STITT FELD HANDY GROUP ON-LINE NEGOTIATION COURSE

Transcription

1 STITT FELD HANDY GROUP ON-LINE NEGOTIATION COURSE

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS POSITIONAL VERSUS INTEREST-BASED NEGOTIATION 4 Positional Negotiating.. 4 Interest-Based Negotiating.. 4 The Difference Between Positions And Interests. 4 Choosing Between Positional Negotiating And Interest-Based Negotiating.. 5 Finding Out Others Interests. 6 Generating Options. 6 Points To Consider In An Interest-Based Negotiation 7 Tips. 9 MAKING ASSUMPTIONS. 10 Tips.. 10 SALES AND COLD CALLING.. 11 Tips.. 13 SPEAKING PERSUASIVELY. 14 Tips.. 14 EFFECTIVE LISTENING. 15 Interactive Listening. 16 Using Open Body Language Or Other Non-Verbal Clues.. 16 Using Prompters 16 Asking Clarifying Questions Restating Or Paraphrasing.. 17 Identifying Feelings.. 17 Acknowledging Underlying Values.. 18 Tips. 19 DEALING WITH AN INFLEXIBLE BUREAUCRAT 20 Going To The Superior 21 Trying To Establish A Positive Relationship With The Inflexible Bureaucrat By Being Polite And Respectful.. 21 Threats 22 Exaggerating Or Stretching The Truth.. 22 Focusing on What Is Fair. 23 Providing Information. 23 Directing The Inflexible Bureaucrat To What You Think Is The Right Answer. 24 Asking The Inflexible Bureaucrat Questions That May Lead Them To The Answer, Rather Than Telling Them What They Should Do 25 Focusing On Who Is Right And Who Is Wrong 25 Using Silence. 26 Brainstorming Possible Options With An Inflexible Bureaucrat.. 26 Putting The Onus On The Inflexible Bureaucrat To Find A Solution.. 27 Knowing Your Audience 28 1

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Cont d. Focusing On The Positive 28 Focusing On Interests.. 29 Challenging The Rule.. 29 Focusing On Standards of Legitimacy.. 30 Knowing and Understanding the Value of Your Best Alternative To A Negotiated Settlement (BATNA) 30 Tips. 31 NEGOTIATION TENDENCIES 32 People Who Have A Tendency To Be Analytical 32 People Who Have A Tendency To Seek Justice.. 33 People Who Have A Tendency To Seek Results. 34 People Who Have A Tendency To Avoid Hostility 34 People Who Have A Tendency To Focus On Relationship 35 Tips. 35 MAKING THE FIRST OFFER OR PUTTING FORWARD THE FIRST NUMBER 36 Tips.. 37 HOW MUCH INFORMATION SHOULD YOU SHARE? 38 Tips. 39 IS IT IMPORTANT FOR YOU TO APPEAR TO BE REASONABLE? 40 Tips.. 41 SHOULD YOU MISLEAD IN NEGOTIATION? 42 The Prisoner s Dilemma One-Time Negotiations. 44 Strategies For Dealing With The Prisoner s Dilemma. 45 Don t be envious. 45 Don t be the first to defect or deceive. 45 Reciprocate both co-operation and defection/deception. 46 Don t try to be too clever 47 Tips. 48 WHEN YOU SHOULD WALK AWAY FROM A NEGOTIATION AND WHEN SHOULD YOU ACCEPT WHAT IS OFFERED When Should You Say Yes?. 51 Tips.. 52 NEGOTIATING IN PAIRS OR TEAMS.. 53 Advantages of Negotiating In Pairs Or Teams 53 Disadvantages of Negotiating In Pairs Or Teams 54 Ideas To Consider When Preparing to Negotiate As A Team 54 Strategies To Consider When Negotiating In Pairs Or As Part Of A Team. 55 Tips

4 TABLE OF CONTENTS Cont d. DIFFICULTIES IN NEGOTIATION. 58 Steamrolling With Information Assuming A Deal.. 60 You Commit, I Decide.. 61 Unreasonable First Offers 61 Mixing The People And The Problem 62 Being Obstinate. 63 Tips INDEX

5 POSITIONAL VERSUS INTEREST-BASED NEGOTIATION 1 POSITIONAL NEGOTIATING In positional or competitive bargaining, the negotiators begin with an exchange of positions. A position is a specific proposal or suggested solution. The negotiators usually then argue about why their position should be accepted. Concessions may or may not be made. If an agreement is reached, it is normally a compromise between two positions. INTEREST-BASED NEGOTIATING In interest-based negotiation, the negotiators focus on each sides interests and try to create options that will satisfy those interests. Interests are the underlying needs, desires, wants, goals, and concerns behind the positions. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN POSITIONS AND INTERESTS Positions are specific proposals or solutions, which have been designed to satisfy interests. A position can be satisfied in only one way. Interests, on the other hand, are the underlying needs, desires, concerns, and fears that the person is trying to satisfy by adopting a position. Interests can be satisfied in many ways. Positional negotiating involves starting with the answer (the position) and then discussing possibilities and concerns. Interest-based negotiating involves starting with needs, exploring possibilities, and arriving at answers (or positions) at the end of the negotiation rather than at the beginning Stitt Feld Handy Group. This material may not be reproduced without the permission of the Stitt Feld Handy Group. C

