Today, you and peers may find yourselves in two new situations. You are representing your firm in forming alliances with other organizations, which will involve you in a traditional negotiation. Perhaps you may find yourself on one side and your peer on the other, negotiating with each other for necessary resources—money, people, or time. Even the most successful organizations have limited resources, which means difficult decisions have to be made about their allocation. You may have to go to a peer to get help to complete your own work.
Let’s look at these situations, beginning with partnering with peers to build relationships with other firms.
Before you enter into this kind of negotiation, you need to be clear not only about the best possible outcome for your firm but also the absolute bottom line (that is, the worst possible outcome for you, but a deal your organization could live with if it had to). You also need to know the concessions you can make and the limits of your authority.
Listen carefully during the meeting. You know what your firm wants. Now you have to determine what the other side wants. Ask as many questions as you need to understand their position. It’ll be too late once a deal is struck, so don’t be afraid to speak up when something isn’t clear to you. Using complex language or confusing arguments may be part of the other team’s strategy, and they may be hoping you won’t admit that you don’t understand. Don’t fall for their ruse.
In your negotiations, you can expect give-and-take on both sides. Be prepared to trade concessions, but be careful not to go overboard. Say, slowly, “Well, I guess we might be able to. . . .” when the other side offers the very concession that you want.
Not all will go as you want. To close the deal, you may even have to settle for your bottom-line position—an outcome you can live with if you really have to. Monitor progress throughout the negotiation session. At regular intervals, stop to summarize what has been agreed on so far and what issues remain. That way, everyone will have the same understanding at the same time.
At the end of the session, summarize the agreement, point by point, to en- sure that there are no disputes.
I mentioned the puppy ploy. There are other tactics and tricks of seasoned negotiators you should know, like:
- The bulldozer. This entails taking the initiative in a big way, right at the start of the negotiation, then making one assumption after another and pushing hard. If that’s the other side’s strategy, don’t let it intimidate you.
- The friendship tactic. You have yet to agree on anything, yet the team from the other side comes into the negotiations behaving as if your team and they are old buddies. Don’t fall for this. Just as you are there to negotiate the best deal for your organization, they are there to do the same for theirs. Hold on to your ideal outcome for as long as you can, and don’t be tempted by the convivial atmosphere.
- The tough stand. The threats may be covert, but the implication is that if you don’t become an ally with this firm, you could become an enemy. If you and your teammate have done your prenegotiation preparation, you have considered all the possible outcomes. Don’t be so frightened that you submit unnecessarily.
- The cool approach. The other team dismisses or glosses over your concerns. The concerns may, indeed, be important to you, which is probably why the other side is trying to lull you into a false sense of security. The other side knows it will make a better deal if the discussion doesn’t take this direction.
It may surprise you to know that a peer may use these strategies in negotiations with you. After all, your peer wants to come out well in negotiations with you, just as another firm would.
Such negotiations with peers come about as you look for support to complete a project or implement an idea. Your request for staff or funds has been turned down. Money is scarce. Management is willing to help fund a portion of your project, but you will need to get help from other areas of the organization to complete the work.
In such circumstances, you first need to ask yourself, “Is there a department or division within the organization with the resources—people or money—to do the work?” The second question: “If there is, would it give me the hand I need?”
Consider what this other department or division would get out of your project. If there is no direct benefit to the other operation, then you may need to do a little horse trading. Horse trading can be done over coffee or lunch, even standing by the network printer—today’s water cooler. It is an informal negotiation in which you approach the other manager, describe your problem, make an offer, and wait to see if the manager agrees or not. It won’t always be a fair exchange. If you are giving something worth one thousand dollars, you may think you should get something worth one thousand dollars back. But a more accurate measurement of a good horse trade is if you get something you want.
Let’s look again at our database scenario.
Let’s assume that Kevin, who heads up another division of the company, has a staff member, Jim, who in a previous job oversaw setup of a system similar to the one you plan. Jim has nothing to do with systems development, but he has told you he would be willing to provide the assistance your department needs if he just had the time. Maybe you can help Jim find the time, assuming Kevin is agreeable, and thereby get Jim’s help on the project.
So you make it a point to ask Kevin to lunch. First, however, you find out what you can trade Kevin for Jim’s time. What would Kevin’s objections be? Better, what could you offer Kevin for help from Jim? Could the outcome of your project favorably affect Kevin’s operation? Assuming that Kevin is agreeable, could someone on your staff do some of Jim’s work? If not, what other options do you have? Would you have to go to a third manager to borrow a substitute Jim, calling for further horse trading?
Let’s assume that Jim’s work can be done by one of your staff members, and while Kevin believes his division won’t benefit from your project, he thinks his group could benefit from marketing assistance. You happen to have some friends outside the organization familiar with the targeted market who might spend some free time with Kevin’s marketing staff.
During lunch, you explain to Kevin the purpose of the project and how Jim could help. You have your bargaining chips—either a staff member to help make up for the time that Jim spends on your project, or marketing advice and counsel via your outside network. If you can mention to Kevin that being a team player will be well received by senior management, you might want to do so.
Before discussing your idea with Kevin, you should also check with your own manager to be sure that whatever deal you strike will be acceptable. During your meeting with Kevin, communicate senior management’s support of your project. Give him further reason to want to get involved.
