Read the Room Before Influencing

Before you attempt to influence others, it’s essential to “read the room”—even in written communication. This means paying close attention to what others care about, picking up on subtle cues in their language, and adjusting your approach based on how they respond. By doing so, you can ensure your influence is both effective and ethical, and you avoid crossing the line into manipulation. The following sections will help you develop these skills by focusing on three key areas: noticing others’ priorities and motivations, observing verbal cues in writing, and adjusting your assertiveness to fit the situation.

Notice Others’ Priorities and Motivations

When evaluating scenarios where you are trying to influence, your first step should be identifying the primary request or goal embedded in the message. Sometimes this appears straightforward, such as "Can you review this document by Friday?" However, the real ask often lies buried beneath pleasantries or justifications. This isn't necessarily manipulation — context matters — but recognizing the structure helps you evaluate whether the approach respects your autonomy or attempts to corner you through obligation.

To truly "read the room" in communication, pay attention to what the other person values or is focused on. Are they emphasizing deadlines, team success, personal recognition, or problem-solving? Noticing these priorities helps you understand their motivations and tailor your response or influence attempts accordingly.

Observe Verbal and Nonverbal Cues

In any communication—whether in person, on a call, or in writing—people give off verbal and nonverbal cues that reveal their true feelings and intentions. Here’s what to look out for in each context:

Dark blue card-style graphic titled ‘Observe Verbal and Nonverbal Cues’ with three rounded rectangles. The first card lists nonverbal cues in person or on video, such as posture, facial expressions, eye contact, tone of voice, and pacing. The second card lists verbal cues, including word choice, framing, emotional tone, repetition, and level of detail. The third card focuses on written communication, highlighting emotional undertones, structure of the message, pressure tactics, and whether the language respects your ability to say no or ask questions.

Pay close attention to the emotional tone and pressure tactics within the message. Healthy influence maintains professional respect even when expressing urgency. Manipulation, however, weaponizes emotions through guilt, flattery, or implied threats.

Adjust Assertiveness Based on How the Other Person Responds

Recognizing patterns in written communication helps you adjust your own approach. For example, if you notice the recipient is overwhelmed or hesitant (perhaps they respond slowly, ask clarifying questions, or express concern about workload), it’s a cue to dial back assertiveness and offer flexibility: If this week is too busy, let me know what works for you. If the other person responds positively and quickly, you can be more direct in your requests.

Patterns such as the sandwich pattern (acknowledgment, request, flexibility), assumption close (acting as if agreement is given), and comparison pattern (referencing others’ actions) all provide insight into how influence is being attempted.

Dark blue card-style graphic titled ‘Spotting Influence Patterns’ with three rounded rectangles. The first card explains the Sandwich Pattern as acknowledgment, request, then flexibility used to soften a request. The second card describes the Assumption Close, acting as if agreement is already given to create momentum. The third card shows the Comparison Pattern, referencing what others have done to create subtle peer pressure.

Recognizing these allows you to respond appropriately—either by clarifying, setting boundaries, or matching the level of assertiveness. To see these concepts in action, consider the following conversation between two colleagues as they analyze a message from their project lead. Notice how they identify the influence patterns, discuss what’s missing, and compare manipulative versus healthy approaches. This kind of analysis helps you become more aware of subtle cues and adjust your own assertiveness in response.

  • Natalie: Did you see the email from the project lead? Since you're so good at presentations, I've volunteered you to present to the board tomorrow.
  • Dan: Yeah, that's definitely manipulation. They made the decision without asking me first.
  • Natalie: Plus, notice the flattery followed immediately by the assumption I'd agreed? Classic sandwich pattern.
  • Dan: Right, and there's no mention of preparation time needed or even what I'd be presenting about.
  • Natalie: Exactly. Compare that to last week when they asked, Would you be willing to present if I helped you prepare? That was healthy influence.
  • The difference is consent and transparency. This email traps us with social pressure instead.
Previous
Next
Sign up
Join the 1M+ learners on CodeSignal
Be a part of our community of 1M+ users who develop and demonstrate their skills on CodeSignal