A lot of social situations that feel icky could’ve been prevented by getting proper buy-in up front.
If you’re the person feeling the ick, there’s not much you can do about that (except for sending them what I’m about to write).
However, there’s good news too:
You can use this same principle to reduce the amount of times people feel like they’re in an icky situation with you and you can use it to experience things with other people which you otherwise might not be able to.
So let’s rewind for a moment. What exactly is buy-in?
Buy-in at a poker table is the amount of up-front money you pay to enter the game (which funds the prize pool and covers the house fee).
If you don’t agree to the buy-in fee, you don’t enter the game.
If somebody would let you enter the game and then say “oh, by the way, we charged your credit card with (buy-in fee)” you would likely feel duped and rightfully so.
This dynamic is exactly why buy-in matters in social situations.
To show you how, let’s start with the poker table example, and transition away from it one step at a time.
Let’s say a friend texts you “having some drinks with the buddies after work, you in? going through a rough time so I really need you right now”
You agree, and they respond with “thanks, it means so much to me having you there, plz don’t flake“.
That evening, you show up, and the drinks in question are happening at an exclusive elite place that only sells rare vintage champagnes by the bottle.
This can feel like a very icky situation, because you said yes to “drinks tonight” but not yes to spending over a thousand dollars on said drinks. Now you have to choose between incurring this cost you didn’t agree to, ditching your friend, or convincing the whole group to change plans.
But if your friend had gotten buy-in from you (“hey, we’re going to this specific place for vintage champagne, you in?”), this would not feel icky at all.
So far we’ve been looking at something that costs you money. Let’s remove the factor that it costs you anything to join. Buy-in still applies.
Imagine a family member invites you for a chat.
But when you arrive, they try to sell you herbalife.
The reason this feels icky isn’t the act of selling itself, it’s that they pulled the rug on you. Your buy-in was for a chat with a family member, not with a sales person. That’s a different game.
Just like you get to choose which poker table you play at, and whatever happens after is the result of how you played it, you want to be able to choose which role dynamics you are opting into so that the interaction makes sense.
“Family member” and “sales representative” are different games to play. Like changing poker tables.
If they had added “I’d love to tell you about this now product I’m affiliating for”, you could’ve bought into it. No ick.
If your boss is your best friend, you don’t want them bossing you around in your friend hangouts. Those are different role dynamics with different buy-ins. If they invite you to a zoom call, they get buy-in by specifying “it’s for work” or “it’s just to catch up”. Sure, the lines may blur at times in terms of conversation topic.
But the rules of the game (which role you play for each other) are different, and unless you clearly agreed which game you’d play, expectations will differ and things get icky.
Now let’s remove role dynamics too:
A new friend invites you to a party. The party is at their place. Bring your own drinks. The plan is dancing.
At some point, one guy gets naked and dances alone in the corner doing the helicopter dick. Everyone sorts of ignores it, so you think “well I guess he’s drunk and not bothering anyone, it’s a bit surprising but I’ll just ignore it like everyone else”.
As the night progresses, you run into more and more helicopters on the dance floor. You even run into a motorboat or two.
Before you know it, you’re the only one wearing clothes.
So you ask your friend “hey, did I miss a dresscode memo or something? Are we supposed to get naked after 10PM? Because I don’t feel comfortable revealing myself. Nor being the only clothed person”.
And they say: “Oh right, I forgot to tell you. All parties at my place are clothes optional. So don’t worry, you can just keep them on.”
There was clearly a premise to this party which you could’ve bought into, but didn’t.
Now let’s take it one final step closer to home:
If you never make it clear to a person that your date is a date (whether explicitly or through clear, reciprocated non-verbal signaling), the other person can’t buy-in to the game you invited them into.
Now suddenly they think they’re about to meet with their platonic buddy (or to discuss a shared interest with a stranger) and things get very awkward.
The person might’ve even been open to a date, but it’s the lack of buy-in and subsequent switcharoo that kills the trust.
This is why, for example, the first email you receive from me after joining the email list says:
- “Sometimes I will send emails daily for weeks.”
- “Every email will contain an offer at the end of it.”
- “If you’re not up for this, you can unsubscribe.”
This matters. Because if you signed up assuming I’ll write to you once or twice a month, like most people do, you might be annoyed by the volume at times.
And if you signed up as someone who is just a friend interested in my writing, but not interested in joining workshops or working with me, it might feel icky when I pitch you something.
If these emails were not selling workshop tickets, dojo memberships or books, I would be financially incentivized to deprioritize having these interactions with you. By making this my primary sales channel, I remove that friction. But that also means it changes the nature of the emails, therefore, I make sure to get buy-in.
To some people, this may seem cumbersome. Do I really need to get buy-in for every context I invite people into?
No, you don’t need to do anything.
You can simply never ask for buy-in and accept the mixed responses.
However, there’s a flip-side to this:
If you do get good at asking for buy-in, you can get buy-in for pretty much anything.
And I really mean anything.
It doesn’t matter how wild, outrageous, unpleasant, unconventional, or un-anything the thing is that you’d like to experience with other people. I promise you there are others out there who want to experience it with you.
There are no limits to this.
Even if you think what you’d ask for is “one-sided” and “only fun for you”, there are people (or groups) on earth who want to experience the other side of that.
But the crazier your plan or proposal, the more buy-in becomes a necessity.
Because even those who want it, want to have signed up for it out of their own agency.
If you could create any sort of game or experience and get people’s buy-in for it, what would it be?
What’s currently challenging about naming it directly?