6 CHOOSING BETWEEN POSITIONAL NEGOTIATING AND INTEREST-BASED NEGOTIATING Positional Negotiating - Advantages The advantages of positional negotiating include: It may achieve a very good substantive result. It may result in a quick deal. It may not require a lot of preparation. It may convey to the other side that you feel strongly about your position. Positional Negotiating - Disadvantages The disadvantages of positional negotiating include: The negotiation may result in an agreement that is not the best possible agreement. The people negotiating may fail to reach an agreement even though there were good agreements that could have been negotiated. The relationship between the two negotiators may be damaged. Opportunities for creative options may be missed. Interest-Based Negotiation-Advantages The advantages of interest-based negotiation include: There is a greater likelihood that agreement will be reached that satisfies the interests of the negotiators. Focusing on interests promotes creativity and there is a greater likelihood that options will be generated that create value. The relationship will likely be maintained or even enhanced. Interest-Based Negotiation-Disadvantages The disadvantages of interest-based negotiation include: It can take more time to prepare for and participate in an interest-based negotiation. You may miss opportunities to take advantage of the other side. You may be perceived as weak by a positional negotiator. 5

7 FINDING OUT OTHERS INTERESTS It may be difficult to determine the interests of others because: Others may not be fully aware of their own interests. Others may not understand the value of sharing their interests with you. Others may resist sharing their interests with you for fear that their disclosing their interests will give you a strategic advantage. To encourage others to identify and discuss their interests, you may: Ask others why they take the position they do (for what purpose). Ask them why particular solutions do not satisfy them. Ask them how they will be better off if their position is accepted. Ask them how the situation has affected them. Ask them where they see themselves in five years. Ask what they hope to achieve in the negotiation. Ask whether something has changed, and if so, what has changed to lead to their position. Ask what the situation would look like if it were improved tomorrow. Ask them to explain how they arrived at their position. Use silence to allow the other person to fill the vacuum. Share your own interests. Show others that you are open to listen to them. If other negotiators are unwilling to discuss their interests, you may want to imagine yourself in the other person s shoes and consider what their interests might be. GENERATING OPTIONS Once the interests have been identified you may try to generate options that might satisfy those interests. In coming up with options, you may consider the following: You may find it helpful to separate the creativity of coming up with options from the process of analyzing the options. You may want to create as many options as you can with the other side and then review the options to determine which options make the most sense. 6

8 One way to generate options is to brainstorm. Brainstorming involves thinking creatively and coming up with a list of possible solutions. A recommended ground rule of brainstorming is that no one be bound by or committed to options that they generate. Options are not offers. A second recommended ground rule is that people who are brainstorming should refrain from criticizing or evaluating the options as they are being generated. Brainstorming can turn the negotiation process from a competitive one into a joint problem-solving exercise. When negotiators exchange positions, the process can become adversarial and it can create a dynamic of competition. When negotiators brainstorm, they work together to identify options that satisfy the interests of both sides. Brainstorming may allow you opportunities to create value or expand the pie. Once the options have been brainstormed, the negotiators can review the options to determine which ones they want to explore further, and which ones may lead to a mutually beneficial negotiated agreement. POINTS TO CONSIDER IN AN INTEREST-BASED NEGOTIATION When you are asking other negotiators questions about their interests, you are not trying to force them to justify their interests; you are trying to get clarity about what their interests are. Try to uncover as many of other peoples interests as you can. People often have more than one interest and some of their interests may conflict. The other negotiator may have constituents whose interests must be satisfied. Therefore, it can be helpful to try to identify who those other people might be (e.g., a partner, a spouse, a boss, etc.) and what their interests might be. It may be helpful to focus on the interests you would like to have met in the future and not on the interests that were not met in the past. Opposing interests are not necessarily bad. Sometimes agreement is possible because people have different interests and the interests are complimentary. 7

9 It may be helpful to acknowledge the other negotiator s interests once you understand them. Acknowledging someone s interests is not the same as saying that you share them or that they will all be satisfied; it is simply indicating to that person that you have heard and understood their needs, desires and concerns. Once the interests have been identified, brainstorming can be used to identify as many options as possible. You may find it effective to talk about interests before you talk about potential solutions. If you start with a potential solution (your position) and then try to justify why the solution is appropriate given your interests, the other negotiator may be less able to hear your interests and generate options than if you start the discussion by identifying both sets of interests and then explore possible solutions together. 8

10 TIPS focus on the interests behind positions know your own interests try to find out the other side s interest ask why and why not to get at others interests ask others how they will be better off if their positions are accepted try to avoid taking positions at the start of the negotiation; instead, try to find solutions that meet underlying interests brainstorm options that may meet interests set ground rules during brainstorming: no commitment to options and no criticism of options 9

