum.com with patron passes offering deep access, private events, and small group time with the speakers. The Oslo Freedom Forum isn't

Starting point is 00:16:30 just a conference. It's a place where ideas meet reality and where the future is being built by people living it. If you run a business, you've probably had the same thought lately. How do we make AI useful in the real world? Because the upside is huge, but guessing your way into it is a risky move. With NetSuite by Oracle, you can put AI to work today. NetSuite is the number one AI cloud ERP, trusted by over 43,000 businesses. It pulls your financials, inventory, commerce, HR, and CRM into one unified system. And that connected data is what makes your AI.

Starting point is 00:17:06 smarter. It can automate routine work, surface actionable insights, and help you cut costs while making fast AI-powered decisions with confidence. And now with the NetSuite AI connector, you can use the AI of your choice to connect directly to your real business data. This isn't some add-on, it's AI built into the system that runs your business. And whether your company does millions or even hundreds of millions, NetSuite helps you stay ahead. If your revenues are at least in the seven figures, get their free business guide, demystifying AI at netsuite.com slash study. The guide is free to you at net suite.com slash study. NetSuite.com slash study.

Starting point is 00:17:47 When I started my own side business, it suddenly felt like I had to become 10 different people overnight wearing many different hats. Starting something from scratch can feel exciting, but also incredibly overwhelming and lonely. That's why having the right tools matters. For millions of businesses, that tool is Shopify. Shopify is the commerce platform behind millions of businesses around the world and 10% of all e-commerce in the U.S. from brands just getting started to household names.

Starting point is 00:18:17 It gives you everything you need in one place, from inventory to payments to analytics. So you're not juggling a bunch of different platforms. You can build a beautiful online store with hundreds of ready-to-use templates, and Shopify is packed with helpful AI tools that write product descriptions, and even in enhance your product photography. Plus, if you ever get stuck, they've got award-winning 24-7 customer support. Start your business today with the industry's best business partner, Shopify, and start hearing sign up for your $1 per month trial today at Shopify.com slash WSB.

Starting point is 00:18:55 Go to Shopify.com slash WSB. That's Shopify.com slash WSB. All right. Back to the show. Just to link this to sort of an example, what is a common kind of pitfall of this commitment and consistency bias that people fall prey to? Yeah, it's the idea that because you've put a lot of money into something, you don't want to get out because that will be a loss.

Starting point is 00:19:26 Even though all the signs are you're going to continue to lose unless you get out, The fact that you have made that initial commitment causes you to try to make it work somehow or through wishful thinking, try to conjure a way that you can make that the situation will improve. That's a really a mistaken way of thinking of working through decision making. You've got to disengage from that commitment when the evidence is clear that it is not going to rescue you down the line. This reminds me of an example you included in your book on the chapter on commitment and consistency.

Starting point is 00:20:10 And it was related to Amazon. This was probably before they were presumably having issues with labor shortages in 2022. But Amazon used to have a paid-equit program for their employees. And they would actually gift their employees who decided to leave the company up to $5,000. And the longer you stayed, the bigger, the incentive. bonus was. And publicly, Amazon said that they wanted people to work at Amazon who actually wanted to be there and actually be doing the job they were put to do. So it was sort of a filtering mechanism. But you actually made the claim that the commitment and consistency bias was also

Starting point is 00:20:47 at play in the pay to quit program. So could you talk more about that? Yeah. So what it, in fact, Jeff Bezos even admitted to it. He said, we want to give these folks the opportunity to leave us and even give them an incentive to a considerable amount. But we don't want them to leave. We want them to recognize that they don't want to leave, even at that level, because that commits them to the job, the idea that, no, this is what I'm choosing. And if you know the literature on organizational dynamics, people are more productive. the more committed they are to the work. So with this strategy, by the way, very few people ever took the deal.

