Becoming the New Normal: The Invisible Mechanics of Influence
Expanding an idea’s sphere of influence seems like it should be straightforward. Get your idea in front of the most influential person you can—hopefully someone with a large audience—and the idea will spread. Turns out, that’s not the case. Not if your idea shifts the status quo in any significant way.
So how do we get our breakthrough ideas to click, catch on and change behaviors? To answer that, we want to take a look at the quantum (read: tiny, atomic) mechanics of influence.
Ever been invited to a really exclusive stage or event? Or finally gotten in after a lot of effort?
I mean the kind that actually makes careers and launches movements?
When all your focus is bent on getting your foot in the door, these coveted opportunities can easily obscure the real goal: behavior change at scale a.k.a social change.
That’s why it’s especially disappointing to get the opportunity, do the thing and have it lead to…nothing.
Maybe there’s a little bit of buzz, but then…nothing. Your industry doesn’t change, your community maintains it’s less than ideal status quo and you’re left wondering if it was something you said.
(or didn’t say)
As it turns out, we can learn a lot about building influence and changing behaviors across industries and communities by zooming in and looking underneath the surface.
On behavior and Influence
First thing’s first. Let’s get on the same page as far as influence is concerned.
Influence is the capacity to translate exposure to an idea into commitment to an idea. Said another way, an influential idea is one that is able to gain, maintain and translate the attention it garners into actual behavior change.
This is why an idea’s journey towards it’s visibility tipping point begins in long term memory: because an idea must first be attached to the chain of behaviors it’s looking to influence, cognitively.
The thing we often overlook is the fact that the most influential version of an idea will differ depending on the stakeholders we are addressing. Firstly, because the chain of behaviors we’re looking to influence differs depending on the stakeholder in question. Secondly, because the facet of your idea each stakeholder finds most motivating will differ because of their varying contexts.
Once the idea is refined into it’s most influential self, then and only then should the exposure process begin. The temptation here is a blitz. An omnichannel, everything, everywhere all at once approach. But research disagrees.
In fact, when people sense they are being backed into a behavioral corner, or manipulated in some way, it often leads to reactance or backlash [1].
And if you are underrecognized [2], this approach is doubly problematic, since it simply reinforces the brain’s propensity for filtering you out in the first place. Translation: it teaches the brain to continue to ignore you.
Those who understand these dynamics usually opt for a more strategic approach: enlisting the support of highly visible influencers.
Unfortunately, again, research disagrees.
Adoption Thresholds.
Let’s say you’ve reimagined the roles everyday citizens can play in the work you do. Common wisdom suggests your best bet is getting your approach in front of an Oprah and having that Oprah share your approach with the world.
And it is true: when someone sees someone they know doing something, they’re more likely to try it.
Even so, the Oprah approach runs into two issues:
You need to supersede their adoption threshold [3] to get the opportunity in the first place
You need to supersede the adoption thresholds of the people in their audience for the idea to spread.
An adoption threshold is exactly what is sounds like. A person’s behavior will only change and remain changed (in a social change context) if they see a certain number of folks around them also making the same change or exhibiting the same behavior. That number is that person’s adoption threshold.
When you’re dealing with a highly visible and/or highly connected influencer, you are dealing with someone who’s adoption threshold is relatively high. Their influence is after all predicated upon their ability to read and stay within the expectations of their audience. If they see a behavior trend growing within that audience, their adoption threshold for that behavior is likely to be met. If they see no such trend, that means they are surrounded by people who are not adopting this new behavior. So they are unlikely to take the risk of doing so themselves [4].
That being said, sometimes it does happen. Sometimes you have the right combination of connections and influential comms and you wind up in front of that one influencer who can change your life. Maybe it’s that invite to Davos or the accepted pitch to speak at SOCAP.
Even if you do get the opportunity, you will still have to contend with issue #2: the adoption thresholds of everyone watching.
As it turns out, adoption thresholds can be higher for a number of other reasons:
Proximity to an Oprah like figure—the people around someone like that also have higher than average adoption thresholds.