11 MAKING ASSUMPTIONS 2 Some of us are too quick to make assumptions in negotiations. When we do, we risk that: we may be wrong others may be put off by our making assumptions we may close our mind to other possibilities. We tend to look for evidence that supports our assumptions, and we see facts so as to support our assumptions. In order to avoid the dangers inherent in making assumptions, we can try to: keep an open mind continually test assumptions that we are making ask whether our assumptions are valid. TIPS try to avoid making assumptions test your hypothesis to see whether your assumptions are valid Stitt Feld Handy Group. This material may not be reproduced without the permission of the Stitt Feld Handy Group. C

12 SALES AND COLD CALLING 3 In sales, you may have to try to sell to someone who doesn t want to talk to you; that is, you may have to make a cold call. People you are trying to sell to may be: busy in a hurry disinterested You will need strategies that encourage the other person to stay and listen to your pitch. You may want to consider the following: Find out what they need rather than telling them what you are selling. The days of making a pitch and waiting for the order are over. The pitch has to meet the clients needs. Be careful making assumptions about what your clients want and need. The consequences of being wrong are too great. Consider starting your pitch by inviting the potential customers to indicate that they in fact do not need or want the product. Tell them that if your product or service is not for then, they should tell you right away so that you don t waste their time. Your invitation may be perceived as refreshing and it may encourage them to listen. They will often respond by asking what it is you are selling. People usually don t like to feel pressured. While some will make decisions because they feel as though they are in a corner, others will react negatively to being forced to decide. People often do, however, work better when there are fixed time frames. Provided the constraints are not so tight that they feel pressured, letting them know that there are consequences to making no decision may force their hand. People prefer to work with people they trust. If you are not scrupulously honest, you will not be trusted and it will likely be harder to make a sale Stitt Feld Handy Group. This material may not be reproduced without the permission of the Stitt Feld Handy Group. C

13 People like freebies. Customers often appreciate gifts, no matter how small. People sometimes feel obligated to give you an order if they believe you have given them a gift with no guarantee of anything in return. People appreciate it when you spend a lot of time with them and do extra work to answer their questions and help them. If you show that you want to help them, they may feel an obligation to try to help you. If you are busy and don t have a lot of time for them, do not expect them to have a lot of time for you. People appreciate kindness. If you are sensitive to the fact that the people you are trying to sell to are human beings, with feelings and time constraints, they may be more open to what you have to say. People appreciate it when you have taken the time to learn about them. Read their promotional material, have a look at their website, and show them that you care about their business. Try to speak to decision-makers, but people don t usually like being told who in their organization should hear your pitch. You may be more successful speaking to the person or people whose job it is to hear your pitch. You may want to pause during your presentation to give your client the opportunity to interject and ask questions. People have a tendency to stop listening if they are not speaking as well as listening. It sometimes requires a number of attempts before people say yes. Some people need time to think about whether they really need what it is you are selling. Follow-up can be crucial. People prefer to deal with other people who are reliable. If you say you will call back on a particular day and you do not call, you may be perceived as unreliable. Some people discount everything that is said by someone who arrives late for a meeting. Your tardiness can prevent you from making a sale that you would otherwise have made. 12

14 TIPS ask questions first and pitch after give them the freedom to say no to you give people what they want, not what you are selling be on time, reliable, and scrupulously honest be generous with your time and, where feasible, be generous with token gifts, even when you may not make a sale. 13

15 SPEAKING PERSUASIVELY 4 We all want to be persuasive in negotiation. Usually, we tell others why we are right and they are wrong. Unfortunately, telling others why they are wrong and should agree with us is often the least effective way to be persuasive. To be more persuasive, you may want to consider the following: Be open to be persuaded. If you want others to be open to be persuaded by you, you need to show that you are open to be persuaded by them. Find out others concerns and try to address those concerns rather than explaining why you are right and they are wrong. People are more likely to be persuaded if their concerns are met. Try to remain curious. People do not hold beliefs that they know to be irrational. Their positions make sense to them. Once you understand the information they have and the way they interpret it, you are in a better position to try to alter the way in which they interpret the information. Demonstrate that you have understood what the other person has said before you share your differing viewpoint. If you listen to them, they may be more likely to listen to you. Try to think about the message you want to send (the content), how to send it (the form), and how the message might be heard. If you have something that you wish to say, try to frame it in a way that the other negotiator can hear your message. Try to avoid questions that are really statements in disguise and ask questions for the purpose of obtaining information. TIPS be open to be persuaded show that you are listening to them so that they will be encouraged to listen to you Stitt Feld Handy Group. This material may not be reproduced without the permission of the Stitt Feld Handy Group. C