Starting point is 00:21:39 I mean, it's like less than 5% ever do. So you get 95% of people making a choice that commits them more deeply to their work. And as a consequence, improves their productivity. That's a good deal. So you related this principle to investing. And for many people listening to our show, maybe they spend 10, 20, 40 hours researching a company before they end up putting a significant amount of money in. And I'm curious to get your take on psychologically when we invest in a company, when we bet on a horse or put chips on red on the roulette wheel, whatever it is. Psychologically, what is happening, you know, that makes us essentially everyone just sort of fall prey to this bias?

Starting point is 00:22:27 Yeah, what we've been talking about is essentially the sunk cost fallacy. The more you've put into something, the more reluctant you are to admit to the error that you made a bad choice, that you are a bad decision maker. People don't want to believe that about themselves. And they don't want the people around them to see them that way either. Okay, I took this big loss. They're more willing to hang on and hope that it will eventually succeed in ways that validate their decision making. And that sort of keeps them from pulling the trigger when all the evidence suggests, no, you need to get out of this. This isn't a good choice now and it's going to be a worse choice in the future. You had mentioned earlier, you know, how these principles sort of tie

Starting point is 00:23:19 into how Munger and Buffett operate. And I find this aspect just so, so interesting because what you see is really what you get. And the shareholders know that there are no surprises, or big surprises coming at least. And if there are big surprises, they're going to be well known to all of their partners. And there's just something to me about this very ethical way of doing business that it's almost amazing to me that it worked as well as it did. Because, you know, I think about like a number of successful people. Obviously, there are nuances and everyone's different, but you look at a number of successful people and especially a very successful salespeople. They're pretty notorious for being the type of people you sometimes just want to run away from when you realize some of the tactics

Starting point is 00:24:04 that they're using. But for Buffett and Munger is very much the opposite, where they've just attracted all these wonderful people around them. Many people in the audience, myself included, go to Omaha and just absolutely love it. We're surrounded by these like-minded people that just love tuning into what these two have had to say over many, many years. So maybe you could talk more about how these principles of influence tie into applying these principles in a way that's ethical. Yeah. So in this, let's first talk about the idea of the perception in the eyes of your prospects or colleagues or customers, clients, that you are ethical. It's a remarkably positive lever for change in your direction, in the direction of the recommendations or proposals that you're making

Starting point is 00:24:55 to people. I speak, I do public speaking these days, often to business organizations. And I was at a group of real estate investors and salespeople, actually, some real estate salespeople. And I was talking about the importance of if you're presenting a case to somebody, you always have pros and cons. And the key, if you want to follow the lead of Buffett and Munger, is to mention those weaknesses, those shortcomings in your case early in your presentation so that everything after that is perceived through the lens of, oh, this person is a credible, trustworthy source of information. I can believe the positive things this person is saying. So I was making that case.

Starting point is 00:25:44 and a hand goes up in the Q&A period, and somebody says, you know, I have competitors. They bury those negative things. They never speak about them at all. And if I'm the one who talks about them and then, you know, I'll accept your view that then I can bridge to the positive ones. But by mentioning a negative one in the first place, I think I would be at a disadvantage. So I said, well, look, if all the others are doing this and you're not, think about the reputation you would generate as being the ethical one, being the honest one, being the trustworthy one that people can deal with. That's gold. So it's gold.

Starting point is 00:26:33 Don't fumble that away if you can generate it honestly. It's really short-term versus long-term thinking, right? If you're hiding the cons, really, you're just trying to make a short-term sale. But if you're trying to find that right customer that, like, truly needs that sort of product, then you can deliver value to them over a very long period of time. And that trust endures over time. And that's what you see in a lot of companies that focus on that long-term, like a Costco, like a Munger talked so often about.

Starting point is 00:27:03 Clay, have you ever dealt with somebody who tricked you into a decision, a purchase, or got you to buy something and then it was not at all what was claimed by this person, right? Have you ever been? You know, we all have. Well, I had one example I was going to mention. I was walking the streets in Miami and I had someone approached me. And they asked me a question, have you ever had a poor experience in a hospital? And I said, well, of course. I mean, like, who hasn't?

