Increased knowledge increases influence

A subject matter expert—whether perception or reality—is more influential than one who is not.

As a rule, people don’t like being ordered to do things. It often generates resistance and resentment. For this reason, most business schools teach prospective managers to avoid “command and control” approaches to leadership and embrace approaches designed to promote willing cooperation. It’s in this latter respect that the second type of authority, being viewed as highly informed, is so useful. People are usually happy, even eager, to go along with the recommendations of someone who knows more than they do on the matter at hand.

Ironically, this is true especially when the expert is conciliatory and acknowledging of their own shortcomings—when they do so before their adversary points it out.

The effectiveness of this approach has been documented in (1) legal settings, where a trial attorney who admits a weakness before the rival attorney points it out is viewed as more credible and wins more often; (2) political campaigns, where a candidate who begins with something positive to say about a rival (such as, “I am sure my opponent has the best of intentions with that proposal, but . . .”) gains trustworthiness and voting preferences; and (3) advertising messages, where merchandisers who acknowledge a drawback before highlighting strengths often see large increases in sales.^[1]

#influence