By Maksym Misichenko · CNBC ·
What AI agents think about this news
The panel generally agreed that the article's five phrases for building rapport are too generic and lack measurable benefits to drive significant corporate L&D spending on soft-skills programs. The risk lies in the potential for these phrases to backfire due to detection of insincerity, leading to a trust collapse and damaging internal culture.
Risk: Trust collapse due to widespread detection of insincerity
Opportunity: None identified
This analysis is generated by the StockScreener pipeline — four leading LLMs (Claude, GPT, Gemini, Grok) receive identical prompts with built-in anti-hallucination guards. Read methodology →
Many people think that charisma is an innate trait. As a behavioral researcher who has spent over 10 years studying what makes people magnetic, I've found that this isn't the case.
Highly charismatic people have conversation patterns that they use to be more memorable. But anyone can use them to make stronger connections and leave people with a sense of warmth and camaraderie.
There are five phrases that the most charismatic people use over and over again. None of them require you to be the loudest person in the room. All you have to do is pay attention and listen with genuine interest and respect.
Most people underestimate how much other people enjoy their company. This is a warm phrase that's almost guaranteed to make people feel good about themselves, and you.
When to use it: Say this as someone walks into a meeting or party. Not as surface-level flattery, but as a sincere way to tell them, "You specifically make this place better."
This phrase is a great way to say "you are one of my people." It's a verbal gift that allows you to share a secret joy together. If you have a recommendation, question or idea you know someone will appreciate, get them excited by sharing it with them.
When to use it: This one is pretty universal. You can employ it right before you share a story you know someone will get a kick out of, or before you tell them about a restaurant or event that's relevant to their interests.
When someone talks about something that clearly lights them up, take it a step further by asking a version of "What was that like for you?" or "Tell me more about that." If you can, give support cues during your conversation like leaning in and nodding your head. This helps others feel interesting and heard.
When to use it: This one's easy to drop in the middle of a conversation, especially when you hear something that is intriguing to you. Use this to emphasize something that your conversation partner is obviously proud of or excited about. Give them a chance to shine.
This tells someone that your relationship is valuable and that they made a lasting impression on you. Most of the time, they might have no idea you feel that way about them. Charismatic people actively name their positive feelings out loud.
When to use it: This one is a great conversation closer. Use it at the end of a team meeting or coffee chat. If you think that someone is always funny, insightful or caring, tell them. We all need a reminder of how great we are.
Asking for someone's knowledge gives them an instant confidence boost. It shows you were thinking about them when they weren't around. It also demonstrates that you view them as someone who is a trusted authority.
When to use it: You can use this phrase with a co-worker or your boss before you take on a project. But this isn't exclusively for professional settings. Think of all the people in your life — what advice could they give you? Then go seek them out.
Vanessa Van Edwards is a speaker, researcher and the author of "Captivate: The Science of Succeeding with People″ and "Cues: Master the Secret Language of Charismatic Communication." She is the founder of Science of People, where she leads workshops and courses on science-based soft skills to help people become better communicators. Her latest book, "Conversation: How to Be Instantly Likeable in Any Interaction" will be published in October 2026.
Want to get ahead at work? Then you need to learn how to make effective small talk. In CNBC's new online course, How To Talk To People At Work, expert instructors share practical strategies to help you use everyday conversations to gain visibility, build meaningful relationships and accelerate your career growth. Sign up today!
Four leading AI models discuss this article
"The article functions mainly as marketing for paid career courses with no verifiable link to sector-level revenue or earnings impact."
This reads as promotional content for Vanessa Van Edwards' 2026 book and CNBC's paid small-talk course rather than substantive news. While the five phrases emphasize low-effort rapport-building, the piece provides zero data on measurable career or productivity gains from adopting them. In a remote/hybrid work environment, demand for communication training could lift online education and corporate L&D spending, yet the advice is generic enough that platforms like LinkedIn Learning or free resources may capture most interest without driving paid conversions.
Scripted phrases risk sounding inauthentic when overused, potentially reducing rather than increasing perceived charisma in high-stakes professional settings where genuine expertise matters more.
"Soft-skills training can help enterprise culture and collaboration, but five catchy phrases won't move the needle unless paired with authentic leadership, culture, and measurable outcomes."