16 EFFECTIVE LISTENING 5 Whether you negotiate in person, over the phone, or by , you are communicating. Negotiation is communication for the purpose of exploring whether people can do something together that is better than what they can do on their own. Better communicators are usually better negotiators. People often try to communicate by arguing why they are right. Often, however, telling someone why you are right is the least effective way to persuade. If you want to persuade someone, you will want to first understand how that person sees the situation. Once you fully understand the other persons perceptions, you will be better equipped to change them. Also, you may be more persuasive if you listen first and then speak. To be an effective negotiator you will need to be an effective listener. The benefits of effective listening are that it: allows you to gather important information about the other negotiator s interests, needs, concerns and feelings allows other negotiators to know that they have been heard builds trust between you and other negotiators helps to establish respectful relationships encourages disclosure provides an opportunity for venting provides other negotiators with the opportunity to hear how their message is being received models the behaviour you would like the other negotiators to exhibit when you speak allows you to determine whether you have correctly understood other negotiators reduces other negotiators need to repeat arguments Stitt Feld Handy Group. This material may not be reproduced without the permission of the Stitt Feld Handy Group. C

17 INTERACTIVE LISTENING Interactive listening involves listening by interacting with the other person listening by interacting in a way that allows the other person to feel heard and understood. The techniques for interactive listening include: Using Open Body Language or Other Non-Verbal Clues Using Prompters Asking Clarifying Questions Restating or Paraphrasing Identifying Feelings Acknowledging Underlying Values USING OPEN BODY LANGUAGE OR OTHER NON-VERBAL CLUES We send messages with body language and we may want to consider the messages that we send. For example: If we cross our arms and our legs, we may suggest that we do not agree with what the other person is saying, even though that may not be the message we want to send. The amount of direct eye contact we make may suggest to others the extent of our sincerity. Our facial expressions may suggest to others that we disagree with what they are saying. If we use open body language, that may suggest to others that we are interested and listening. USING PROMPTERS Prompters are simple verbal cues you can use to encourage the other negotiator to say more. They include comments such as: uh huh I see go on tell me more about that 16

18 ASKING CLARIFYING QUESTIONS You ask questions for the purpose of clarifying information provided by the other person. They are genuine attempts to obtain information, as opposed to questions asked for the purpose of persuading. Examples of clarifying questions could include: You said that you have data that suggests that your salary is too low, what data do you have? Does the guarantee cover dents to the car? RESTATING OR PARAPHRASING Restating or paraphrasing is repeating, in your own words, what you have heard the other person say, and checking with the other person to make sure that you have correctly captured his or her comments. Examples of paraphrasing could include: It sounds as though the three major issues you feel we should discuss today are: the completion dates for the different stages of the project, who will be responsible for supervision, and cost, is that right? Let me make sure I understand you correctly, you are saying that any agreement we reach today would have to include a provision that protects you should we not be able to honour our promissory note, is that right? IDENTIFYING FEELINGS People sometimes become emotional during a negotiation. The other negotiator may become angry, frustrated, upset or offended, for example. Identifying the feelings and acknowledging that you have recognized that those feelings exist lets other negotiators know that you are paying attention to their emotional responses as well as the content of what they are saying. This may provide other negotiators with an opportunity to manage their emotions so that the focus can return to the substantive issues. How and when you choose to identify emotions in a negotiation will depend upon: your personal style your relationship with the other person your assessment of what might be helpful to the other person the circumstances in which the negotiation is taking place 17

19 Some examples of how you might identify the other negotiator s emotions include: It made you angry when I did not acknowledge how hard you had worked to complete the report on time, is that right? Would it be fair to say that you were frustrated by the response you received from us when you raised your concerns? ACKNOWLEDGING UNDERLYING VALUES Each of us has underlying values which guide our behaviour. We also interpret the behaviour of others according to whether it aligns with our values. Examples of underlying values include: a desire to be treated fairly a desire to act with integrity the belief that one should contribute to those who are less fortunate. Often, people in negotiation believe that one of their underlying values has been violated. Frequently, however, people talk about the offending behaviour which violated the value without expressing the underlying value. For example, a negotiator may argue that you are posturing and being unreasonable. The underlying value may be that it is important to the negotiator that people negotiate in good faith. It can be helpful in a negotiation to acknowledge the other person s underlying values that are not being stated. An example of a statement designed to acknowledge an underlying value is: When you say that you have been unfairly treated by the company, it sounds like it s important to you that people treat each other with respect, is that right? 18

20 TIPS try to listen interactively when the other person says something that you disagree with or want to argue about try to show others that you are listening by interacting with them try to use open body language use prompters, paraphrase, ask clarifying questions, and acknowledge their emotions try to determine the underlying value in what they are saying and ask them whether you have accurately determined the value try to show that you have heard before you respond. 19

