Become A Master Negotiator

Summary: Using negative information about a competitor to affect a counterpart’s decision.

Sometimes you can change the power and direction of a negotiation simply by Providing Negative Information.

Example

A saleswoman is making a product presentation to a customer, who eventually says he’s thinking about buying the product from ABC Company, one of the saleswoman’s competitors. The saleswoman has read a great deal of negative information and reviews about ABC’s service, financial stability, and product quality. So she tells the customer, “Before you make a final decision, I recommend that you read these reviews on ABC Company.”

Counter

The customer has to do his homework and verify everything the salesperson says. The salesperson will undoubtedly weigh the negative information about the competitor’s product to be favorable to her own company. The customer should ask the saleswoman to explain why her product is superior to the competitor’s, and substantiate her claims. If the customer is really interested in ABS Company’s product, he should provide them with the opportunity to answer the negative claims made by both the saleswoman and online sources.

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

Summary: Making an offer and assuming a counterpart will accept it.

With this tactic, you make an offer and assume that your counterpart will take it. You’ve undoubtedly met salespeople who, before a negotiation has been settled, just assume you will buy their product and ask, “How Would You Like to Pay for That—cash or credit card?”

Example

You are asking $300,000 for your house. You’ve stated that you’ll consider taking less if the buyer will agree to a short escrow, but you haven’t specified how much less would be acceptable to you. The buyer says he’ll buy your house for $270,000 and asks if you’d prefer a fifteen or thirty day escrow.

Counter

First, you could use the tactic of YIKES! You’ve Got to Be Kidding!-blowing up to get the price back to a respectable figure. Second, you could try making a Trade-Off Concession. You could say that you will accept the price of $270,000 if the buyer will pay in cash and buy the next day. Third, using I’ll Meet You in the Middle. You could come up with a higher price and split the difference. Fourth, you could utilize These Boots Are Made for Walking.

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

Summary: Doing something irrational to encourage a counterpart to concede deal points just to escape from the behavior.

Once in a while it pays to do something crazy—something so irrational that your counterpart will concede just to get rid of you. To make this technique effective, you have to do something so far afield from rational behavior that your actions are obviously absurd.

Example

At the DMV, I once observed a woman who was so upset about having waited in three different lines without finding anyone who could solve her problem that she began crying and screaming, “All I want is for someone to treat me like a human being!” When this outburst started, a manager took the woman aside and personally helped her sort out her registration problems.

Counter

If someone uses this tactic on you, don’t take the behavior personally. Realize that many negotiators do the absurd just for effect. You can always walk away until your counterpart agrees to become reasonable. Another possible tactic is No More Mr. Nice Guy. If your counterpart realizes that every time she becomes unreasonable, you withdraw the last offer you already agreed to, she will soon recognize that her behavior is costing her. Another option is to get closer to someone who is acting crazy. Telling a person who is being absurd, “I love working with you because you display such great passion and emotion,” usually diffuses the effectiveness of the crazy behavior.

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

Summary: Promising something favorable in the future in return for concessions now.

One counterpart in a negotiation may promise the other counterpart, “If you can meet my demands, I will reward you at a later date.”

Example

I once negotiated with an experienced printing buyer. When I was reviewing the job he wanted me to give him a quote on, he made a point of telling me how much printing he was going to be purchasing down the road. Naturally, when I quoted the job, I gave him a very low price because I wanted his future business. When I called the buyer back with the quote, he said that he really wanted to use me but my price was higher than he had expected. He offered, “If you can reduce the price another $500 on this job, I will give you all my future work.” In effect, he was promising that I would get my Reward in Heaven.

Counter

Unfortunately, most people fall for this tactic. My experience has taught me that the promised reward rarely comes through.

One possible response is to simply fight fire with fire. Using the tactic of the Trade-Off Concession, I might have said, “I am not able to discount this job, but if you give me this job and then have another one for me in the next thirty days, I will discount the second job.” A second effective counter would have been citing Standard Practice or Policy: “It is not my company’s policy to discount first-time jobs or allow me to discount a job on the promise of future business.”

Experienced negotiators have been burned by this technique too often. Please spare yourself the frustration of not getting the reward!

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

Summary: Using the argument that “It’s always been done this way.”

Standard Practice or Policy is a tactic used to convince a counterpart to proceed in a certain way simply because that way is “policy.” This tactic works well because it suggests that the way being proposed is the usual or customary procedure and, therefore, is probably the safest approach. The most common example is the standard contract. The party being asked to sign a standard contract will probably just assume that the contract doesn’t need to be changed. However, questioning just how “standard” a contract really is usually produces good results.

Example

Fernando is renting some office space. The landlord hands Fernando a lease to sign, saying, “It’s a standard commercial lease. Just initial it in two places and sign at the bottom.”

