For instance, when an automobile salesman graciously steers you into a

comfortable place to sit and gives you a cup of coffee, you are very likely

being tricked, by this small courtesy alone, into parting with an extra five

hundred dollars. This is far from the most extreme case of sales success that is

rooted in a salesman dispensing minor favors. However, in this scenario of

buying a car, you are going to be disadvantaged by parting with an extra five

hundred dollars of your own money. This potential loss will protect you to some

extent.

 

But suppose you are the purchasing agent of someone else—a rich employer, for

instance. Now the minor favor you receive from the salesman is less opposed by

the threat of extra cost to you because someone else is paying the extra cost.

Under such circumstances, the salesman is often able to maximize his advantage,

particularly when government is the purchaser.

 

Wise employers, therefore, try to oppose reciprocate-favor tendencies of

employees engaged in purchasing. The simplest antidote works best: Don’t let

them accept any favors from vendors. Sam Walton agreed with this idea of

absolute prohibition. He wouldn’t let purchasing agents accept so much as a hot

dog from a vendor. Given the subconscious level at which much Reciprocation

Tendency operates, this policy of Walton’s was profoundly correct. If I

controlled the Defense Department, its policies would mimic Walton’s.

 

In a famous psychology experiment, Cialdini brilliantly demonstrated the power