21 DEALING WITH AN INFLEXIBLE BUREAUCRAT 6 When negotiating with inflexible bureaucrats, you may encounter a number of challenges: They may have limited time to deal with your concerns. You may be perceived as simply one in a sea of abundant clients. They may have partisan perceptions of you and your problem, in the sense that they may, without adequate information or reflection, unfairly pigeonhole you and your problem into a category of clients or problems that they have dealt with in the past. They may see little or no consequence to not making you happy. Because you may have to negotiate over the telephone rather than in person: there may be opportunities for miscommunication; you may not be able to pick up on the other negotiator s non-verbal cues; it may be more difficult to establish a rapport; it may be easier for the person you are dealing with to exit the negotiation by hanging up the telephone. There is no magic formula for dealing with these challenges; however, there are basic strategies you may consider using. Each of the strategies has risks and benefits and deciding which strategy to use involves weighing the risks and benefits. If the first strategy you try does not succeed, you may want to try a different strategy. Consider the benefits and risks of the following strategies Stitt Feld Handy Group. This material may not be reproduced without the permission of the Stitt Feld Handy Group. C

22 GOING TO THE SUPERIOR Benefits: Asking to speak to a superior may shift the negotiation to another person who can override the subordinate s decision. The superior may be more reasonable than the subordinate. The superior may have more authority to deal with the problem than the subordinate. The superior may care more about keeping clients happy. Risks: The subordinate could perceive your request to speak to a superior as a threat. The superior may be removed from the details of the situation. Superiors often do not like to override the decisions of subordinates. The superior may try to defend the actions of the subordinate. You may get sidetracked into a debate about whether the subordinate acted reasonably rather than a discussion focused on finding a solution that meets your needs. The superior may be more difficult to deal with than the subordinate. The superior may have less time and be less open to dealing with the problem than the subordinate. TRYING TO ESTABLISH A POSITIVE RELATIONSHIP WITH THE INFLEXIBLE BUREAUCRAT BY BEING POLITE AND RESPECTFUL Benefits: You may get more with honey than with vinegar. It may be difficult for people to agree with you if they perceive you as unpleasant. Front line service people have to deal with impatient and rude people all the time and they do not like it. You stand out from the crowd when you are polite and respectful. This may set you up for special treatment. People tend to agree with others when they believe others are acting reasonably. Being polite and respectful sends the message that you are reasonable and that what you are asking for is reasonable. 21

23 Risks: Some people see politeness and respectfulness as a sign of weakness. They may think that they can bully you. THREATS Benefits: The inflexible bureaucrat might be intimidated and give in. Risks: People who are threatened often react by threatening back or by trying to exit the situation. A threat can put an end to a negotiation or create an unproductive exchange of threats. Threatening others may make it more difficult for them to listen to you and be sympathetic to you and your situation. Your threat may be perceived as unreasonable. That unreasonableness may taint everything you say. Threatening can damage a relationship and prevent inflexible bureaucrats from considering options that they otherwise might have considered. EXAGGERATING OR STRETCHING THE TRUTH Benefits: You might get more attention if the bureaucrat thinks your situation is worse than it really is. You may be able to trick the bureaucrat into giving you what you want. Risks: Lies are often easier to discover than liars think. If inflexible bureaucrats think you are exaggerating or lying, they may stop trusting you. Everything that you say may appear suspect, including your story, your concerns, and your positions. If the inflexible bureaucrat believes that you are exaggerating, the person may also perceive you as unreasonable, with an unreasonable story and 22

24 unreasonable demands. Inflexible bureaucrats do not like to say yes to people they perceive as unreasonable. Inflexible bureaucrats may believe that you are trying to take advantage of them if they believe you are exaggerating. Your reasonable position could get lost in the emotion you create by the exaggerating or lying. If you are found to have exaggerated, the inflexible bureaucrat may not want to negotiate with you and may try to end the negotiation. FOCUSING ON WHAT IS FAIR Benefits: Most people want to be fair, be perceived as fair and do what is fair. If people believe that what you are asking for is fair, they are more likely to want to try to help you. It is harder for the inflexible bureaucrat to walk away from the negotiation if you are asking to be treated fairly. You can use fairness as an objective standard for determining which option should be accepted. Risks: Different people have different perceptions of what is fair. Their perception of what is fair may be very different from yours. You may be perceived as being on your high horse. Some people are more interested in what is in it for them and those they work for than what is fair. They may decide to do what is good for them even if it is unfair. PROVIDING INFORMATION Benefits: If you make a demand before others understand the problem, they may have a knee-jerk rejection of your suggestion. Providing information can help them to understand your problem and may help them to identify possible solutions. 23

25 An inflexible bureaucrat may pigeonhole you and your problem. Information may help the inflexible bureaucrat classify the situation and get you out of a pigeonhole. You might even be able to convince the other person that your situation is unique and that it does not fit into a preconceived pigeonhole. Risks: Providing information takes time; you might be able to get what you want without a detailed story. The information you are providing may not seem relevant or useful to inflexile bureaucrats. As a result, they may become frustrated or stop listening. If you provide too much detailed information, the inflexible bureaucrat may not be able to see the forest for the trees. DIRECTING THE INFLEXIBLE BUREAUCRAT TO WHAT YOU THINK IS THE RIGHT ANSWER Benefits: The inflexible bureaucrat might agree with you. Telling the inflexible bureaucrat what the right answer is can send a clear message about what you think and what you are prepared to accept. Saying what you want conveys confidence and may give you credibility. Being direct can save time. Risks: People do not like to be told what to do and what the right answer is, even if the answer is a good one. Sometimes they need to be able to come to the answer themselves before they see it as credible. When you give inflexible bureaucrats the right answer, they are faced with a choice: agreeing or disagreeing. By forcing them to make the choice, you run the risk that they may say no and exit from the 24

