It might work during a job interview. It might work when flirting at the bar. But when engaging customers, reverse psychology is neither a valuable nor desirable strategy.
It simply has no business in customer management.
Predicated on the notion that the position of power is an optimal one, the social use of reverse psychology enables one to shift the power dynamic.
Consider the job interview. In reality, the employer—not the job seeker—controls the situation. He has the leverage, the ability to provide the greatest net value and complete ownership of the decision. Yet, as brilliantly articulated in an episode of "Curb Your Enthusiasm," an astute interviewee knows to "flip" the situation.
Instead of simply answering questions and attempting to impress the hiring manager, the empowered candidate applies reverse psychology and flips the recruiter into believing it is his duty to impress the interviewee. As the conversation shifts from focusing on why the job seeker would be good for the company to why the company would be good for the job seeker, so too does the power dynamic. The prospective employee is now the one calling the shots.
The same principle is often used effectively in the courtship process. When someone develops an attraction to another and begins his flirtation, he is inherently forfeiting the power to that person. The object of the affection is the one who has the leverage, the ability to provide the greatest net value (since he or she is, at least at first, more attractive to the other person than the other person is to him or her)and complete ownership of the decision.
But if one can use a combination of indifference, aloofness and "swagger" to convince the object of his affection that he is not especially interested, he suggests that he is the bigger catch. And in many cases, that mirage compels the other person to re-forfeit his power in the name of attraction. The flirtee becomes the flirt.
Given how effectively reverse psychology works in such scenarios, it is reasonable to assume it would be just as effective in customer management. After all, if showing indifference can make someone more attractive to his crush, why would it not have the same impact on customers?
Intuitive enough at face, that question garners further support from the extent to which indifference is touted as an essential sales tactic. From the commencement of their training, young sales representatives are trained to show indifference in their pitches—and not make it clear they stand to personally benefit from closing the deal—which strongly suggests that reverse psychology does have a place in customer management.
After all, it is very much the job of salesmen and marketers to convince customers that they want the organization’s product more than the business wants the customer’s money.
But when one takes an overview of the situation, he sees that the logic does not apply to the totality of customer engagement. Rather than creating the illusion that they possess power over the customer, business who employ reverse psychology generate questions about whether they truly have the customers’ best interests in mind. They make themselves less, not more, attractive to the customer.
Engagement and support are not merely mechanisms for conveying a product’s ultimate value but value items in and of themselves. They are evaluation points for customers, and if they do not demonstrate that the brand will build its relationships on trust, care, efficiency, efficacy and respect, they automatically make the business—and its product lines—less appealing.
When a cashier or customer service representative opts not to warmly initiate conversation with the customer, he is not establishing himself as cool but as someone who does not care about his customers. And if he does not care enough about customers to exchange such mild pleasantries, why would he care enough to protect the customer and deliver value during periods of true challenge, difficulty and burden?
That line of questioning helps to underscore the substantive difference between using reverse psychology in customer engagement and in other social circumstances.
In the aforementioned courtship scenario, the suitor is being judged not by the specific quality of his flirtation but by what the flirtation represents. Recognized as part of the game rather than its own value point, flirtation is a means for evaluating an end: the man or woman doing the flirting.
And when a person flirts without desperation, it suggests that the important qualities—his true personality, charisma, wealth, sexuality, etc—are of value.
The same goes for the job interview. When a candidate uses indifference to "flip" the discussion, he is not demonstrating an indifferent approach to the work he will potentially be doing but immense confidence in his ability to succeed in the role.
A signal of more relevant qualities in those scenarios, the initial conversations are the relevant qualities in customer engagement scenarios. Customers want to know that the brand is committed to creating a successful customer experience; attempting to appear better than the customers through reverse psychology is as destructive to the relationship as a suitor admitting he would cheat on his bar crush or the job candidate admitting he would take a lax approach to his work.
An indifferent sales approach works because it represents the means rather than the end; a lack of desperation in the sales process reflects a valuable final product. That product, of course, is not simply the tangible good but the service and customer relationship management that go along with it.
And an indifferent approach to those elements does not work.
Politely engaging potential in-store customers and proactively following up with existing customers are not signs of desperation but signs of good service. Customers are increasingly demanding these demonstrations of warmth and investment from businesses, and they are certainly not looking down upon the businesses that provide such demonstration.
The tell-tale sign that proactive, passionate, customer-centric engagement works comes from the fact that luxury brands—think the Ritz-Carlton—are among those best known for delivering high quality experiences. Just like models and extremely accomplished job candidates, luxury brands do not have to aggressively convince customers of their value. If involved in the bar scene, they would be the most aloof, indifferent flirters possible.
But they know that quality customer engagement is the product rather than the pitch. And insofar as they want customers to know they will get the most attractive experience possible, they know they have to put their money where their mouth is. They have to produce a meaningful experience.
Businesses can try all the tactics they want, but at the end of the day, the customer is the one with the power. The customer is the one who can choose to direct his money and loyalty into a business, and the customer is the one who can take those items elsewhere when he grows dissatisfied.
That customer will always gravitate towards the most attractive businesses. And in the case of customer management, that business is the one that shows it wants the customer’s loyalty and cares about offering perpetual value.