Negotiation strategies

Ross Woods, Jan 09 Rev. Mar '12, May '13, Dec. '17

This e-book is a toolkit of negotiation strategies. Some are mutually exclusive and some are nearly the same. A few imply that the other party has a particular strategy for negotiating with you. Here are some more general principles:

1. Make friends if you can. Difficult things become much easier easier if you create a positive, trusting atmosphere.
2. Be polite and patient; don't lose your temper or make threats.
3. Listen carefully to what they have to say and try to understand their viewpoint.
4. Be aware that, like you, they have real limitations to what they can do. Unfortunately, however, some people use lots of fake excuses for not doing what they really could.
5. In many cases, you should avoid laying blame. It creates resistance.
6. Be fair to both sides. This isn't easy if they are rather militant for their own opinion.
7. Give people time to adopt new opinions.
8. Give people room to move. If people feel trapped or cornered without options, they are more likely to fight back and make erratic, unhelpful decisions.
9. When people push strongly for a particular viewpoint or feel trapped, they naturally tend to exaggerate the points that they see to be strong or in which the opponent seems weak. Their original view might be quite justifiable, but the distortion is not. Part of the solution is to consider the actual view, not the emotional distortions. The distortions might fall away when the emotions subside.
10. Compromise on non-essentials if it helps you get what you most need, but hang tough for the things you really need.
11. A few people simply lie to get what they want.

Strategy 1: Create win/win situations

The idea of the win/win approach is to make the resolution attractive to both parties; both sides feel they are in a win situation.

Put people in win-win relationships. People will be attracted to a position that is of overall benefit to themselves.

Scenario

Two companies have a grievance and try to sue each other. The legal fees in litigation are higher than the possible profits of working together, so they decide to leave the problem in the past and work profitably together.

Strategy 2: Provide a range of solutions and give them a choice

Generate multiple solutions that are all equally good. Explain the advantages and limitations of each one, then let them choose the solution they prefer. They have the advantage of a choice, and can exercise some control over the outcome. It's a safe option for you too; the client is responsible for the path they choose.

Risks:

• The client might be very indecisive, or not yet ready to make a decision.
• The client might not want any of the options.
• You might create unrealistic expectations in the client: "If they have so many good solutions, why can't they do better than any of these?"

Strategy 3: Generate a creative alternative

The creative alternative is this. Both sides of the conflict are in gridlock. Neither can get what they want because the other side won't give in. The "creative alternative" approach is to offer a new alternative that is acceptable to both sides that they hadn't anticipated.

In some cases, their motivation might be to save face. It can be very embarrassing for the person if he/she realizes they won't get what they want. They might feel unable to back down if it makes them feel like a loser. You need to create a face-saving option.

Strategy 4: Check the actual wording

In many disputes, it pays to go back and check the actual wording of your organization's policies, the agreement, or the guarantee.

It may be that the client has simply forgotten, misremembered, or misinterpreted what it actually says. It could also be that you have forgotten, misremembered, or misinterpreted it. If so, a clarification of what it says can resolve the problem. This is a safe option for anybody in a larger or highly regulated organization, and you can easily put it in a written form (e.g. letter, or email).

If it's a special case that isn't adequately covered by the wording, you can use your discretionary right, if you have it. Otherwise, refer the matter to your supervisor or to your organization's lawyer.

Risks:

• You might still misinterpret the wording.
• You might be seen to be a bureaucrat who is hiding behind the rules.

Strategy 5: Compromise

Pretty basic. You get an agreement by giving in on something that isn't essential.

You have to accept that you won't completely get your own way, but you can still get what you really need. Besides, the things that you can give up might be essential to the other side.

Using compromise well is one of the most powerful negotiation skills, as it can get you concessions that would be otherwise unavailable.

Strategy 6: Classical polemic

Each side explains its case, giving more detail and time to the arguments with more weight, pointing out the limitations of arguments against their case, and conceding the strengths of the opposing case. Each side might deliberately try to conceal information that damages its case.

The strongest case wins and the weakest case loses. This is totally opposite to the win-win relationship.

Strategy 7: Be tough

Being uncompromising is historically a variation of the polemic approach. While it is mostly identified with Americans, almost any culture can be tough when it needs to be.

If you decide to give people a hard landing, find ways to be pleasant about it. You might want to draw a hard line if:

• the complaint is unfounded
• you are legally in the right
• you have little or nothing to lose by being firm
• you have no space to negotiate (due to legislation, legal agreement commitments, or your organization's policies)
• the consequences of giving in to the client could be harmful to them.

It does have risks. This approach is often counterproductive, especially in Asian cultures. It can also make you appear unreasonable.

Strategy 8: Both negotiators take both roles

Each side is responsible to see the perspective of both sides and be willing to make realistic compromises. Contentious or difficult issues are handled very carefully, by third parties if necessary.

The purpose is to gain a consensus that is fair on both sides so they can work together in a trusting, cooperative relationship. It emphasizes politeness and mutual respect, avoids confrontation, and deliberately prevents one side from losing face.

This approach is common in Asia, and is very similar to the win-win strategy.

Strategy 10: Seek more information

Negotiations can bog down simply though lack of information and advice.

Peter's Pretzels and The Burger Company wanted to merge. They had good reasons and thought it would work well. The two boards had met several times and it looked very good. Then they got stuck. The only solution was to get more information. They had to speak to the accountant to check the figures and their tax situation, and see how easy it would to put the two very different accounting systems together. They also had to speak to the lawyers, to figure out how they could both honor all their agreements with other parties.

Strategy 11: Explore hypotheticals

If you are negotiating a situation that neither side fully understands, you might need to explore the hypotheticals. This is especially necessary if you have to negotiate a complex long-term agreement that must cover a wide range of possible scenarios.