26 negotiation. It may be too early in the negotiation to force the inflexible bureaucrat s hand. ASKING THE INFLEXIBLE BUREAUCRAT QUESTIONS THAT MAY LEAD THEM TO THE ANSWER, RATHER THAN TELLING THEM WHAT THEY SHOULD DO Benefits: People are more likely to want to implement a solution if they think they came up with it. You appear to be less pushy and more reasonable. Risks: An indirect route can take more time. You may appear to be confused, unprepared and tentative. You may send the message that the problem is not as important to you as it really is. Some inflexible bureaucrats may not be able to come to solutions on their own. Asking questions may appear to be patronizing. FOCUSING ON WHO IS RIGHT AND WHO IS WRONG Benefits: You may be able to convince the inflexible bureaucrat that you are right. Since most people want to do the right thing, if you are right, the inflexible bureaucrat may be more inclined to say yes to you. If the wrong person is somebody other than the inflexible bureaucrat, you may be able to shift the blame to that third party. There may be no way of resolving the matter without focusing on who is right and who is wrong. Risks: Few people like to admit that they are wrong. Even if you do not mean to criticize or attack inflexible bureaucrats, they may perceive your focus on who is right and who is wrong as criticisms or 25

27 attacks. Suggesting to inflexible bureaucrats that they have made mistakes may make them more resistant to everything you propose. Focusing on who is right and who is wrong focuses the discussion on the past. Solutions are usually found in the present and in the future. Focussing on the past can put distance between you and a discussion about solutions. USING SILENCE Benefits: Being silent encourages others to talk and to provide information. When people are thinking through issues, they sometimes need time to think. Silence can give them that opportunity. Risks: If used at the wrong time, silence may be seen as a negotiation tactic by others. If you are silent when an answer is expected of you, others may become frustrated, may believe you are trying to make something up, may see you as confused and unmotivated, or may simply believe, in the case of a telephone negotiation, that you have hung up. BRAINSTORMING POSSIBLE OPTIONS WITH AN INFLEXIBLE BUREAUCRAT Benefits: Brainstorming may lead you to solutions you had not considered. There are often many solutions to a problem and some of these solutions are frequently better than others. It is not uncommon, however, for people to miss an elegant option because they have failed to generate all of the possible options. Brainstorming can increase the likelihood of exploring all of the potential options. Brainstorming can help change the direction of a negotiation. It can help pivot the negotiation into a discussion of options and away from who is right and who is wrong. Brainstorming can create an environment of joint problem solving. 26

28 Risks: Brainstorming requires more time than focusing directly on a particular or limited number of solutions. If you are dealing with people who are tired, busy, and want to resolve issues as quickly as possible, brainstorming might annoy them. You may be perceived as not knowing what you want. An inflexible bureaucrat may see your request to brainstorm as patronizing. PUTTING THE ONUS ON THE INFLEXIBLE BUREAUCRAT TO FIND A SOLUTION Benefits: Playing to the expertise of inflexible bureaucrats can empower them and give them the sense of controlling the situation. The perception that they are in control may encourage them to continue the negotiation, and perhaps find a solution to the problem. The inflexible bureaucrat may know of solutions that you have not considered. If inflexible bureaucrats come up with a solution, they may be more likely to want to implement it. Inflexible bureaucrats may have an understanding of the situation that you do not have. Hearing their view may provide you with important information. Risks: You may appear not to know what you want. The inflexible bureaucrat may not care enough to find a solution. You may not like the solution that the inflexible bureaucrat proposes. If inflexible bureaucrats believe that you share some blame for your predicament, they might believe that you should share some responsibility of finding a solution. 27

29 KNOWING YOUR AUDIENCE Benefits: If you understand how inflexible bureaucrats see things, you may be able to predict how they will react. You may be able to put yourself in their shoes, ask yourself how they are likely to react to what you are about to say or do, and then ask yourself whether that is the reaction you want. For example: Will asking to speak to a superior be perceived as a threat? If you suggest to inflexible bureaucrats that they are under stress, will they see this as a suggestion that they were wrong? If you praise the inflexible bureaucrat, will you appear patronizing? It forces you to see the negotiation from the inflexible bureaucrat s perspective. The first step in building a strategy to get somebody to change their mind is to understand how they see the problem. It may help you to anticipate challenges in the negotiation. If you know what to expect, you will likely be better prepared. Risks: You may become so focused on the inflexible bureaucrat s perspective that you lose sight of your agenda and what is important to you. FOCUSING ON THE POSITIVE Benefits: People like to deal with others who are positive. By recognizing the positive things that the inflexible bureaucrat does, you may appear more reasonable. People like to agree with those they consider reasonable. Inflexible bureaucrats may be less likely to exit the negotiation if they hear positive things. Risks: You may appear to be patronizing. You may be perceived as weak and unfocused. 28