The nature of the behavior change we’re trying to make happen in the first place—if the behavior shifts the status quo in some way, adoption thresholds will be higher
The messenger—if they hail from an underrecognized community and nothing has been done to neutralize the cognitive biases that activate and maintain that status, adoption thresholds will be higher.
If any of the above is true, then your approach or idea is unlikely to spread and catch on with this strategy, even with the endorsement of this influencer.
Because the adoption thresholds of each audience member have yet to be met.
This is where the, “We get invited to the Aspen Ideas Festival but it does nothing for the spread of our ideas” scenario comes from.
This is why the most influential spaces and places aren’t always the most visible, the most exclusive or the most well connected to power.
Often the most influential spaces are on the fringes—where adoption thresholds aren’t quite so high.
Choosing a Catalyst.
Once you’ve chosen a network location—a place where you can meet the adoption thresholds of your intended audience in a way that is well within the reach of the resources you can bring to bear—you do still need to go about the business of activating people in order to meet the local adoption thresholds.
How do you decide who to activate?
By identifying the barrier(s) to adoption you’re dealing with.
Let’s go back to our example: Every day citizens could change the world if only they knew about and adopted your ideas about the roles they can play in your sector—let’s say it’s climate.
Who folks need to see adopting a behavior, in order for their adoption threshold to be met, depends on the barrier we’re looking to neutralize. Are folks not adopting this new perspective, or these new roles because they don’t believe it’s worth the effort or risk (an issue of credibility*)? or is it because they fear social disapproval (an issue of legitimacy*)? Both?
These aren’t the only barriers to adoption, but they are two incredibly pertinent ones.
Once you’ve identified your barriers, you can begin to select your stakeholders.
If the issue is one of credibility*, then research currently suggests the best stakeholders to select are those who share relevant traits with those who’s behavior you’re looking to change. People like them.
If the issue is one of legitimacy, then research demonstrates people will need to see lots of different kinds of people adopting the behavior in order for that barrier to be neutralized.
Expanding an idea or approach’s sphere of influence usually follows this trajectory: Sharpen into an influential idea → Try to meet enough adoption thresholds for that idea to catch on → Enter the Rooms where it happens, where structural changes take place. Sometimes, we’ll skip steps or approach steps in ways that are incongruent with the outcomes we’re trying to make happen and that will lead to a weird sense of displacement. The “I was on Oprah and it did nothing for us.” scenario is one of the most common.
Fortunately, the quantum mechanics of influence give us some guidance on how to activate behavior change at scale for ideas and approaches that shift the status quo. Instead of relying on places, spaces and stakeholders with proximity to power and high visibility, start your adoption threshold matching journey on the fringes and select catalysts (read: stakeholders) that address the adoption barriers in your way.
If your idea has already been refined into an influential one, these steps will ensure your ideas will click, catch on and change behaviors at scale.
*these are the terms given these barriers in network analysis science. personally, I don't love them.
Feel like you have no idea where to start?
That’s probably because you don’t know where you are in your visibility journey. Take our assessment, and we’ll tell you what stage of visibility you’re at right now.
[1]- Zemack-Rugar, Y., Moore, S. G., & Fitzsimons, G. J. (2017). Just do it! Why committed consumers react negatively to assertive ads. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 27(3), 287–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2017.01.002
[2]- Nwangwu, N. C. (2023, April). Why we should stop saying underrepresented. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2023/04/why-we-should-stop-saying-underrepresented
[3]- Nwangwu, N. C. (2024, December). Why some ideas spread (and others don't). The Nerdlist. The Midweek Labnote 12/12.
For our visual learners, this a link to a Midweek Labnote, where I explain adoption thresholds visually, in a video format.
[4]- Centola, D., & Macy, M. (2007). Complex Contagions and the Weakness of Long Ties. American Journal of Sociology, 113(3), 702–734. https://doi.org/10.1086/521848