Post on 04-Jan-2016
transcript
Negotiating 101
Agenda• The Problem
– Positions• The Method
– Separate people from problem– Focus on interests, not positions– Invent options for mutual gain– Insist on using objective criteria
• Yes, But. . .– What if they are more powerful?
• More on BATNAs– What if they don’t want to negotiate?– What if they don’t negotiate fairly?
• Summing up
Don’t negotiate over positions
• Unwise agreements
• Inefficient• Endangers a long
term relationship• Being a nice
person is no help• Focus on interests
and negotiate in a principled way.
Separate people from problem
• Negotiators are people first
• Two basic interests: the substance and the relationship
• Positional bargaining puts the two in conflict
• Deal with relationship as a separate consideration
Manage your perceptions• Put yourself in their
shoes• Don’t deduce their
motives from your fears• Don’t blame them for
your problem• Discuss each
perceptions• Give them a stake by
getting them to participate
• Make your proposals consistent with their values
Control your emotions
• Be aware and identify your own emotions
• Same for them• Talk about emotions
explicitly• Allow them to vent
interfering emotions– Anger and fear,
common• Do not react to emotional
outbursts• Use symbolic gestures
Concentrate on communication
• Listen actively and acknowledge
• Speak to be understood
• Speak about you, not them
• Speak for a purpose
Start before problems arise
• Build a working relationship immediately
• Focus on the problem, not them
Focus on interests not positions
• Reconcile interests
• Identify their interests
• Talk openly about interests
Reconcile Interests
• Interests define the problem
• Behind positions lie interests
• Interest categories– Compatible– Shared– Conflicting
Identify their interests• Ask “Why?”• Ask “Why not?”
– What are their other choices?
• Multiple interests– Detail the many sources
of interest in the problem, and determine who represents them
• Interests: the power of basic human needs
• Make lists
Talk openly about interests
• Show concern for their interests
• Put their problem ahead of your answer
• Make your interests come alive
• Look ahead, not behind
• Be concrete but flexible• Hard on problem, soft on
people
Invent options for mutual gain
• Diagnosing the problem
• Solving the problem
Diagnosis before prescription
• Be the Problem Doctor:
– Problems of premature solutions
– Searching for the single answer
– Fixed pie? Are you sure?
– Solving their problem is my problem.
Prescription methods
• Separate inventing from deciding
• Broaden your options• Look for mutual gains• Make their decision easy
Separate inventing from deciding
– Before brainstorming– During brainstorming– After brainstorming– Helping them brainstorm
Invent Options First
Decide which is best
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Broaden your options
• Look for help from a variety of experts
• Invent agreements of different strengths
• Change the scope of a proposed agreement
• Multiply options: the Circle Chart exercise (next)
Circle Chart for Inventing Options
Step I: Problem
What’s wrong?
Symptoms?
Reality vs Desired Future
Step II: Analysis
Sort symptoms into groups
Possible causes
What’s missing
Barriers to solving
Step III: Approaches
Possible strategies
Theoretical fixes
Broad ideas about what to do
Step IV: Action Ideas
What specific steps
Goals
Verify
Look for mutual gains• Identify shared interests
• Merge differing interests– What is the difference?– Different beliefs?– What is their value of
time?– Different forecasts about
the future?– Risk aversion differences?
• What are their preferences?
Make their decision easy
• Whose shoes?
• What decision?
• When threatening is not enough
Insist on using objective criteria
• Deciding based on strength of will
• Case for objective criteria• Developing objective
criteria• Negotiating with
objective criteria• Joint search for objective
criteria
• Reason and be open to reason
• Never yield to pressure
Deciding based on strength of will
• Too costly– Substance– Relationships
• Someone has to back down– No one wants to do
that, loss of face– Leads to irrational
choices
Case for objective criteria
• Principled negotiations– Smarter
• Finding data, information that help inform a better decisions for both parties
– Efficient• No time wasted in testing each other’s will
– Less hostility• No need to get angry if we looking for objective data
– Protects the relationship• Mutual hunt for an objective basis
Developing objective criteria
Fair standards– Market value– Precedent– Scientific judgments– Professional standards– Efficiency– Costs– Court decisions– Equal treatment
Fair procedures– Coin flips– Cut and choose– Veil of ignorance choices –
not knowing your part– Taking turns– Drawing lots– Letting a third party decide– Choosing the last best
offer
Criteria need to be independent of each side’s will
Legitimate and practical
Negotiating with objective criteria
• Frame each issue as the joint search for objective measures of value, facts, etc.
• Reason and be open to reason as to what to accept as appropriate standards
• Never yield to pressure, only to principle.
The joint search for objective criteria
• What is fair to both sides?
• What is your theory about what is fair?
• Agree first on principles.
Reason and be open to reason
• Keep an open mind
• Possibility of multiple criteria of fairness– What objective basis
is there to decide?– Splitting the
difference or compromising
Never yield to pressure
• Pressure to yield takes many forms– Bribes– Threats– Stubbornness
• Question the process, look for objective criteria
• This is why you have a BATNA!!!!
Yes, but . . .
• What if they– are more powerful?– won’t negotiate?– won’t negotiate fairly?
What if they are more powerful?
• Protect yourself from making a bad decision.– The problem of being too accommodating– The problem of being too inflexible– Know your BATNA: all offers are measured against it.
• Make the most of your assets– Better BATNA = More Power– Develop your assets into a BATNA
• Invent a list of actions you could take if the negotiation fails
• Improve the ideas and convert to practical alternatives• Tentatively select the alternative that seems best
What if they won’t negotiate?
• You can concentrate on interest / merits not positions.– Everything we have
looked at so far
• If they don’t respond, focus on what they might do. Negotiation jujitsu.
Negotiation jujitsu
• The typical attack has three parts;– Aggressively asserting
their own position– Attack your ideas!– Attack you!
• You should– Look behind attack for
motivating interests.– Treat their position as one
possible option.– Don’t defend your ideas
• Invite criticism and advice– Re-frame attacks on you
as attacks on the problem– Use more questions, make
fewer statements
What if they won’t negotiate fairly?
• Deliberate deception– Unless you have good
reason to trust someone, don’t trust them.
– Check facts, assertions, etc.
• Unclear authority– Making you think they
have power to decide– Asking you to concede
but claiming they don’t have power
– Before you begin, ask how much authority they have to make the decisions.
• Questionable intentions of the other side– Make your doubts
public– Negotiate assurances in
the agreement• Creating purposely
stressful situations– Acknowledge the
stressors and ask for some adjustments
• Personal attacks– Recognize it and call it
to their attention• Threats
– Recognize and call attention to it. Treat as pressure.
Questions?