30 It may leave the inflexible bureaucrat with the impression that you were not treated as unfairly as you believe you were. FOCUSING ON INTERESTS Benefits: People tend to act in their best interest or in the best interest of the organization they represent. If inflexible bureaucrats understand how a solution or a course of action is in their best interest, they may be more likely to accept it. Understanding inflexible bureaucrats interests may help you come up with solutions that they can accept. If you know their interests, you will have a better sense of which solutions are likely to be attractive to them and which are not. Helping inflexible bureaucrats understand your interests may help them understand what is important to you and why. If inflexible bureaucrats understand your interests, they are more likely to understand your position. Risks: Understanding and finding underlying interests may take time. If you focus on your interests, inflexible bureaucrats may be encouraged to focus on theirs. This may lead them to reject solutions they might otherwise have accepted were they not as focused on all of their interests. CHALLENGING THE RULE Benefits: Where inflexible bureaucrats invoke a rule to justify a course of action, challenging the legitimacy of the rule may get them to reconsider whether they should apply the rule to your situation. It may be possible to challenge the application of the rule to your circumstance without challenging the rule itself. You may be able to argue that the rule is appropriate but it simply does not apply to your circumstances. 29

31 You may be able to convince the inflexible bureaucrat that applying the rule to your situation defeats the purpose behind the rule. The person you are dealing with may not like the rule. Risks: The person you are dealing with may have no discretion to disregard the rule and may be annoyed and frustrated by the discussion. The inflexible bureaucrat may hide behind the rule and lose the desire to help you. FOCUSING ON STANDARDS OF LEGITIMACY Benefits: If you can demonstrate that your solution fits with objective standards, you may be able to persuade inflexible bureaucrats to implement your solution because they may perceive it as fair. Risks: If you have decided that you want more than what is fair in the negotiation, focusing on standards of legitimacy may focus the inflexible bureaucrat away from your goal. Inflexible bureaucrats may have other standards that they can refer to that do not support your preferred solution. Finding and comparing standards may take a lot of time. KNOWING AND UNDERSTANDING THE VALUE OF YOUR BEST ALTERNATIVE TO A NEGOTIATED SETTLEMENT (BATNA) 7 Benefits: Your BATNA is what you will do if you cannot reach an agreement. Knowing your BATNA provides you with something to measure against potential solution. If the solution proposed is better than your BATNA, you should agree to it. If not, you should reject it in favour of your BATNA. 7 Fisher Roger and William Ury, Getting To Yes, Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In, Penguin Books, New York,

32 Knowing your BATNA helps you to assess whether to accept or reject a potential solution. You may appear more confident in the negotiation if you know and understand what you will do if you do not reach an agreement. Risks: You may cave in too early (say yes to the first thing that is better than your BATNA) and not push to get the best possible deal. You may appear nervous if you know that the result of walking away from the negotiation is bad for you. TIPS When dealing with inflexible bureaucrats: try to find solutions that meet their interests try to be polite, respectful, and establish a positive relationship show that you understand their constraints and are open to creative solutions treat them as experts and create a challenge for them to find a solution to your dilemma know what you will do if they refuse to help you 31

33 NEGOTIATION TENDENCIES 8 Every negotiator has a unique style. If we were to examine styles closely, however, we would notice that many people in negotiations exhibit common tendencies. People may be analytical, seek justice, seek results, avoid hostility, or focus on relationships. Most negotiators possess a combination of tendencies, and while they will usually have a dominant tendency that will take over in most of their negotiations, they will likely have different tendencies dominate in different situations. While some of us are aware of our dominant tendencies, others are unaware of how they are perceived in negotiations. If you become more conscious of your negotiating style, you can draw on the advantages and minimize the disadvantages of your style. In addition to knowing your own negotiation tendencies, it can be helpful to be aware of the tendencies that other negotiators exhibit. The other negotiator may have different dominant tendencies or the same dominant tendencies as you. When reviewing the advantages and disadvantages associated with the tendencies (listed below), please note that the advantages and disadvantages relate to an individual tendency and not an individual negotiator. PEOPLE WHO HAVE A TENDENCY TO BE ANALYTICAL Advantages The advantages enjoyed by people who have a tendency to be analytical may include an ability to: identify issues identify symptoms of a problem deal rationally with issues work efficiently and quickly separate people from the problem Stitt Feld Handy Group. This material may not be reproduced without the permission of the Stitt Feld Handy Group. C

34 have creative and flexible thought processes be good at organizing Disadvantages The disadvantages may include an inability to: deal well with emotions arrive at a fair outcome listen effectively be sensitive to concerns of others step back and see the big picture consider that there may be many possible good solutions conclude negotiations quickly PEOPLE WHO HAVE A TENDENCY TO SEEK JUSTICE Advantages The advantages enjoyed by people who seek justice may include an ability to: improve relationships defend results remain open-minded negotiate with a clear conscience accept merits of others positions maintain a good reputation Disadvantages The disadvantages may include an inability to: be perceived as strong negotiators conclude a negotiation quickly be open to others assessment of fairness get the best substantive deal 33

