And, lo and behold, you encounter resistance.
When I ask sellers or buyers on contract skills training sessions, I find that few people do any in-depth planning before negotiating.
I am not referring to determining how much will be spent, how long to complete a project, or what their walk-away number might be. I am talking about detailed planning, which involves attempting to determine what the other side may want, and why.
This is vital to your negotiating skills development taught in all of our negotiation skills training seminars. You do not want to accept an outcome that is worse that what you may have done otherwise.
Why are they negotiating with you? What is preventing them from doing it with someone else, or on their own? In the fall of , Negotiator Magazine conducted a reader poll. Sometimes, the most difficult part of planning and negotiating can be with your own team.
If you thought through in advance, you can compare where you are in the negotiation to your plan. You are also less likely to agree to an unacceptable outcome. If you find yourself getting lost in relation to your plan, you can caucus, take a time out, and rethink where you are.
Changing the way you think about negotiating joint problem solving versus a series of compromises where one party may win and one may lose is the first step towards leveraging your negotiating skills towards enjoying better results.
Recognising the reasons why people act the way they do, and having the ability to communicate to a broad range of behavioural styles offers the skilled negotiator the ability to be reach satisfactory outcomes more consistently.
Following a process or strategy is fine, but understanding the styles of the people with whom you are negotiating, and changing your approach to communicate more effectively can be the key to success. Last, developing a plan in advance of the actual negotiation will give the negotiator more confidence, and lead to better and more consistent results. The negotiating requires in any case a personal approach and a search for compromises. Such steps are mandatory for a successful outcome.
This article has explained at length how negotiation can be effective, and how it can become a win-win situation for both parties. It has equipped me with some skills that I have always overlooked. Your email address will not be published. Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment. Summary Improve your negotiating skills and learn what really interests people in a negotiation.
The answers generally are: Comprehending a negotiating process is important…but… Tip 2: It is your people skills that can make the difference First, you need to know how your behaviour affects others. Next, understand that everyone has their unique preferred way of communicating and it may not be your way. Effective skilled negotiators are those of us who can change their communication style to meet the needs of the listener.
Dominant people are good at making decisions. They desire to control their environment, and do so by solving problems and meeting challenges. They are very direct and they are good at telling. They are self-confident but can sometimes be seen as intimidating and arrogant. Questioning and listening does not come naturally to dominants.
They tend to move toward goals without considering multiple solutions or outcomes. For that reason, others often view them as impatient and uncaring. They use a bottom line approach. They are good at stating why something will not work. As a result, they may be seen as negative. To dominants, results are much more important than how people feel.
Like a person who is Dominant, influencers are good at telling but they use a less direct method. They want to convince and motivate you, rather than coerce you to do something. Rather than being task focused like a Dominant, they are focused on completing the task with people.
Influencers see the possibilities in a plan or concept, rather than the pitfalls. At their best, they can be viewed as visionaries. Both want to make the decision, and are leaders.
Influencers like to make favourable impressions and want a relationship. They can appear to be impulsive and disorganized. Attention to detail is not an asset because they prefer to look at the bigger picture. Influencers are social, and usually know a lot of people. They want to get results, but their focus is on motivating people to get the results, together. Steadiness people, like influencers when looking at new ideas will see the positive aspects.
Unlike the influencer, they do not like change even if it is positive. They see themselves as less powerful than their environment and feel that all will be well if everyone will just work harder, together, on the status quo. They are superb listeners, and consider things before responding.
Like the influencer, they are focused on people. They are extremely dependable, solid team players. High Dominant and influence styles that negotiate with people who are in the Steadiness style have to be cautious as they like immediate responses. The Steadiness style likes to think before responding. They are very methodical, and reserved. They are opposites of dominants and influencers. Like Steadiness, they are introverted and reserved. But, like the dominant, they are task and control focused.
When negotiating, your statements must be factual and have a point. Their approach is indirect, reserved, business-like, and diplomatic. Unless you can provide them with reasons supported by facts, they do not readily accept change. They believe that if people will follow processes and procedures, many problems will be solved and change becomes unnecessary. Facts and processes are most important and people are a secondary consideration. The Classic Profile includes an evaluation of how your style tends to behave in consideration of the following: Emotions Goals Judging others Influencing others Value to an organisation Tendencies that can be overused Behaviour under pressure Fears How to increase effectiveness You may use one or several attributes less, because they feel uncomfortable.
Being an effective communicator starts with being an outstanding listener… Tip 3: The most potent negotiating skill is listening You learn the interests of the other party through listening.
