The following is a Q&A exchange that’s worth reviewing because it illustrates some very important nuances in Sphere of Influence.
Gareth Kemp:
SOI fundamentally changed how I approached attracting clients. I’ve used the chain of beliefs extensively since learning the concept and it’s fascinating how and where it can be applied. I use it in MPPS but also in 300-word blog articles to set people up for the next step.
The one thing that trips me up every time is “How many beliefs do I need in a chain?”
I think in the original worksheets, 3-5 were suggested, however, in Todd Brown’s video he talks about the Pizzeria example and highlights that if you miss out a foundational belief, the remaining ones are rendered useless.
And that’s where I work myself up into finding I’ve got too many micro-beliefs and start getting into the weeds, rather than staying more top-level and allowing the narrative to flow. I eventually get myself out the weeds, but it adds a long time to my process!
Can you give some insight into the number of beliefs and, perhaps more importantly, how to ensure no foundational ones are missed? Or how to avoid falling into the trap of finding micro-beliefs that feel important but perhaps aren’t so critical? As I write this, I think Shawn’s “Focus on the main 3 jobs/pains/gains” from The Traffic Engine could be the solution so maybe I just answered it 🙂
I’d love your thoughts.
Second question:
You spend a long time explaining how others use a headline to grab attention, only to say, “Here’s how I differ…”
I may be overthinking again, but are you saying the “intellectually interesting” and other components must be there but rather use imagery to allow people to come to their own conclusion around how what the big idea is and how it could apply to their life instead of copy writing it?
André’s reply:
Gareth, some great questions, mate. I’ll weigh in with my option from my own experience, and I’ll ask Shawn to jump in too with his insights. Our experiences may not align perfectly, which I suspect is the case because of one fundamental truth — which is there is no objectively definitive binary answer. All of this is subjective.
The one thing that trips me up every time is “How many beliefs do I need in a chain?”
I still think 3-5 is a good rule of thumb. Less is probably better than more. I think it can be challenging for a reader/viewer to process and manage too many different big ideas/concepts/insights.
A recent example was the SOI manifest I wrote: Better Prospects. Draft 4 was up to 8 beliefs. The signal something was “off” was that it was VERY challenging to wrangle the narrative. Draft 6 was down to 4, which made all the difference.
You’ll notice from recent emails Shawn and I have written, is we stick to one or two beliefs per piece. Then later emails “stack” beliefs on beliefs, which works well. People have had time to process/internalize the insights. This is why SOI + ARM together produce a better result than just one or the other.
… in Todd Brown’s video he talks about the Pizzeria example and highlights that if you miss out a foundational belief, the remaining ones are rendered useless.
Conceptually this may be accurate, but what is a “foundational belief”? I don’t think there are any absolutes here. It always depends.
In the SOI manifesto, our thesis statement (our unifying idea) is BETTER PROSPECT MATTER. So the beliefs we chose needed to support this idea. We could have gone in many different directions — neither necessarily being subjectively “incorrect.” But for us, “businesses are systems” and “business is an infinite game” also supported our downstream philosophy.
And that’s where I work myself up into finding I’ve got too many micro-beliefs and start getting into the weeds, rather than staying more top-level and allowing the narrative to flow.
Yes. Being aware of our own “signals” of dissonance and/or resonance is important, and can help shorten the timeline of creating something significant that moves the people we seek to move in our direction.
… how to ensure no foundational ones are missed? Or how to avoid falling into the trap of finding micro-beliefs that feel important but perhaps aren’t so critical?
I don’t think there is a way.
One idea that Shawn and I have loved using over the years, is an idea from Jim Colins – fire bullets, then cannonballs (see Great by Choice).
QUOTE: “Fire Bullets, Then Cannonballs is a concept developed in the book Great by Choice. First, you fire bullets (low-cost, low-risk, low-distraction experiments) to figure out what will work—calibrating your line of sight by taking small shots.”
Bullets are ideas that can be shared easily with people to get back a signal/feedback. I do this in emails. I use our newsletter to expose unfinished ideas to people. You may remember our manifesto started as an emails (Attention: A Manifesto). That was a “bullet.” It hit, and from that we assembled resources to make a cannonball.
Shawn’s Reply:
Gareth – I just looked at a few outlines I have created for client MPPS’s over the years and none of those had fewer than ten beliefs at first (14 – 18, in general). However, let me explain my process to give some texture to that.
When I have written multi-page presell sites (or used the equivalent structure across ads, landing pages, and emails), I start with a document to capture and compile beliefs. I don’t worry about order or precision. The goal is to externalize, in writing, everything a prospect needs to believe.
(Side note: the belief that’s easiest to forget is that they can do it – whatever “it” is. It’s not enough to explain how great something is by showing others how to do it – a lot of resistance comes from self-doubt, and clarifying that the prospect has the skills/ability is critical.)
That initial list generally has 14 – 18 beliefs. However, many of those are duplicates (me saying the same idea in different way). My next step, still with that document, is to organize similar beliefs together and then define the underlying believe that unites them all.
The process usually reduces the number by half (approximately).
Then I create a new document to capture the beliefs in order. (You could do that by reordering the first document.) I’m a visual/spatial thinker, and I like to have the first document open on the left of the screen and the second document open on the right. I then copy and organize beliefs in the appropriate order. (The two document format helps clarify my thinking, shows me progress along the way, and helps me sense inconsistencies in structure, logic, etc.)
This is when I’m looking for the overall thesis (Todd Brown calls this the marketing thesis, I’ve heard it called different names by others). That’s the belief that encapsulates the whole point of what I’m trying to convey to the client. Usually it’s some variation of “there’s a better way, others similar to you have done it, and you can do it too”.
My thinking has been heavily influenced by Eli Goldratt’s Theory of Constraints and I often think structurally, in logic trees. When I create a chain of beliefs, I’m working backwards through logic and emotion. The (loose) format I use to organize beliefs is asking myself “for this to be true, what does someone have to believe?”. In my experience, that filter helps in the process of organizing beliefs in a way that has the most impact for the reader.
For example, let’s assume I’m selling a business coaching service that shows entrepreneurs how to double their income in a year. Before someone can accept my offer, they need to believe that it’s possible to double income in a year, I know how to teach someone how to do that, that they can execute on what I teach, and that they can afford to pay for the coaching.
If they believe those four things they’re ready to accept the offer.
With that as my list, I would start by sequencing those beliefs. What’s likely to get their attention first? The promise of doubling their revenue. They need to believe that’s possible (a few examples, particularly in story format about others like them who have done it, are perfect).
Then they need to believe that I can teach someone how to do that, which is where I display credibility/authority with real examples of how I’ve helped others just like them double their income in a year.
Next, they need to overcome self-doubt and know that they can do it. (This is where it’s helpful to focus on your unique method/process and emphasize that the process gets the result, not the person – the person just has to follow the process. This absolves them of self-doubt, in general.) Examples here, also in story format, would help. “Here’s someone just like you with the same struggles who had tried the same things and s/he doubled her business in a year following the X,Y,Z method…”
Finally, explaining your pricing structure in a way that confirms they have the ability to pay. That could be a coaching fee, reduced coaching fee + percentage of growth after the fact, etc.
In this simple example, we’re guiding a prospect through the beliefs, in order, and when s/he arrives at the point of conversion in our MPPS (lead/sale/consultative call, etc.) s/he should have internalized that it’s possible to double her income in a year, that you’ve taught others how to do that successfully, that your system is responsible for the results as long as she follows the system, and she can afford your fees right now.
If you were to remove any one of those beliefs the case would be much weaker (and far less compelling).
End Of SOI Core Training