Become A Master Negotiator

Summary: Taking a break from a negotiation can sometimes be the best thing for both counterparts. You may want to just use the restroom, let tension disperse, or locate additional information before making a decision. A break might last 10 minutes, overnight or a whole weekend. Novice negotiators have to learn to feel comfortable saying, “Let’s take a break.”

Example

All parents have a difficult discussion or two with their children at some point. The topic of the discussion may be school grades, curfew, telling the truth, or enforcing discipline. Sometimes a discussion does not go well. The parents end up angry, raising their voices and saying things they regret later. The child ends up frustrated and in tears. At a time like this, a great question for parents to ask themselves is, “If we get angry enough to say things we might later regret and our child ends up in tears, will we have accomplished our goal?” If the answer is “no,” it may be time to take a break.

Counter

If your child thinks he is “winning” the discussion and you are taking a break for the sole purpose of avoiding the issue being discussed, he may want to insist on resolving the issue immediately. As another option, he could make sure you establish a specific time to reconvene.

Have you used or encountered this tactic in your negotiations? If so, how’d it go?

Summary: Taking action first, asking for forgiveness later.

Fait Accompli is a tactic described by Gerard I. Nierenberg. The phrase is French for “accomplished fact,” and refers to a deed that is already done-and is therefore irreversible. You employ this tactic when you do something without first negotiating it. Then, when you get caught, you respond to any questions with something like, “Who, me? I didn’t know I wasn’t supposed to be doing that. I apologize. I will not do it any more.”

Example

Your neighbors’ trees are hanging over your property and you are tired of raking up the leaves. Instead of making a big deal and asking your neighbors to cut the trees back to the property line, you decide to trim them yourself. Your neighbors become incensed that you have cut their trees without asking. You reply simply that you thought you were doing the right thing by not bothering them, and you apologize for your actions.

Counter

The reason this tactic is so powerful is that there are few tactics to counter it. What is done, is done. About the only thing the neighbors can do is stop future progress. For example, if you are still cutting the trees, the neighbors could ask you to stop, saying they will hire a professional to trim their own trees. Putting the process on hold puts them in a better position to enforce future action. They could also use The Safeguard tactic to guide the future relationship, asking you to agree that you will never cut the trees again without first getting their permission.

Have you used or encountered this tactic in your negotiations? If so, how’d it go?

Summary: Feigning ignorance to test a counterpart’s honesty and the accuracy of his information.

Playing Stupid sometimes pays off. You may ask a question even when you already know the answer in order to verify the accuracy of your counterpart’s information or to test his honesty. This tactic works because people tend to want to help you more when they think you are handicapped by a lack of skills, knowledge, or information. In other words, there are times when playing dumb is smart.

Example

Last year we were in the market for a new refrigerator for our office. Wanting to make a good investment, we did a lot of research. After visiting three stores, we began to realize that we knew more about the models than the salespeople waiting on us did . But because acting too knowledgeable would probably intimidate the salespeople and cause them to keep their guard up, we began Playing Stupid, saying that we just weren’t sure what type of refrigerator we needed for the office. We didn’t volunteer the fact that we had already shopped at several other stores.

Finally, when the sixth salesperson had concluded his presentation, we narrowed our focus down to the model we were interested in and told the salesperson that if he sold us that refrigerator for $950, we would make the purchase right then and there, without even price shopping. This was $70 off his asking price and $135 off the lowest price we had found at the other stores.

Counter

In the scenario above, the salesman responded, “I can’t give this refrigerator to you for $950, but I can let you have it for $980.” It was still a great deal, so we agreed.

Remember to keep your guard up in every negotiation. Realize that any information you yield may be used against you. Helping a stupid person is a good thing, but it is devastating to help a smart person dig a grave for you!

Have you used or encountered this tactic in your negotiations? If so, how’d it go?

Summary: Asking questions to clarify a counterpart’s position on issues.

Some authors on negotiation encourage readers to ask only questions to which they already know the answers. Although we agree that you may not want to ask questions in some situations, we support asking questions when you don’t understand your counterpart’s position. Asking for clarification or more information from your counterpart can be very helpful in creating a win-win outcome.

Example

An organization sends out a memo informing customers that checks will no longer be accepted for payment to accounts. All future payments must be made by debit card. One customer, using the Help Me Understand tactic, calls the organization to ask why the policy is being implemented. The accounts receivable manager informs the customer that by eliminating the “float” period while checks are in the mail, the organization hopes to minimize the money it needs to borrow to maintain adequate cash flow, thereby saving over $50,000 annually.

Counter

This clarification allows the customer to come up with an option, using the If…Then tactic. The customer asks the accounts receivable manager, “If I mail my payment five days before the due date, then will you accept my check?” Since the outcome for the organization would be the same as debit transaction on the due date, the accounts receivable manager agrees to accept the customer’s check.

Have you used or encountered this tactic in your negotiations? If so, how’d it go?