Understanding the Five Doors of Influence
The more senior you become in an organisation, the more your success depends on your ability to influence others. Your ability to advance good work and build effective relationships hinges on this skill. There is a delicate balance between influencing and dictating. While seniority may grant formal authority, true progress comes from fostering intrinsic motivation in your team. Forcing people to act is far less effective than inviting them to contribute to a shared goal.
Of course, a balance is necessary. Some tasks are non-negotiable. When direct influence is not enough, you must rely on structural mechanisms. For example architectural governance boards, contracts and complience in the TOGAF framework. This allowed enterprise architecture to align teams with the company’s strategic goals, providing a formal channel for influence where informal methods might fail.
In his article, “How can I influence others without manipulating them?”, executive coach Andi Roberts provides a useful model for thinking about interpersonal influence. He frames it not as manipulation, but as an invitation.
Influence can be understood as an invitation. It is the art of meeting people where they are, of entering their world with respect, and of opening a door that they might choose to walk through with us.
Andi proposes five “doors” of influence, which are different styles of persuasion. Most of us have a default style, which can become a blind spot. We mistake a different communication preference for resistance. The key is to recognise which door the other person is standing at and adapt our approach accordingly.
Here is a summary of the five doors:
| Door | Description | Best For | Risk of Overuse |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rationalising | Persuading with facts, evidence, and logical analysis. | Appealing to people who value data, structure, and clarity. | Becoming cold, detached, and overly complex. |
| Asserting | Persuading with confidence, conviction, and direct statements. | Engaging with people who value decisiveness and a clear position. | Appearing domineering and silencing dialogue. |
| Negotiating | Persuading by finding common ground and seeking mutual benefit. | Working with people who are pragmatic and prefer collaboration. | Seeming weak or making unnecessary concessions. |
| Inspiring | Persuading with stories, vision, and appeals to purpose. | Motivating people who respond to meaning and possibility. | Feeling idealistic and disconnected from reality. |
| Bridging | Persuading through relationships, social proof, and third-party validation. | Influencing people who value trust, rapport, and peer endorsement. | Becoming dependent on others for validation. |
The central challenge is that any of these styles, when used exclusively or inappropriately, ceases to be a tool for connection and becomes a barrier.
The paradox is that any of them, when overused, becomes a wall. Logic turns cold. Conviction turns harsh. Compromise turns weak. Vision turns empty. Relationship turns dependent.
This framework is a practical guide for senior leaders. It reminds us to be conscious of our own default style and to listen for the preferences of others. By choosing the right door, or variating between doors, we can make our invitations to collaborate more effective. And when that is not enough, we can turn to structured governance to ensure alignment.
