Before you read this, get yourself a double espresso. Or a latte with an extra shot. Or a soya macchiato with a squirt of caramel. It doesn't matter what form the caffeine comes in so long as the dose is large. There is a point to this, which I'll explain in a minute, writes Lucy Kellaway

For now it is enough to know I am changing the way I write columns. Over the past 13 years I have developed a technique that goes roughly like this: find something daft from the world of management. Give examples of how widespread it is, then use irony laced with reason to ridicule it. On this model I have written 600 columns. Last week I made the dismal discovery that all have been wasted.

According to Robert Cialdini, a US professor in psychology and marketing, persuasion is a science. Some tricks work, and some don't. Unfortunately, all my efforts fall squarely into the second category.

Take a column I wrote two weeks ago ridiculing people who say "going forward". At the time I judged it to be a great success as nearly 100 people told me they agreed. On reflection, they were the only 100 people left in the world who don't use the phrase.

The only "user" converted was Christopher Cox, the chairman of the US Securities and Exchange Commission, who wrote to the Financial Timessaying he was quitting the habit. But that may have been because I had fingered him in print and he was simply clearing his name.

As for the rest of the world, there seems to be more going-forwarding than ever. Last Wednesday I heard Robert Peston, BBC business editor, saying four "going forwards" in three minutes.

Prof Cialdini explains the trouble: by drawing attention to the fact that so many people say "going forward" I am contributing to the spread.

He describes an experiment in a US national park. A sign was put up pointing out that lots of people had stolen wood in the past, much damage had been done and asking people to stop. The result: wood theft went up threefold.

So this week I am going to use principles taken from his book Yes! 50 Secrets from the Science of Persuasionto see if I can become more effective than before. My aim today: to persuade people to stop saying "reach out". First, I am going to do this by adapting the following experiment on hotel towels.

Most hotels have signs in bathrooms saying: "We invite you to join with us to conserve water by using your towels more than once," which are successful about 60 per cent of the time.

Prof Cialdini and his team replaced these with a sign saying: "Sixty per cent of guests in this hotel re-use towels" and found that compliance went up by 26 per cent. The implication is that we are sheep: we don't want reasons, we just want to know what people just like us do, and then do the same.

So here is my assertion: "Sixty per cent of business people never say 'reach out'." One small problem: this is a lie.

A second proven persuasion technique is foot-in-the-door.

In another weirdly depressing experiment, researchers knocked on doors in a posh neighbourhood trying to get people to put a giant notice on their lawns saying "please drive carefully".

Almost no one agreed. They then asked another group to put a small sticker in their cars to the same effect. Almost everyone agreed. A couple of weeks later they asked these same people to take the hideous sign. Lots said yes. Lesson: people will agree to something big if you soften them up first by getting them to agree to something small.

So to get people to stop saying "reach out", I need to convince them to stop saying something more obviously awful first. Unfortunately, I can't think of anything except "going forward" and I've done enough damage there already.

Another good persuasion technique is to work on people's fear. Using fear alone (which is what I used to do) is hopeless as it just paralyses them. If, instead, you hype up the danger while offering an easy solution, your audience will roll over obediently. So how about this: "If you say 'reach out' you will look like a moron, and discerning people will recoil. But if you say: 'call' or 'e-mail' or 'get in touch' you will seem like a normal person."

Are you convinced? I don't feel terribly convincing writing this. I am not persuaded that these persuasion techniques are right for me. The trouble is that my message to readers is always the same: plug in your brain.

By contrast, the persuasion book is based on findings that we have our brains semi-unplugged most of the time. Which brings me to the book's last and most frightening tip. If you ply your audience with caffeine they are 35 per cent more likely to agree with you, so long as what you are saying isn't total twaddle.

Just as I write these last words, an e-mail has landed. It is from the BlackBerry of a US colleague sitting in an SEC meeting. He tells me that commissioner Kathleen Casey just uttered the words "going forward" but then she stopped and looked at Christopher Cox. "Oops. I can't believe I just said that," she said.

I can believe it only too well. But what I can't believe is that she corrected herself. Thank you, Ms Casey. My faith in my own ways is restored.

Next week I will revert to my tried-and-tested formula.