Negotiations: Coming To Terms
One of the problems in negotiations is: how can you preserve the relationship and still get the best terms possible? In most negotiations training, you're told to "go for the jugular" and get everything you can. As we have noted before, this can have disastrous consequences for relationships. If either party feels exploited, the relationship suffers even though one party feels "he get the best possible deal."
So how can we negotiate in a way that makes "terms" less of an issue? Here are five key points to keep in mind:
1. Separate the people from the problem.
In other words, don't allow personalities to dictate what you do or how you negotiate. Instead focus on the problem both parties have in common and how to solve that particular problem.
2. Focus on interests instead of positions.
Your position might be "I must have Saturdays off." But your real interest might be that you want to attend ball games with your son twice a month on Saturday. So if you state your interest, it is entirely possible that a mutually acceptable agreement might be adopted in which you work two Saturdays a month.
3. Generate a lot of options.
This is where most of us develop tunnel vision in negotiations. . We see only one or two options on the table and consequently we feel forced to choose between them. If we take a moment and step back from the problem, and brainstorm possible solutions--even crazy solutions--there's a likelihood a mutually acceptable solution may reveal itself.
4. Use an outside, objective standard to determine the solution.
For example, suppose I want to buy your car and you are also my best friend. It could certainly damage the relationship if I force you to keep lowering your price so that I can get a really good deal. However, if both of us acknowledge that the relationship is important, we can determine that I will buy your car and the price will be set by the Kelly Blue Book price for that model with those features. So, in effect, we have taken price off the table for the sake of the relationship, both of us feel the deal was fair, and we both achieve our interests (not our position).
5. You can be positive and constructive in negotiations even with the other party is not.
This does not mean making yourself into a "door mat." It just means you continue to attempt to preserve the relationship as you simultaneously seek favorable terms. It also means you reveal your interests early in the negotiations and you encourage the other party to do the same. They may not. However, by taking the higher ground you encourage negotiations that are fair to both parties. (If they do not eventually become more cooperative in the process, you have little to gain by lowering yourself to their standards).
What to do this week
Keep these 5 principles in mind in your next negotiation with a contractor, your boss, or your spouse. Don't deliver ultimatums but make every attempt to reveal your needs and interests and inquire about theirs. It is possible that this process will not work. But can you really afford to negotiate any other way when relationships are involved?
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Negotiations 101
Today's Learning Link begins a series on negotiations. Perhaps you are one of those who "doesn't enjoy negotiating." But the fact of the matter is that we are always negotiating in almost everything we do. Even deciding on a time for a meeting that fits both schedules is negotiating with a colleague.
Not negotiating is not an option. But it is a skill we can learn and actually enjoy. Here are a few simple guidelines:
Negotiations do not have to be confrontational
If both parties approach negotiations with a spirit of cooperation and willingness to engage in a dialogue about each other's needs, there's no need for confrontation. In fact, it can be quite an enjoyable process since both parties are trusting that the outcome will be mutually advantageous. The classic model that most of us have seen in negotiations is based on the assumption that if I get more, the other person gets less and vice versa. If we take that attitude, there's a high probability that one or both parties will become frustrated and the trust level deteriorates.
In any negotiation, both terms and relationship are important
If you are purchasing a new car, you'll be careful to get the best price you can since you will likely not see the salesman again. Since the relationship does not matter, the terms are everything. On the other hand, negotiating with your spouse about scheduling a weekend activity puts the relationship well ahead of the terms. It also redefines what "winning" is about.
If you think you have no power in the negotiation, then you have no power
Most of us are not aware of the power we have in negotiations. We assume the other person has leverage that we do not and therefore we are at a disadvantage. Sometimes this is true, but more often we do have things that the other person wants and needs and is willing to negotiate. Taking the time to openly discuss each other's needs instead of wants will help to level the playing field and reduce the confrontation needed for a win-win outcome.
Win-win negotiating is the only acceptable approach
If both parties in the negotiations are not satisfied, then the outcome is not acceptable. Both parties should leave the table feeling they got much of what they asked for, compromised as little as was necessary, and the eventual solution was a collaborative one sustainable over time. If you enter negotiations with the attitude of destroying the other party, you may win based on terms but you will likely lose (or at least damage) the relationship.
We will elaborate more on some of these key concepts in future Learning Links. But it would be valuable to hear your questions or concerns about the concepts above. Does it seem too soft? Does it fit your notion of "winning?" And exactly what power do you really have in negotiating with a colleague--or a spouse?
Send us your questions and we will address them in future issues.
What to do this week
Using your best questioning and listening skills, start any negotiations you face with a goal of understanding the other person's point of view instead of what you can gain. Be open in revealing your needs and attempt to understand theirs. The solution should then become obvious.
Not negotiating is not an option. But it is a skill we can learn and actually enjoy. Here are a few simple guidelines:
Negotiations do not have to be confrontational
If both parties approach negotiations with a spirit of cooperation and willingness to engage in a dialogue about each other's needs, there's no need for confrontation. In fact, it can be quite an enjoyable process since both parties are trusting that the outcome will be mutually advantageous. The classic model that most of us have seen in negotiations is based on the assumption that if I get more, the other person gets less and vice versa. If we take that attitude, there's a high probability that one or both parties will become frustrated and the trust level deteriorates.
In any negotiation, both terms and relationship are important
If you are purchasing a new car, you'll be careful to get the best price you can since you will likely not see the salesman again. Since the relationship does not matter, the terms are everything. On the other hand, negotiating with your spouse about scheduling a weekend activity puts the relationship well ahead of the terms. It also redefines what "winning" is about.
