Alexander Hamilton lost his life on July 11th, 1804 so that Aaron Burr could get some satisfaction. The famous duel in Weehawken, NJ occurred because of disparaging remarks made by Hamilton at a dinner party. I hope images of one gentleman slapping another gentleman with ladies gloves flashes through your mind. While we’ve moved past the era of challenging someone to a duel at 20 paces the sentiment lives on in many of our behaviors. Most deals are won and lost because of this very idea. Skilled negotiators understand that you have to provide the other side with some satisfaction in order to ink the deal. In the far east, they have a similar concept around the idea of “Face” or “Saving Face”.
Satisfaction unfortunately is intangible and therefore difficult to create and trade. Satisfaction isn’t like price or volume, it encompasses the whole process as well as the individuals involved. It’s closely related to “How” you handle the entire negotiation. Emotional outbursts, heavy-handed tactics, personal challenges, disparaging remarks all destroy satisfaction. Building satisfaction is different for every negotiation and every person. Respect and dignity are common themes when trying to build high levels of satisfaction. Here are two important concepts for establishing satisfaction while negotiating.
Continue reading »
One of the most important elements of a robust negotiation strategy is your question strategy. Questions put you in charge during a negotiation. Questions accomplish the following:
- Establish baseline responses
- Allow you to direct the issues discussed
- Apply pressure to the other side as they attempt to respond
- Unlock information by getting the other side to talk
- Create momentum and continue the discussion
Many people are familiar with the classic question funnel as a strategy. I’ve modified the funnel and added a preliminary level called “Baseline”. It is critical to establish baseline responses for the other party in all styles of negotiation. You want to establish what a genuine “No” sounds like, feels like, and looks like. The theory is simple, ask questions that A) you know the answer or B) a reasonable person wouldn’t lie. Small talk is great for establishing a baseline. Great baseline questions are conversational and immaterial to the actual negotiation. Questions about hobbies, television, sporting events etc. work well. Ask questions you are fairly certain will receive a “No” response. For example when negotiating with a male counterpart I might ask:
Internal negotiations can include:
- Resource allocation discussions
- Project management and implementation
- Labor relations
- Influencing and persuading
- Recruitment and promotion
- Etc.
The problem starts with the structure of most corporate firms. Decisions tend to follow a pyramid like hierarchy, even in flat or modular organizations. As a result, disputes and conflicts are escalated for resolution. The two sides submit their conflicting views and recommendations for consideration. The decision maker chooses. One side wins, and one side loses. At the risk of over-simplifying the problem, this process creates win-lose outcomes when clearly win-win is appropriate given the circumstance. (see Wheel of Negotiation)
Change the Decision Process
In order to avoid a win-lose outcome, the first step is to begin treating the discussion as a negotiation. Instead of relying on delegated authorities to solve the conflict or issue, agree with the parties involved to reach a consensus as a group. Leave escalation as a means for resolving deadlock or last resort. If deadlock occurs, a “last best offer” style for the decision can be very effective at minimizing the lose factor. In treating the issue as a negotiation a formal process needs to be followed to maximize the potential result. (Details below)
- Time – if you have more time than the other party, you have the ability to increase your options, you have more power.
- Circumstance – extenuating factors effecting the parties’ level of need or desperation.
Change either the time or circumstance and you change the value of everything. There are countless examples of case studies where parties have drastically changed the balance of power by introducing or changing these two factors. Two pristine examples:
Continue reading »
No I’m not arresting you, yet I will absolutely punish you if you forget this rule. In negotiation everything you say delivers information to the other party. The more you say the more information you provide. Make no mistake, INFORMATION IS POWER! When you are negotiating there are three levels of information available voice, verbal, and visual. I am going to explore the information provided in the verbal content during discussions. Verbal content is available in both face to face and telephone communications. Quite simply, the verbal content is made up of the words someone uses to transmit an idea. The verbal aspect is “How” you phrase your sentence.
Read Brett’s statement carefully, he is talking in the past tense when referring to playing with the Vikings. What do you think? As a fan, hopefully he will change his mind as we get closer to the 2010 kickoff.
“It was truly an amazing experience to be a part of the Minnesota Vikings this past season. Regardless of what the future holds, I want everyone to know that I will cherish the memories of the past year for the rest of my life.” - Brett Favre
Let’s see if Brett’s language changes over the course of the year.