Kevin is a nice guy who is likely to agree to one of your two offers. But don’t take advantage of the situation by doing a power play, bulldozing your way through. Fast talking might get you what you want, but at the expense of future cooperation or impairment of your reputation. Besides, those who don’t think they got a fair deal may come back and renegotiate for higher stakes.
Kevin agrees to let you have Jim, but only for a month, at the start of the project. In return, he wants access to your external network and help in doing Jim’s work over a two-month period. At first, you are sufficiently annoyed to want to stop negotiations and consider alternatives, maybe even consider other ways to complete the project without a systems expert. But you can’t allow the heat of negotiations to cause you to lose sight of the project’s need. Remember, as the person seeking help, you are in the weaker negotiating position. So you accept. You will go along with providing the extra month of help, even if you don’t think the deal is fair.
The bottom line is that you and Kevin have both won.
Let’s look at some of the reasons why the negotiations was successful.
- You were open to changing your position—you agreed to give more to get what you wanted.
- You heard Kevin out. He alerted you to a deadline Jim had that could interfere with his helping you unless he had additional assistance. So he offered an alternative solution—with which you were agreeable.
- You knew your objective but were flexible about how you would reach it. You didn’t think to yourself, “I need to achieve A; to do that, I will do B and C.” Rather, you thought, “I need to achieve A; help me to figure out what I will need to do to get that.” You tried to understand Kevin’s objectives, concentrating on his goals, not his demands or your own need to out-trade him.
- You didn’t expect Kevin to be concerned about your needs. While you began by explaining your needs, you allowed Kevin to turn the conversation around to discuss his needs and addressed those to achieve your own.
- You asked yourself if the results were in the best interest of your organization. Nobody wants to be involved in a deal that is going to upset their own manager. You made sure that your own supervisor would be happy with any deals you struck. Further, you made Kevin aware that senior management would be pleased about his collaboration.
In the end, neither you nor Kevin can be seen as a loser. Kevin had you make a further concession, but in that you both came away with something that will help you, you both gained from the negotiation. Everyone won: you won, Kevin won, and—in the end—your organization won.
Let’s assume that you have to negotiate with another manager, someone less agreeable than Kevin. Manny is indecisive initially, requiring you to check back and even undertake more horse trading before you get a final answer, which might be yes or might be no.
If you make your offer and it is refused, don’t become insistent or threaten. Such a response will only create further resistance. Instead, ask questions to clarify the objections. Is the manager’s objection that he doesn’t need a horse at all, or is it that he doesn’t need a roan or a bay—but a pinto would do nicely? Maybe you have a pony, and he needs a Morgan, a real workhorse. Perhaps right now, he can’t make a deal—he hasn’t the resources to spare—but might be able to do so in a month when circumstances change.
Probe to better understand Manny’s situation. “What is the problem? Why can’t you do this?” Most importantly, ask, “What if we . . . ?” which may reopen the door to negotiation by making him, not the solution to your project’s dilemma, but a part of the problem-solving team.
Go further, still, and ask the person for advice. Manny may have an answer you and your project group haven’t considered. Maybe this manager can become a horse trader for you if he is able to share the glory of a successful project.
Let’s say that, no matter what you offer, Manny refuses. While you are disappointed—maybe even angry—you need to keep the outcome from souring your long-term relationship with Manny. After all, you don’t know all the pressures he may be under.
Did You Know?
In negotiations, how you phrase your offer is as important as what you say. Here are some words and phrases that will aggravate anyone with whom you are negotiating.
“You don’t understand.” Nobody likes to be told that. The phrase immediately translates to them as, “You’re too stupid to understand.”
“I want. . . .” Unfortunately, in negotiations, while it is worthwhile for the other party to know what you want, the reality is that most people don’t care. And telling what you want gives away an advantage in the give-and-take.
“It can’t be done that way.” Try, instead, “Have you considered . . . ? Then offer an alternative solution.
“I won’t,”or, “I refuse,”or, “I will never….” These are words you may have to end up eating.
“How could you?” Your intention may be to make the other person feel guilty. Even if it works, it won’t impact the final outcome of the negotiation except in a negative way—nobody likes to feel guilty.
“That’s beside the point,” or, “That’s irrelevant.” You may be right, but it is better to let the other person finish and then bring the discussion back on track.
“You would be better off. . . .” The other side is not going to believe that you know better than they do what is in their best interests.
Rather than build a wall between you and Manny by venting about his lack of cooperation and collaboration, go back to the drawing board to see if you can identify someone else with the skills to help you. Maybe you need to send out members of your project team to identify likely opportunities for horse trading. (Keep in mind that you may have animals other than horses to trade; maybe someone needs a goat, a cow, or even corn, and you may have some in your silo.)
Never give up. In making deals, you have to maintain a positive attitude. Those you negotiate with will sense your self-confidence, and it will influence how they respond to you.
Tips
While you don’t want to come across as a wimp, you shouldn’t appear too tough, either. The other side may break off negotiations and leave if you give the impression that you are inflexible. Seeing your behavior, others will think you are more interested in getting your way than in negotiating the best outcome for everyone.
Don’t lose your temper over the little things. Know what is important and worth fighting for.
Don’t oversell the advantages of supporting your idea or project. Hyperbole breeds distrust.
If the opposition has more than one representative, and there are differences in opinion among them, probe gently to see if you can use that weakness to strengthen your position.
Check your body language to see that you aren’t revealing too much. Develop a poker face. Keep your thoughts to yourself as well. Silence is golden during negotiations.