Chapter 8 - The Human Side Of Negotiating Tactics
This chapter focuses on qualities and practices of negotiators in general, rather than those that are germane to a specific task in the context of negotiation.
Be Assertive in Pursuit of Your Interests
The author distinguishes assertiveness from aggressiveness, as both concepts pertain to pursuing your own interest, but assertiveness also requires respecting the interests of others, whereas aggressiveness does not. The author suggests that an aggressive person may behave dishonestly or rudely in an attempt to get what he wants from the other party (EN: which is false - you can be civil and honest and still be aggressive.) In essence, an assertive party seeks a win-win resolution.
The author suggests that assertiveness is a learnable personal skill that can be acquired through practice. (EN: Wrong again. Assertiveness is a posture or attitude and not a skill, and while people can learn tricks to feign assertiveness, they cannot learn to be assertive, only to be comfortable adopting an assertive posture.)
Some people lack the quality of assertiveness, often in the interests of avoiding conflict, and would prefer to accept a less advantageous agreement without risking offense to the other party - which is never a good approach, as a relationship in which you must always concede is not win-win, but parasitic.
The author associates four qualities with assertiveness:
- Clarity. An assertive person speaks in straightforward and unambiguous terms, this gives the other party a clear understanding of his meaning, and minimizes the chance mistakes will be made by misinterpretation.
- Persistence. An assertive person does not give up if the other side does not get (or pretends not to get) his meaning. He will repeat, rephrase, and continue to press until the matter is overtly resolved.
- Directness. An assertive person will come directly to the point rather than beating about the bush and expecting the other side to intuit or guess what they mean.
- Confidence. Through body language and tone of voice, an assertive person makes their presence known, and seems certain of what they want and what they are willing to give.
The author suggests assertiveness is a consistent quality of character - a person should be assertive in their everyday life, not merely pose as being assertive in negotiation situations.
Understand the Role of Respect and Self-Esteem
Negotiation is a highly social practice, and pertains to the relationships among the people and organizations involved. As such, etiquette and protocol are heavily present in negotiation. Additionally, since negotiation is a process of struggling for dominance, there are many psychological aspects to the interaction.
While there are positions of advantage in negotiation, it is not strictly about power. If one side had the power to force the other to comply with its desires, there would be no reason to negotiate. Instead, parties must arrive at a voluntary agreement, and this will not occur if any party feels disrespected by the other.
It is therefore important, even when you are in a position of considerable advantage, to be respectful of the other party and seek to negotiate in a manner, and toward a conclusion, that enables them to "save face" even when they are giving concessions due to their desperation to make a deal.
Prepare To Handle Difficult People
In spite of your efforts to be a good negotiator who seeks to achieve win-win outcomes and foster mutual respect, you will still encounter many bad negotiators and will have to deal with their antics.
(EN: The author bundles several bad behaviors into a couple of stereotypes, and provides some facile advice for counterpunching against unreasonable demands and refusals to negotiate - the keys to which are generally to refrain from retaliating or playing into their tactics, but back up and compel them to negotiate logically, or simply walk away and seek other alternatives.)
The author notes that bad behavior is more common in win-lose deals in which the parties do not expect to have relations in future, hence the temptation is to play for the best offer and disregard the value of the relationship. You can often frame the argument in a way that clarifies the interests of both parties - and to be sure, no matter the bluff and posturing, the other party does have interests in striking a deal, or they wouldn't bother speaking to you at all.
Deal with Power Imbalances
The author speaks to the power in terms of the relationship between the parties in a negotiation, which is a different thing to the negotiation itself. There are often instances in which a person who is in a lower position, in terms of their rank or prestige, has an advantage in a negotiation over a person who outranks them.
While this seems enviable, it is a dangerous position to be in because the other party may retaliate outside of the negotiation. A boss who calls an employee to come to work on their day off because another employee has called in sick is generally in a desperate situation and needs the employee's assistance to serve customers ... but if the employee uses this to his advantage and negotiates accordingly (it would be reasonable to ask for additional compensation for sacrificing personal time), he may find himself on the short-list to be terminated as soon as the boss is able.
The author asserts that "there is no sure way to turn the tables in your favor" when this occurs, and often you must capitulate to protect your greater interest outside the negotiation rather than take a hard line. Failing to concede to a boss's demands may cost you your job; failing to concede to a client's unusual demands may cost their future business as well as the current deal. Sometimes it's just not worth it.
Generally, if you can find out what the other party is attempting to achieve, you can propose another way to meet their objectives. For example, if the boss insists you work late Thursday to complete a report needed on Friday, you might offer to work late Wednesday instead. So long as the report is ready on Friday, it should not matter which night you sacrifice.
Another tactic may be to form a coalition with other parties. In some instances you may go over someone's head to get an ally from above them ... or in others you may lock arms with peers to resist an unreasonable demand. Labor unions generally operate in this manner, and it is common in International politics (OPEC is in effect a coalition of small nations whose collective bargaining power in trade negotiations with much larger nations is significant).
In the business world, this is often a reason for getting buy-in from multiple parties: if the VP of accounting is opposed to an idea, but you have the buy-on of his peers in Marketing and Operations, he will be less likely to try to throw his weight around.
It's also worth remembering that power imbalances are short lived: and employee who is routinely bullied by his boss will find another job, and a supplier who is routinely bullied by his customers will find more profitable customers. That's not meant to encourage quitting a relationship to damage the other party - because it will generally be only a temporary inconvenience to them - but merely to indicate that there is always an escape hatch to escape a parasitic relationship, even when the parasite is in a position of power.
Learn and Watch
Knowledge is power in negotiations: the value of things, alternatives to achieve a goal, the interest and constraints on the other party, and other factual information is helpful to negotiating. The skills of negotiating itself - effective techniques to use and methods for countering dirty tricks others might use against you - is also useful knowledge.
Being observant is also valuable: the ability to "read" other people is generally a matter of observing their nonverbal communication when they speak or react to something that was said, as well as the ability to leverage this information to conceal or exaggerate your own reactions.
Attitude and Personal Preferences
The author speaks vaguely on the topic of a person's attitude and "personal preferences" and regards them as "aspects of our inner selves." The techniques and tactics of negotiation can be learned and improved with practice, but attitude cannot be taught.
(EN: Little point in carrying on, as it's merely justification for the observation that people have certain natural talents and some are just born better. It's a common dodge used when an author recognizes the limits of his theory, and it is not strictly true. Attitude can be fostered and behavior patterns influenced - it's difficult and takes a lot more time, and most would rather just write people off than take on the task. I don't much respect that.)