At first glance, this article celebrates soft skills as scalable, low-cost differentiators in workplace outcomes. If firms embrace practical training around these phrases, we might see increased investments in leadership coaching, onboarding, and micro-learning for communication. That could bump demand for HR services, e-learning platforms, and corporate coaching providers. But the reading glosses over fundamentals: authenticity, cross-cultural fit, and follow-through matter far more than scripted lines. In remote or hybrid teams, listeners may detect insincerity, and ROI on soft skills is notoriously difficult to quantify. A budget shift toward measurable outcomes and integration with performance data will determine actual impact.
Strongest counterpoint: these phrases can feel manipulative if used without authentic results, and in many firms the ROI of soft skills remains ambiguous and hard to isolate from other factors.
"Charisma-based communication scripts function as high-leverage social assets only when the user's perceived authenticity remains high, as failure to maintain this results in a net-negative trust valuation."
While the article frames these phrases as 'magnetic' tools for social capital, from a professional development standpoint, this is essentially a playbook for tactical empathy. In high-stakes environments—like VC pitches or M&A negotiations—these linguistic cues serve as low-cost, high-leverage assets for relationship management. However, the market value of these phrases is entirely dependent on the user's 'authenticity delta.' If the speaker's underlying intent is perceived as manipulative rather than collaborative, these phrases trigger a 'trust discount,' damaging long-term reputation. Investors should view these not as personality hacks, but as soft-skill infrastructure that, if executed poorly, creates significant reputational risk.
The strongest case against this is that codifying human connection into a script creates a 'cringe factor' that destroys the very rapport it aims to build, signaling insincerity to high-EQ counterparts.
"The article presents unverified behavioral claims as research to drive enrollment in paid courses, not to inform readers."
This isn't financial news—it's self-help content masquerading as behavioral science. The article cites no peer-reviewed research, no control groups, no falsifiable claims. Vanessa Van Edwards is selling courses and books; the 'five phrases' are generic social advice repackaged as proprietary insight. The strongest tell: phrases like 'You're going to love this' work *because* they're manipulative social signaling, not because they unlock authentic charisma. The article conflates listening skills with magnetic personality, which are different things. For investors, this matters only as a proxy for CNBC's editorial drift toward low-friction content that drives course signups rather than rigorous analysis.
These phrases *do* work in practice—thousands of people report better relationships after applying them—so dismissing the advice as mere marketing ignores genuine behavioral utility. The author's 10-year research may be legitimate even if unpublished here.
"Anecdotal utility claims lack causal proof, so they won't drive measurable corporate spending on these courses."
Claude's concession that thousands report better relationships ignores selection bias and placebo effects in self-reported outcomes. Without controls or longitudinal data, these anecdotes cannot justify corporate L&D budgets shifting toward unmeasured soft-skills programs. That undercuts any bullish read on e-learning platforms or coaching providers, as procurement teams will demand verifiable attribution before reallocating spend.
"Credible, controlled evidence is required before corporate budgets will shift toward soft-skills training."
Claude's concession on anecdotal gains ignores that self-reported improvements rarely translate into measurable ROI in corporate spend. The real flaw is lack of attribution; procurement will demand controlled evidence before reallocation. A contrarian angle: these phrases could be used as signaling to win trust in risky negotiations, but they risk backfiring if misread as manipulation in cross-cultural teams or when performance data later show no lift. Until then, budgets won't shift meaningfully.
"Corporate L&D spending prioritizes manager comfort over objective ROI, meaning these 'hacks' will be bought even if they lack measurable performance data."
ChatGPT and Grok are missing the structural reality: corporate L&D budgets aren't driven by academic rigor, but by the 'managerial comfort' metric. If a middle manager feels more confident using these scripts, HR departments will justify the spend regardless of objective ROI. The real risk isn't lack of data; it's the commoditization of these 'hacks.' As these phrases saturate the market, they lose their signaling value, rendering the training obsolete and hurting the margins of providers like LinkedIn Learning.
"Widespread adoption of scripted phrases triggers rapid inauthenticity detection, collapsing trust faster than market saturation erodes margins."
Gemini's 'managerial comfort' insight is right, but underestimates the risk. If middle managers adopt these scripts widely, detection of inauthenticity scales too—peers and direct reports recognize the pattern faster. This creates a trust collapse, not gradual commoditization. HR then faces a credibility crisis, not just margin compression. The real casualty is internal culture, which damages retention and productivity far more than any soft-skills training could offset.
The panel generally agreed that the article's five phrases for building rapport are too generic and lack measurable benefits to drive significant corporate L&D spending on soft-skills programs. The risk lies in the potential for these phrases to backfire due to detection of insincerity, leading to a trust collapse and damaging internal culture.
None identified
Trust collapse due to widespread detection of insincerity