In order to be effective at asking questions, three things must take place: Understand where your questions are going. Most people find randomly asked questions to be unnerving and it makes them distrust you. Ask the other party if it is okay with them if you ask questions. Then tell them what information you want to know. Use the three levels of listening to obtain information: It is also beneficial to follow up with a confirming question. People will do business with you because you are perceived as: Trustworthy An adequate problem solver Adding value to the relationship Effectively seeking information through questioning skills and listening skills will help build these perceptions.
Develop a plan prior to negotiating When I ask sellers or buyers on contract skills training sessions, I find that few people do any in-depth planning before negotiating. Your plan should also include the following: Try to establish the negotiating style of the other party e. This helps you think through how best to communicate and then go through the process of confirming if you were right.
If you do not know the other party at all, you will have to make educated guesses and adjust as you go. This is not what you want, but why. Make sure that you scrutinise all of your interests as there may be more than one. What are the interests of the other side? Opposing interests are what you negotiate. What do I have that I can trade that is of lesser value to me and of higher value to the other side?
Some researchers would argue a neutral location. By remaining unbiased, you cultivate a shared focus on problem solving rather than competition. On the other hand, more aggressive negotiators would recommend your own office. Not only could you convey your dominance through that decision, but you could also use your office to incorporate other persuasion techniques. They found that body language associated with low power e.
If you give your counterpart a short and awkward chair, you decrease their testosterone and raise their cortisol. In Western cultures, negotiation has a bad reputation. Only one winner can emerge. Sure, that perception is just a philosophy. However, that philosophy has influenced the negotiation process in the Western world. Because only one winner can emerge, people negotiate more aggressively. Rather than look for mutual gains — which would benefit both parties — people focus on defending their position.
Both parties eventually receive a worse deal. And this section will give you a few tactics that can help. Be careful when planning the negotiation with your counterpart. Your wording can play a powerful role. To prevent aggressive behavior from your counterpart, avoid negotiation terminology. Always use words that depict cooperative behavior e. You should also incorporate 1 st person plural pronouns e. When possible, break up the negotiation into separate meetings.
Why do people behave less aggressively? Pruitt explains that people develop a stronger need to cooperate:. Even if you plan to reach an agreement within one day, you could plan a subsequent meeting to review the contract.
If you plan that second meeting beforehand, your counterpart will behave more cooperatively during the initial negotiation. Next to power, rapport is also crucial. Participants gained better deals when they spoke with their counterpart on the phone for 5 minutes before the negotiation. The remaining tactics in this section will give you additional ideas to implement during the schmoozing phase.
When you disclose personal information to other people, you build greater rapport with those recipients. When you disclose unrelated personal information, your counterparts negotiate less aggressively, giving you a better overall deal Moore et al.
Before the negotiation starts, always mention unrelated tidbits about yourself, such as interests or hobbies. Those tidbits —albeit small and innocent — will make the negotiation more successful. When you bring pastries and coffee to the negotiation, you accomplish four important tactics described in this section. Mimicry can also explain another finding: As Lakshmi Balachandra explains….
This unconscious mimicking of each other may induce positive feelings towards the other party and the matter under discussion. In his book, Influence , Cialdini proposed that reciprocity is one of the six principles of persuasion.
That urge to reciprocate has become so internalized that we reciprocate even when the other party will have no knowledge of our reciprocation.
For example, Burger et al, hired a student to be a confederate in an experiment. The student asked peers to a complete a survey and b drop it in a box outside the Psychology Department a few days later.
The survey was anonymous, so the student would have no idea if people actually completed it. Despite that anonymity, people were three times more likely to complete the survey if the student had given them a free bottle of water. Even if your counterpart hates pastries and coffee, the mere favor will trigger an inner need to reciprocate. Other research shows that increasing glucose levels can reduce aggressive tendencies Denson et al.
Since pastries and coffee increase glucose levels Lane, , they can reduce the amount of aggressiveness in your counterpart. Lakshmi Balachandra explains that…. Research suggests that warm beverages e. Those results occurred because of the insular cortex. Because it processes both physical and psychological versions of warmth…. Moreover, [this] should then influence, in an unintentional manner, judgments of and behavior toward other people without one being aware of this influence.
As a side note, those findings illustrate another benefit of negotiating at your office: This section will give you a few strategies to implement throughout the remainder of the negotiation. In Tactic 3, I explained that you should negotiate in good weather. Nice weather will trigger a positive mood in your counterpart, giving you a better deal in the negotiation. Since you and your counterpart should be feeling positive, should you outwardly convey a positive mood?