Counter

Fernando has several options here. Using the tactic of the Salami, he could start slicing away, ever so slightly, at what is considered “standard,” agreeing to some terms of the lease but not others. He could use the tactic of the Trade-Off Concession, agreeing to all the terms of the lease in return for one month’s free rent. He could rewrite the contract to suit his own needs. Or, utilizing the tactic These Boots Are Made for Walking, he could always leave and go rent space from someone else.

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

Summary: Raising an unreasonable deal point to distract a counterpart and get her to make a concession on another deal point.

You place a deal point on the bargaining table that you don’t expect to achieve and don’t particularly care about, knowing that it will be about as acceptable to your counterpart as the smell of a dead fish. When your counterpart makes a fuss, you offer to give up the deal point, but you make it sound like a big concession on your part so you can ask for something in return.

Example

Consuela is buying a used car from Josh. Josh is asking $10,000. Consuela wants to pay less, so she lays The Dead Fish on the table, asking Josh to purchase new tires. When Josh balks at the suggestion, she agrees to drop the new tires demand, but only if he lowers his price by $400.

Counter

Josh could simply insist that the price is not negotiable. Or he could use Apparent Withdrawal, These Boots Are Made for Walking, or the Trade-Off Concession.

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

Summary: Making a big issue of something unimportant in order to gain a concession that matters more.

With The Decoy, you make a big issue of something you don’t care much about when you are really after something else more important to you.

Example

You’re buying a new copier and you strike a deal. The only option the copier doesn’t have is the ability to email files, which the dealer agrees to install for you. When you are getting ready to sign the papers, the dealer informs you that it will take a month to get the copier ready. Although the time frame is not that important to you, you make a big issue of it, hoping that the dealer will make another price concession. In fact, you even tell the dealer you will go somewhere else if he can’t make the long wait worth your while.

Counter

If he suspects your motives, the dealer can utilize Uncovering the Real Reason to expose your tactic. Other options are Apparent Withdrawal and These Boots Are Made for Walking.

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

Summary: Avoiding immediate agreement to a counterpart’s offer to prevent the impression that the negotiation was too easy.

Have you ever felt that you paid too much for something? Chances are you felt that way because you didn’t have to fight hard enough for your outcome. When someone says “yes” to your first offer, you walk away with one of two feelings: You may think you paid too much or, as if that feeling were not enough to make you have buyer’s remorse, you may think something is wrong with what you just bought.

Example

A woman is buying a used couch at a garage sale. She challenges the seller with, “You’re asking $300 for this couch. Would you consider taking $200?” The seller responds, “Sure, $200. It’s a deal!”

Counter

First, this is the time to use the tactic of The False Alarm . The buyer could say she was just asking if $200 would be acceptable, but she thinks that is still too much to pay. Then she could raise her level of aspiration. Second, she could use the Higher Authority tactic, telling the seller that $200 sounds reasonable to her, but she needs her husband to come over and take a look at the couch.

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

Summary: Giving a counterpart several acceptable alternatives to choose from.

You can use this tactic when you have several alternatives that are acceptable to you. Salespeople are trained to use this approach to gain a buyer’s commitment.

Example

A car buyer tells the salesman, “I’m looking for a 0% loan. However, I am willing to buy this car for $23,999 at 4.5% interest, but only if you throw in the paint sealant, upgraded sound system, and floor mats. Either way, The Choice Is Yours.”

Counter

The salesman has lots of options here, including: saying “no” to both deals and starting over; making a counteroffer to one deal or the other; using Apparent Withdrawal; employing These Boots Are Made for Walking; or making a Trade-off Concession.

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

Summary: Attempting to change the outcome of a negotiation after the counterpart thinks everything is settled.

Have you ever been involved in a negotiation and thought you had concluded a deal, only to learn that the other person was just getting started? This is known as The False Alarm.

Example

While you’re purchasing a commercial building, you negotiate with the owner and agree on a price of $940,000. You’re convinced that you have a deal. Later that day, the owner of the building calls to tell you he has presented the offer to his business partner, and his partner reminded him that although the sale price of $940,000 was accurate, he had forgotten that there would be an additional $6,500 in loan charges on the property.

Counter

There are several possible counters. First, when the owner tells you about his partner’s increase in price, you could use the tactic of the Withdrawn Offer. Tell him you shared the deal with your business partner and she will not let you pay more than $935,000. (This also employs the tactic of the Higher Authority.) Second, you could expose the owner’s tactic and say that the deal you struck is good only for twenty-four hours. If he does not take the deal right away, you will have to start the negotiations over again. Third, you could employ These Boots Are Made for Walking . Finally, you could utilize the Trade-Off Concession, saying, “Yes, I will pay $940,000 plus the additional loan charges, but only if you paint and re-carpet the entire building.”

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