35 PEOPLE WHO HAVE A TENDENCY TO SEEK RESULTS Advantages The advantages enjoyed by people who seek results may include an ability to: get good results be focused and well-prepared be satisfied with results appear persistent and tenacious have a strong reputation with clients and constituents conclude the negotiation quickly Disadvantages The disadvantages may include an inability to: take into account others concerns hear others ideas maintain a good relationship during and after the negotiation reach a deal at all, even when there are deals that can be reached PEOPLE WHO HAVE A TENDENCY TO AVOID HOSTILITY Advantages The advantages enjoyed by people who avoid hostility may include an ability to: anticipate problems before they arise be open to new ideas emphasize the positive avoid getting locked into positions maintain (or even improve) relationships learn about the concerns and interests of others Disadvantages The disadvantages may include an inability to: deal with issues that need to be addressed defend one s own position, interests and objectives negotiate effectively with a tough bargainer avoid making inappropriate concessions 34

36 investigate all of the options avoid a damaging blow-up at the end of the negotiation be perceived as strong PEOPLE WHO HAVE A TENDENCY TO FOCUS ON RELATIONSHIP Advantages The advantages enjoyed by people who focus on relationships may include an ability to: take long-term view of situations and relationships encourage others to communicate enhance trust maintain credibility and a good relationship anticipate needs of others negotiate with less stress Disadvantages The disadvantages may include an inability to: protect oneself from being taken advantage of focus on the problem rather than on the emotion negotiate without being exploited bargain without making concessions negotiate effectively when there is no on-going relationship. TIPS know your dominant tendencies and their advantages try to protect yourself from the disadvantage of your dominant tendencies know that others may have different dominant tendencies than you try to assess their dominant tendencies try, however, not to stereotype people as having only one tendency 35

37 MAKING THE FIRST OFFER OR PUTTING FORWARD THE FIRST NUMBER 9 Most people prefer to receive rather than make the first offer. Advantages of receiving the first number (receiving the first offer) include: you learn information about how the other side sees the situation you can gauge whether a deal is likely to be reached you get a sense of what kind of offer you should make the offer may be very good - better than what would have been your first offer it feels more comfortable to receive rather than give information Disadvantages of making the first offer include: it could be too generous and the other side may accept it it may be perceived as too extreme and the other side may react angrily and walk out On the other hand, there are benefits to putting forward the first number or making the first offer. They include: you set the playing field, the zone in which the discussion will focus because most people like to receive the first number, you can avoid the awkward and time-consuming phase of negotiation where both sides wait for the other to put forward a number you can control the process in the way you make the offer by, for example, justifying your offer based on objective criteria and thereby encouraging others to justify their offers Stitt Feld Handy Group. This material may not be reproduced without the permission of the Stitt Feld Handy Group. C

38 Disadvantages of receiving the first number include: the other side may never make an offer you sacrifice control of the negotiation If you are going to put forward the first number, you may consider: putting it forward as an option rather than as a demand or even an offer avoiding starting with a final offer putting forward the number based on objective criteria and asking whether the criteria are accurate expressing that you are open to be persuaded that the offer is not fair People usually like to engage in the negotiation dance and make some counter-offers, so it can be dangerous to have your first offer be your best offer. One idea is to start by looking at all of the possible offers that you could reasonable argue are fair, and choosing the one that is the best for you. TIPS consider the benefits of putting forward the first number or first offer on a negotiation leave room in your first offer for the negotiation dance try to justify your offers based on objective criteria 37

39 HOW MUCH INFORMATION SHOULD YOU SHARE? 10 Deciding whether to share a piece of information with the other side involves measuring the risks and benefits of sharing the information. People often withhold more information than they should in a negotiation and when thinking about whether to disclose information, you may want to consider: There are benefits to sharing information about your needs in the negotiation. People negotiate to try to satisfy needs that they have going into the negotiation. It will be difficult for others to come up with settlement options to satisfy your needs if they do not know those needs. Disclosure of information is not the same as agreeing to do something. People often decide on the answer in negotiation (their position) before they understand the needs of the other negotiators. An exchange about what each side needs at the beginning of the negotiation can result in a better, more creative, and durable deal that meets both sides needs. If you have information that is damaging to you, you have no obligation to disclose it, and you can get a deal without revealing it, you may be better off not revealing it. Before deciding to withhold information from the other side, you may want to think about the importance of the relationship. Some people with on-going and long-standing relationships expect you to make full disclosure, and may become angry if they later learn that you withheld information. Consider how the situation would appear to others if they find out later about the information that you withheld. If that prospect worries you, you may choose to disclose the information. If your BATNA (Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement) is worse than the other side thinks, you may want to avoid revealing it to the other side. Once others know your BATNA, they will only have to craft an offer Stitt Feld Handy Group. This material may not be reproduced without the permission of the Stitt Feld Handy Group. C