Starting point is 00:27:36 We all go to the hospital a number of times. And eventually there's something you might not like or, you know, some sort of experience that's outside of your control. And then they proceeded to get me to donate to a hospital and, you know, donate to like a children's hospital. And it was like, oh, right after I made the donation, I had realized, I was just persuaded to make a decision I didn't want to. You're tricked into it, right? Would you ever go back to interact with that guy? Would you ever partner with that person? Would you ever want to do business with that?

Starting point is 00:28:08 So that's the cost that comes, as you say, down the line. There's that short-term hit. But you've alienated. You've poisoned the water for future interactions if you're that guy. You know, you're not the honest guy. You're not the honest one. So I won't deal with them in the future. Yeah.

Starting point is 00:28:28 And I think most of us are like that. one really fascinating aspect of your book is that one can read it and try and internalize all of these concepts related to influence and persuasion, but we can still fall prey to them because these ideas are deeply ingrained in a part of who we are and these biases. Can you talk more about that and how we can be more aware of these sort of tactics and not fall prey to these types of situations? Right. And this is really an important question. In fact, in my book influence at the end of, you know, I have one principle of persuasion per chapter. I have, you know, seven of these universal principles of influence and I treat them. And then at the end of each chapter, I say, how do you say no? When somebody uses this on you in an undue or unwelcome unethical way, what do you do? So let's take the principle of scarcity, the one that, the one that,

Starting point is 00:29:28 says people want more of what they can have less of, that things that are unique or rare, dwindling in availability, become more attractive to us, and we want them more as a consequence. Well, usually that works very well. Those things that are scarce, are leaving our possibility of obtaining something that's valuable, it makes sense to want to get those unique advantages or benefits and so on. Okay. Well, the problem is when somebody counterfeits that information. Otherwise, living up to a behavior pattern in which you seize those opportunities, where you're dealing with truly credible individuals or people who have given to you first and so on.

Starting point is 00:30:18 And those things always make sense. They make for a better set of interactions with our partners, with our compatriots, our contemporaries, and so on. if we live up to seizing those opportunities that are there. And I'll give you an example from scarcity. A while ago, I was in an appliance store, and I wasn't really looking for a TV, but I noticed there was a big screen TV that was on sale. And I knew from reading consumers' reports that this was a very highly approved and evaluated set.

Starting point is 00:30:54 So I was over there, and I was reading some of the material that was associated. with it underneath this on the table. And the salesman came up to me. And he said, I see you're interested in this set at this price. I can see why. This is a great deal. But I have to tell you, it's our last one. And already I was, well, it's your last one. I started to get tense. And he said, yeah. And there was a woman who called a while ago who said, she might welcome in this afternoon to buy it. Well, they call me the godfather of influence, right? the guru of invoos. 20 minutes later, I'm wheeling out of the store with that set in my cart. Okay, because of, and I knew that it was the principle of scarcity that was being used on me.

Starting point is 00:31:42 But what I didn't know was whether it was honest or not. I didn't know if that was really the last one or whether there were a bunch more in the stock room and they would just use this tactic to get people to buy and then they'd just replenish the spot with a, set. But I bought it because, you know, I believe this guy. At least I thought, all right, this is a good enough deal. I want to seal the deal. But I wanted to know if it was true. So I went back the next day to see if there was another one of those models on the table. No, there wasn't. It was a blank space. So I was happy that this man told me it was the last. one. If he hadn't told me, and I came back later that night to purchase, I went to think about

Starting point is 00:32:35 and I said, no, I really want this. And I came back and he said, oh, it's gone. It was our last one. And a woman from Scottsdale just came down and bought it. I would have been furious at him. What? It was the last one? And you didn't tell me about its honest, genuine scarcity? What's wrong with you, man? Right. So the key. is, I applaud people who use these principles on me if they're honest, if they truly are accurate and they are representing the truth of whether it's truly scarce, whether there's true authorities or recommending it, whatever the principle might be. It's the people who are deceiving us by counterfeiting that information. Those are the ones we have to watch out for.

Starting point is 00:33:28 So that's what I think we have to do. We have to look not just at the information. We have to see the extent to which the information, as best we can tell, is honest. If we can't tell before we buy, we can do what I did. We can then experience it. And then if it falls short, if it really isn't what we expected or what we were told, then we can be aggressive and get online and review that place and that person negatively. We don't have to be passive victims of this.