If you think you have no power in the negotiation, then you have no power
Most of us are not aware of the power we have in negotiations. We assume the other person has leverage that we do not and therefore we are at a disadvantage. Sometimes this is true, but more often we do have things that the other person wants and needs and is willing to negotiate. Taking the time to openly discuss each other's needs instead of wants will help to level the playing field and reduce the confrontation needed for a win-win outcome.
Win-win negotiating is the only acceptable approach
If both parties in the negotiations are not satisfied, then the outcome is not acceptable. Both parties should leave the table feeling they got much of what they asked for, compromised as little as was necessary, and the eventual solution was a collaborative one sustainable over time. If you enter negotiations with the attitude of destroying the other party, you may win based on terms but you will likely lose (or at least damage) the relationship.
We will elaborate more on some of these key concepts in future Learning Links. But it would be valuable to hear your questions or concerns about the concepts above. Does it seem too soft? Does it fit your notion of "winning?" And exactly what power do you really have in negotiating with a colleague--or a spouse?
Send us your questions and we will address them in future issues.
What to do this week
Using your best questioning and listening skills, start any negotiations you face with a goal of understanding the other person's point of view instead of what you can gain. Be open in revealing your needs and attempt to understand theirs. The solution should then become obvious.
Monday, February 2, 2009
Building Winning Teams bySetting Behavioral Expectations
What makes for a winning performance? Talent, experience, knowledge, a track record of executing? Yes, all that and more. Coming in to Super Bowl XLIII, the Steelers and the Cardinals had all of that.
But Monday-morning quarterbacks are saying that the Steelers wanted it more, had more passion, determination, persistence, optimism, confidence. They say in a closely matched game like this one the intangibles can make all the difference. Experts and fans will probably argue for years about this game, about why the Steelers won.
But there’s no argument about what creates winning performance in a work team. Talent, experience, and business knowledge are important. But the winning difference is most often a result of those hard-to-measure human qualities -- passion for serving customers, initiative, persistence, commitment, resilience, dependability, adaptability, empathy, confidence, teamwork, leadership, and many more.
While we can all agree that these qualities are essential for success, we seldom talk about them until we decide an employee isn’t displaying them. "You need to show more initiative," we say. Or "You’re not being a team player." Giving this kind of feedback without agreeing on the behavioral goal first is like asking someone to play basketball on a court without nets or boundary lines, and telling them, when they shoot at an imaginary hoop, "Too bad. You missed."
Employees need to know what the "targets" are before the game starts. Yet in our 30 years experience we’ve met few managers who set clear behavioral targets. "That’s so subjective," managers often say. "How can you set goals about personality characteristics?"
Your challenge as a manager is to have conversations about these "winning" behaviors in a way that everybody understands. The words do seem subjective. Just as "beauty is in the eye of the beholder," the definition of a quality like initiative seems to depend on who is defining it. So when you say "I expect you to show initiative," how do you and your employees know you’re on the same page? Furthermore, when it comes time to review performance and give feedback, how will you and your employee agree on whether or not they actually did show initiative?
The ALTtm skills we have talked about before can help you and your employees "get on the same page" about exactly where these goals and boundary lines are. The key is to identify the behaviors that would be evidence of leadership, or teamwork, or initiative, etc. Think of what a camcorder could capture – what a person does or says, and how they do or say it. If a recorder can’t capture it, you can’t communicate it as an expectation and you can’t measure it. For instance, flexibility can mean doing whatever you’re asked to do, or volunteering to take on new challenges, or just smiling and being pleasant when asked to drop one task and pick up another.
But Monday-morning quarterbacks are saying that the Steelers wanted it more, had more passion, determination, persistence, optimism, confidence. They say in a closely matched game like this one the intangibles can make all the difference. Experts and fans will probably argue for years about this game, about why the Steelers won.
But there’s no argument about what creates winning performance in a work team. Talent, experience, and business knowledge are important. But the winning difference is most often a result of those hard-to-measure human qualities -- passion for serving customers, initiative, persistence, commitment, resilience, dependability, adaptability, empathy, confidence, teamwork, leadership, and many more.
While we can all agree that these qualities are essential for success, we seldom talk about them until we decide an employee isn’t displaying them. "You need to show more initiative," we say. Or "You’re not being a team player." Giving this kind of feedback without agreeing on the behavioral goal first is like asking someone to play basketball on a court without nets or boundary lines, and telling them, when they shoot at an imaginary hoop, "Too bad. You missed."
Employees need to know what the "targets" are before the game starts. Yet in our 30 years experience we’ve met few managers who set clear behavioral targets. "That’s so subjective," managers often say. "How can you set goals about personality characteristics?"
Your challenge as a manager is to have conversations about these "winning" behaviors in a way that everybody understands. The words do seem subjective. Just as "beauty is in the eye of the beholder," the definition of a quality like initiative seems to depend on who is defining it. So when you say "I expect you to show initiative," how do you and your employees know you’re on the same page? Furthermore, when it comes time to review performance and give feedback, how will you and your employee agree on whether or not they actually did show initiative?
The ALTtm skills we have talked about before can help you and your employees "get on the same page" about exactly where these goals and boundary lines are. The key is to identify the behaviors that would be evidence of leadership, or teamwork, or initiative, etc. Think of what a camcorder could capture – what a person does or says, and how they do or say it. If a recorder can’t capture it, you can’t communicate it as an expectation and you can’t measure it. For instance, flexibility can mean doing whatever you’re asked to do, or volunteering to take on new challenges, or just smiling and being pleasant when asked to drop one task and pick up another.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