Emotions have always been a tricky subject for negotiation researchers. Luckily, emerging research has shed some light on the situation. This section explains that research. Why does that happen? Researchers argue that disappointment triggers a greater urge to compensate:. If you follow this tactic, be careful. Research also shows that your counterpart will develop a more unpleasant perception of you.
Consider using this tactic only for short-term relationships. Regardless of its controversial nature, anger needed to be included somewhere in the article. A ton of research has investigated its role in negotiations. Past research found anger to be harmful.
Those emotions can result in worse outcomes for both sides Allred et al. In recent years, however, the tides have been turning.
Many researchers are now finding positive outcomes for showing anger. You increased your power before the negotiation. But why stop there? During the negotiation, you should also be conveying your power. But that old school approach is gone. More research has uncovered the opposite to be true. Honesty, especially in regards to your BATNAs, can cause your counterpart to give larger concessions, giving you a better deal DeRue et al.
Honesty leads to other benefits too. You could simply ask how the current deal will be different than your alternatives. Ask how the current opportunity will be different.
When your counterpart is more powerful e. You might feel pressured to use soft disclaimers, such as:. Never use those disclaimers. Instead, show signs of confidence and dominance. Never insult or degrade your counterpart. Just be firm and confident in your requests. This step is critical. Because of the combative perception of negotiation, you need to prevent your counterpart from developing a fixed pie mentality. But how can you do that? Your biggest enemy is a fixed pie mentality.
Consider a job negotiation. With a fixed pie, at least one party would need to make a concession. The final agreement is usually worse for both parties. They usually occur because both parties focus on a single metric e. To avoid a fixed pie, you need to address all terms. By listing all of the terms, the negotiation becomes less fixated on a single metric. With more terms on the table, you create flexibility to negotiate. Once you create your list, how do you negotiate those terms?
The research is clear: As Weingart and Olekalns explain…. Once you and your counterpart rank the importance of each term, you can spot areas of flexibility. You should never resolve terms sequentially. Resolve everything at once. When you lump everything together, you retain bargaining power. You can make concessions in less important areas so that you can receive greater value in more important areas.
How do you handle the offer? How strong is it? If you want to understand the mechanisms behind anchoring, you can refer to my book, Methods of Persuasion. This strategy will just present two tactics that apply anchoring in negotiation. Some people argue that you should wait for your counterpart to make the first offer. Adam Grant, author of Give and Take , argues against that approach:. One thorough analysis of negotiation experiments showed that every dollar higher in the first offer translates into about 50 cents more in the final agreement.
The high anchor point primes your counterpart to focus on the best qualities about your offer. In a real estate context…. The same outcome occurs with other negotiations. If you request a high salary, suddenly your best qualities become a focal point. Even if the final salary is below the exact anchor point you requested, that priming mechanism pulls the final settlement closer to that range.
The anchoring effect is also called the anchoring and adjustment heuristic. When you provide a high anchor point e. In a recent study, Ames and Mason examined different methods. Here are your options when making an offer:.
Compared to a single anchor, ranges seem less rigid. You should also request a precise range e. When your anchor is precise, your counterpart will remain closer to it. I explain why in this pricing tactic. Both messages are trying to achieve the same outcome: Despite a small difference i. In negotiation, framing can have powerful effects. This section will teach you specific frames that will help you secure a better deal in any negotiation.
Both outcomes are the same. However, most people feel greater satisfaction with the second outcome Thaler, With those options, the second option makes people feel worse. Turns out, people prefer to gain value in increments, but they prefer to lose value in one lump sum. You just turned one benefit into three. The opposite is true for requests. When you present requests — the terms that your counterpart must give up — you should aggregate those requests as much as possible. The lump sum will trigger less pain.
They care about relative value — how much they receive in comparison to you. How does that relate to you? When structuring your agreement, you need to cultivate a sense of equality. Nonetheless, you should still reinforce that perceived equality, even when a deal is truly balanced. To reinforce it, you need to consider a common heuristic. People often judge the value of a deal based on a simple rule of thumb: In the previous tactic, you separated benefits into smaller pieces.
When presenting those numerous benefits in writing, always maintain a visual balance. In addition to the length of benefits, another common heuristic is justification. When you provide justification — any form of justification — your counterpart is more likely to accept that justification as valid.
Consider three different requests that they used:. However, the second request garnered 93 percent compliance, whereas the first request only garnered 60 percent compliance.
Copyright © 2017 · All Rights Reserved · Maine Council of Churches