Starting point is 00:34:11 We can counter punch and reduce the likelihood that this sort of thing happens without penalties associated for the people who use these principles unethically. Right. And it's just a good reminder of how much is in our own heads, right? You know, someone tells you this is the last one on the shelf and there's going to be no more after this. And in your mind, it's like, oh, the perceived value of it just increased. And I can't help but think of when I was shopping for a house of five or so years ago. And, you know, you're shopping around looking at different places and you kind of get interested in one. And you're like, okay, I'm not going to make a quick decision here. I'm going to think about it, consider if it's something I really want. And then you get that text from your real estate agent and says, oh, someone else is interested in placing an offer on that place. And it's like, huh, I wonder if that was the honest deal because he could be, you know, just trying to spark more interest because he makes a commission on the sale.

Starting point is 00:35:12 And the scarcity piece to me is just so fascinating because compared to decades ago, we just live in a world of abundance. You know, if something isn't available right now, we can oftentimes go across the street or, you know, just maybe wait till the next day. It's just, but it still seems to be so powerful. Yes. And I think the way to counteract the idea that because there's a lot of abundance, we don't really have scarcity, is to recognize that within those available options, some are unique. some give us uncommon and rare advantages. And those are still worth seizing.

Starting point is 00:35:53 Even though there's plenty around, what we want is the ones that have scarce benefits for us to acquire if we make those choices, to think about the pattern of features. And it may not be that there's any one feature that this thing has that nobody else has, but it might be that this one has a suite of features that nobody else has, a combination of benefits that I can't get anywhere else. And that helps me make that decision to move forward based on the scarcity principle. Let's take a quick break and hear

Starting point is 00:36:34 from today's sponsors. No, it's not your imagination. Risk and regulation are ramping up, and customers now expect proof of security just to do business. That's why VANTA is a game changer. VANTA automates your compliance process and brings compliance, risk, and customer trust together on one AI-powered platform. So whether you're prepping for a SOC 2 or running an enterprise GRC program, VANTA keeps you secure and keeps your deals moving. Instead of chasing spreadsheets and screenshots, VANTA gives you continuous automation

Starting point is 00:37:07 across more than 35 security and privacy framework. Companies like Ramp and Ryder spend 82% less time on audits with Vanta. That's not just faster compliance, it's more time for growth. If I were running a startup or scaling a team today, this is exactly the type of platform I'd won place. Get started at Vanta.com slash billionaires. That's Vanta.com slash billionaires. Ever wanted to explore the world of online trading but haven't dared try?

Starting point is 00:37:39 The futures market is more active now than ever before, and Plus 500 futures is the perfect place to start. Plus 500 gives you access to a wide range of instruments, the S&P 500, NASDAQ, Bitcoin, gas, and much more. Explore equity indices, energy, metals, 4X, crypto, and beyond. With a simple and intuitive platform, you can trade from anywhere, right from your phone. Deposit with a minimum of $100 and experience the fast, accessible, and you can trade from your phone. futures trading you've been waiting for. See a trading opportunity. You'll be able to trade it in just two clicks once your account is open. Not sure if you're ready, not a problem. Plus 500 gives you an

Starting point is 00:38:21 unlimited risk-free demo account with charts and analytic tools for you to practice on. With over 20 years of experience, Plus 500 is your gateway to the markets. Visit Plus500.com to learn more. Trading in futures involves risk of loss and is not suitable for everyone. Not all applicants will qualify. Plus 500, it's trading with a plus. Billion dollar investors don't typically park their cash in high-yield savings accounts. Instead, they often use one of the premier passive income strategies for institutional investors, private credit. Now, the same passive income strategy is available to investors of all sizes thanks to the Fundrise income fund, which has more than $600 million. invested and a 7.97% distribution rate. With traditional savings yields falling, it's no wonder

