If I could... would you...?

It does get a commitment however it may be perceived as manipulation by the salesperson which can be very aggravating

I agree on this one I think we all have been here at one point.

Manipulation is a tool that we all use in many different situations and circumstances. It is not dishonest unless it is used to deceive.

Manipulation in selling is (most often) used to slant the facts about the salesperson’s products and services - emphasizing or exaggerating the positives and omitting or denying the negatives. In my opinion, anything short of total disclosure is deception.

I am not a moralist. If the results of using deception got statistically better results than honesty, I might have conducted research on the most effective methods of manipulation.

Robert B. Cialdini wrote an excellent book on the subject: “Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion.” It is notable that he does not recommend the use of the various manipulations that he describes.

That's a valid point. Would it be too far of a strecht to say that when a relationship is having difficulties it can be be attributed to a lack of rapport?

I wouldn't call that too far of a stretch.

This is precisely why "Rapport" is so vital to personal selling.

It certainly can be defined that way by personal preference according to one's functional beliefs. According to mine, rapport would equate more to harmony which could serve to open up lines of communication.

I have had rapport with people I did not trust, did not understand, and did not agree with. I can remember, for instance, a professional con artist I knew who fit that category who I genuinely liked.

We openly communicated--and we did business with real dollars. I was unscathed--I think because we had a mutually beneficial objective.

So--we did not have a relationship of rapport by your definition. But the fruits of the relationship were substantially more than nothing.

Would you agree that "Rapport" as defined by Salesguy is vital to personal selling?

That's music to my ears. Well said.

Gary, from your description it appears that you did in fact have a mutual understanding and agreement towards a common objective. Am I reading that wrong?

Agent Smith, perhaps "Vital" is too strong of a word. Might I suggest the word "Important" instead?

[quote=SalesGuy]Gary, from your description it appears that you did in fact have a mutual understanding and agreement towards a common objective. Am I reading that wrong? QUOTE]


Good point. Yes--within the context of the specific endeavour, activity, partnership--whatever we would call it- an agreement (noun) and understanding (noun) existed. And--within those boundaries there was probably an element of mutual trust.

However in terms of general attitude towards the man, regardless of the fact that I liked him--I did not trust him as a person, understand the sociopathological behavour that defines a con artist, or agree with him on how we should treat our fellow man.

But your point is well taken. In my mind, I take the rapport (as you describe it) element out of the confines of a specific situation and apply it to my general feelings about a person. I am also aware that my short term relationship with the man put me at risk. Con artists prey on people who think they are smarter than them.