Starting point is 00:39:14 private credit has grown to be a trillion dollar asset class in the last few years. Visit fundrise.com slash WSB to invest in the Fundrise income fund in just minutes. The fund's total return in 2025 was 8%, and the average annual total return since inception is 7.8%. Past performance does not guarantee future results. current distribution rate as of 1231, 2025. Carefully consider the investment material before investing, including objectives, risks, charges, and expenses. This and other information can be found in the income funds prospectus at fundrise.com

Starting point is 00:39:50 slash income. This is a paid advertisement. All right. Back to the show. From your experience, are there any businesses that come to mind that seem to be one of the best at using this principle of scarcity? You know, it's the luxury products. It's the ones that have very high prices and there aren't

Starting point is 00:40:12 very many available in the first place. Or there are, when an automobile company has an exclusive model that is only available for a certain time or in a certain number of them, if you look at the research, it shows that, The customer appreciation of that model jumps up to the extent that it is not available. So Volvo did this a while ago with a special model and had that impact. And Munger is also well known for popularizing the use of mental models and connecting the dots within these different disciplines. And he's also known for this term that ever since he started using this, it's just really

Starting point is 00:41:00 stuck with me. It's the Lollapalooza effect. And this is when you combine a variety of forces and it creates an amplified result in the end. I'm curious to get your take on if the Lala Palluzza effect applies in the context of the seven principles in your book in the way that Munger describes it.

Starting point is 00:41:18 It does. When it's possible to see more than one of the principles applying to an offer, that elevates it. So a while ago, I was doing some consulting for the Bose Acoustics Corporation. And they had a new product. It was called the Bose Wave Music System, and they represented it in their ads as new. New, you'll be able to gain new features and simplicity and elegance and so on. And they weren't happy with it with the advertising

Starting point is 00:41:52 program, even though it was better than any of their rivals and they had priced it attractively. So they asked me to come in and change their ad, and I took a look at it and I said, no, this is a good ad for Bose purchasers. They want this information that you're giving them. They're not spur of the moment, impulsive kind of buyers. But I'm going to ask you to change something at the top of your ad. Previously, it said new. Well, we know from the scarcity principle that people are more motivated to avoid losing something, that is something that they can't get anymore, the ultimate form of scarcity.

Starting point is 00:42:34 They're more motivated to avoid losing something than gaining that same thing. So I would just like you to change the wording at the top of the ad from new to hear what you've been missing. So now the idea is, if you don't get this, you're missing something. you're losing something, which Daniel Kahneman's prospect theory showed, is twice as effective as just telling people what they are getting. We don't want you to lose this. You don't want to

Starting point is 00:43:05 forego what this will provide. And that increased purchases by 45%. That one change. Now, after that happened, the Bose marketing people asked me to come in and talk about what other principles there might be that I could tell them about besides scarcity. And when I got to the principle on authority, that people want to follow the lead of legitimate, credible experts on the situation, I saw lights going on over the heads of these folks because by then they had several testimonials from experts, from true authorities in the area of audio technology,

Starting point is 00:43:50 praising this new product. So what we did was to generate yet a third generation of the ad. This one said, hear what you've been missing at the top, but also had a column of quotes from widely respected experts in audio technology. And that increased purchases by 60% compared to the first generation ad. So you can put these together and produce Lollapalooza effects when there's a confluence of factors that all apply. I'm a great one from believing that of believing that. When you see a big effect, a very large scale sea change kind of effect, it's almost never due to one thing. It's due to a conjoint unification of several things at the same time that are pushing in the same direction. And that accounts for the mushrooming kind of effects that you see in Lollapaloozes.

Starting point is 00:44:59 Yeah, that's a very good point. And now whenever I visit some sort of sales page, I just can't help but point out, oh, there's that principle, there's that principle. And I also can't help but stay on the Charlie Munger path here. One of my very favorite quotes of his is to get what you want, you need to deserve what you want. I'm curious on your thoughts on how this might tie into reciprocity in this quote here. The key for implementing reciprocity is that you have to go first. You have to provide something to another, which causes them to want to give you what you deserve in return, right?

Starting point is 00:45:37 So I think that's what he's saying. you have to go first. Really, you have to go first. Provide gifts, favors, services, information to people, not designed to improve the likelihood that they will see your offering as better, just that they will feel grateful for being the recipient of something that's designed to improve their outcomes, not buy your product, just in a general way. And so there was a lovely study done by making. McDonald's that showed that if, for one week, every family that came in to the McDonald's location received a balloon for each of the kids. Half of them got the balloon as they were leaving as a gracious thank you for coming, frequenting our restaurant, right? The other half got the balloons

Starting point is 00:46:31 as they came in. They got the balloons first. Those parents, bought 25% more food because they had received. So this is, I think, the essence of you have to go first to trigger the benefits of the reciprocity rule. And what Charlie's quote specified is exactly that. You have to have deserved what you've gotten, yeah, by the action. It's a great reminder when you have something you want in life. It's like, okay, invert it.

Starting point is 00:47:07 use that inversion principle amongers, what can I do first to sort of maybe lead to that outcome? So to have a good spouse, be a good spouse, to have a good partner, be a good partner. You know, you should lead to try and bring that outcome, you know, if you're intending to try and bring that outcome on the back end. That's right. You know, there's so much wisdom there. And it's a reason why in every human culture, we are trained from childhood in this rule. you must not take without giving in return.

Starting point is 00:47:40 You must not take. We have very nasty names for people who take without giving in return, who we then avoid. We call them moochers or takers or ingrates. So we don't want to deal with those people as a consequence because it's so beneficial to the larger community, to the larger society, to have people cooperating and exchanging goods and favors and services with one another.

Starting point is 00:48:06 And one of the sort of aha moments for me in reading this chapter in your book is that this tactic can be really tricky when other people are using it because you don't control two things. So the first thing you don't control is what people are giving you. And then the second thing you can't control is what they're potentially asking from you later. So you're receiving your gift. You're like, oh, now I have to, you know, you feel indebted to them and you have to give on to them. And so that's another one of those things that we talk about at the end of it. So if you see that this was designed as a device, it was an artifice. It wasn't a true gift.

Starting point is 00:48:43 It was designed to get you to do this thing. Like the situation you described where somebody says, have you ever been in a hospital where you wanted a better service? I can't remember exactly what else. But it's designed to get you to do something. It's not based on the merits of the thing. And so that's the key is make sure that you make a differentiation. between these things that people give you just to get you obligated to them,

Starting point is 00:49:12 versus people who are just open-hearted and want to give you things because they like you or they're that kind of person. They're nice people. And there's another thing I talk about in the section on what not to do with reciprocity, and that's when we have given something to someone, and they're very grateful, and they reply, so I really appreciate this. And I used to do something where it was a big mistake. I'd say, oh, don't think anything of it. No big deal. Just, you know, it wasn't a problem at all.

Starting point is 00:49:45 Don't worry about it. Even if I went above and beyond to make sure they got this thing, I did this favor for them. And then I dismissed it? I just slapped it out the window with the back of my hand. No, the world works better when people who give get something for it. Otherwise, they stop giving. So what I recommend is that if somebody gives you generously a phrase, thank you, I appreciate this so much, so on, this sort of thing, we put it on the map.

Starting point is 00:50:20 We don't dismiss it or diminish it or define it away as something else. So I would say, if it's somebody inside your organization, what you say is, oh, I was glad to do it. It's what we do here for one another. So you just set the norm that this is what we do, and don't forget the addendum for one another. So that person is now readied. If you need something, this is what we do here for one another. If it's somebody outside of your organization, what I recommend saying is, oh, of course, I was glad to do it. I know that if the situation were ever reversed, you'd do the same for me, right?

Starting point is 00:50:59 And everybody says, right. So now they're waiting to have a chance to repay because you've put it on the map. You haven't claimed that it's nothing to worry about. Oh, no problem, no problem. You've heard that so many times. So often it isn't true. And we have to stay close to reality. What's true?

Starting point is 00:51:20 I also came to this realization. I had stated earlier of using reciprocity to get what you want. But I think another aspect that's really interesting that Buffett and Mung, have done is just give, give, give, give, and expect nothing in return. And there's something to that where, one, who doesn't like being surrounded by people that just love helping you in whatever way possible and just giving? And also, it attracts all these wonderful people into their lives as a byproduct of that. Yes, yes, that's right. And so often that's the key. those return favors, sometimes larger than the one you gave, right?

Starting point is 00:52:01 That's a downstream side effect of giving. It's not the intent. That's just something that flows from, naturally from it. Nobody loses under those circumstances. I also wanted to mention the liking bias. As an investing podcast, it's commonly known that we're likely to buy into, to a company if we like the CEO or the face of the organization. And even in sales as well, we may be offered an inferior product or service,

Starting point is 00:52:36 but we want to buy from the person we like. And this could be with a real estate agent, it could be with a financial advisor. It could be really with anything. The problem is that it might not be in our best interest to make that purchase or invest in that company. And especially with as investors, we see the face of these organizations on, in interviews on TV or they're on YouTube or doing a presentation. These people just generally tend to be really likable people because they rose up the ranks

Starting point is 00:53:02 and because they're likable, they rose up to be in that position. You know, just because someone is very likable doesn't mean it's a good investment for us. So when we're listening to someone like this that's a public CEO, maybe you could talk about what is it about people that makes us like them in the first place? You know, there are two people in national politics who were defined as Teflon. That is, they couldn't do anything wrong in the eyes of people because they were so likable. One was Ronald Reagan. The other was Bill Clinton.

Starting point is 00:53:41 They just had this charismatic kind of engaging personality that came across for them. for them. And they're completely different in terms of their political orientations, but they did have this commonality. And if you look at the way that they talk to people, it revealed the key. They liked the people around them. They were people persons. They liked you. You got the feeling, even in an audience, this person likes me. Like you. Like you. You got the feeling, even in an audience, this person likes me. likes people like me. Well, I've been in a lot of sales training programs, and they tell us the number one rule of sales is to get your customer to like you. Well, that's very important. I think that's true that it's, that works. I don't think it's the number one rule. I think the number one rule is come to like

Starting point is 00:54:40 your customer, come to like your prospect, come to like your client. And when they see that, when they see, that you like them, all kinds of barriers to decision-making come down. So what Reagan and Clinton had was the ability to project onto others that they like people, they like people. If you're in, either of them will like you if you had a chance to meet them. That I think was the key for me in what those charismatic and uniformly amiable and likable people do. They project their liking onto you rather than trying to pull it out of you. Both of those work, but I would take the first of those over the others. And I think there's another interesting dynamic here where with these very well-known people,

Starting point is 00:55:41 like a lot of times we're just watching them on TV. so they can't personalize their message to you? So is there a difference between, you know, someone just being out in public where they're speaking to a general audience versus they're just interacting with you one-on-one? Is there anything different when they're speaking in that public sort of format?

Starting point is 00:56:01 Well, I mean, they try to infuse evidence that they are open and approving of you. This is the sort of things that, you know, they use humor that's a very humanizing, kind of thing. You see that. They tell stories about themselves, self-deprecating stories about themselves. Do you know Guy Kawasaki, who was the communication guru for Apple under Steve Jobs, he was the chief evangelist for Apple? And as I say, I do public speaking, and we were on the same dais with one another. We were speakers on the same conference. It was an international conference.

Starting point is 00:56:41 It was in Bucharest, Romania. And he had a problem, which was that in his presentation, he had to be very self-promoted, or seemingly self-promoting. That is, he had to talk about how he and Jobs came up with brilliant ideas. I mean, seismic changes in producing the success that Apple had. And that causes people to sort of move away from you. If they see you as a braggard, always being a broker of information, positive information about yourself, you start to lose credibility in their eyes. Well, he did something at the outset of his talk

Starting point is 00:57:24 that punctured that sense of self-aggrandizement, right? He did a piece of self-deprecatory humor. He was saying to the audience, so I was on the phone to my wife last night in telling her, her about this conference and how I'm on this, the same dais as people like Cheldini and people like Harari, you know, and he said, did you ever in your wildest dreams picture me in the same places as those guys? And she said, and he said, she said to me, guy, you're not in my wildest dreams. So everybody laughed and they said, and now he was able to go on and present positive information about himself and what he had done at Apple without getting the reputation as a self-aggrandizer. No, he started out by puncturing himself, you know, his ego. That was

Starting point is 00:58:26 brilliant. And I think in trying to overcome something like this, we want to simply look at the facts and look at, you know, what it is we're actually trying to get, you know, in the example of an investment, we want to look at the company for what they've actually done and in how great of a company they actually are rather than how much we like the CEO. Is there, is there anything else to overcoming the liking bias? Yeah, I think, first of all, by the way, that's not just for the CEO and investor. It turns out there was a study that in India that auditors, who like the CEO, give them a freer ride in the audits. If you're from the same region of India or the same religion,

Starting point is 00:59:15 they get softer audits because of those factors associated with liking. So for me, the general rule is, let's say you're buying a car and you really come to like this salesperson. and after half an hour or 40 minutes, you're ready to buy the car, you have to ask yourself, do I like this person more than is justified for being with him for 40 minutes? Is that real, or is it the fact that he gave me a soft drink? That he told me that he was born in the same area as my wife grew up, or that he complimented the car that my trade in,

Starting point is 01:00:06 the good choice of the upholstery and colors and so on. Whatever, you have to separate the salesperson from the thing he or she is selling and focus on the merits of the thing rather than the communicator who delivered those things. That liking shouldn't be part of that decision. because you're driving the automobile off the lot, not the salesperson. He or she is staying there. You're getting the car. So that's the strategy I would use to step back from that situation and separate those two elements.

Starting point is 01:00:46 Wonderful. Well, Dr. Chaldeany, I really, really appreciate you joining me on the show. I want to give you a chance to give a handoff to the audience to how they can get connected with you. And it was brought to my attention. You recently launched the Chaldeenie Institute. So please talk a little bit about that as well. Well, it's an online on-demand educational program that informs people of how to be successful and ethical in persuading others in their direction.

Starting point is 01:01:17 Anybody who is interested in it can just go to cheldini.com and you'll come to our website and see what the program is like, what the various options. are for interacting with us. And yeah, so we have four pillars in that. Everything we say has to be research-based. Everything we say has to be ethically commendable. Everything we have to say has to be applicable. So we don't just provide a college course, but how do you apply this knowledge about ethical influence now that you know it? And then finally, we have something new called the small, big, how to be efficient in applying this. What are the smallest changes you can make to your persuasive approach that produce the biggest impact on your persuasive success? So those are

Starting point is 01:02:09 the elements that we try to build into all our programs. Wonderful. Of all the books on my shelf, your book is definitely one of my favorites. I continually revisit and occasionally have it by my bedside and check it out before I laid a rest. And it's no wonder on the front cover, there's a Charlie Munger quote. It says, this is the book that I give most often as a present and is my top recommendation. So if that's not enough of a endorsement, I don't know. I don't know what is. So also, I also wanted to mention that many people in our audience will be in Omaha. So I'm curious if you could share if you'll be attending and what that might look like. Because to my knowledge, there's some sort of association with you in Berkshire, Hathaway.

Starting point is 01:02:52 Yes, we go every year. And there's a bookstore there in the auditorium. And you have to be accepted. You have to be nominated by Charlie or Warren. And we'll be there again. So if people would like to say hello, we'll be at the Berkey bookstore. Wonderful. Well, thank you so much again, Robert. I really appreciate the opportunity. I enjoyed it. Thank you for listening to TIP. Make sure to follow. We'll be. study billionaires on your favorite podcast app and never miss out on episodes to access our show notes transcripts or courses go to the investors podcast.com this show is for entertainment purposes only before making any decision consult a professional this show is copyrighted by the investors podcast network written permission must be granted before syndication or rebroadcasting

We Study Billionaires - The Investor’s Podcast Network - TIP616: The Godfather of Influence w/ Dr. Robert Cialdini

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.