The Intelligent Negotiator (17 page)

If you can induce opponents to meet at your office, this may also allow you to generate feelings of obligation by providing them with food and drink. While you may question whether such insignificant gratuities would be likely to influence anyone, I prefer to be the provider rather than the recipient of such generosity. If you doubt the impact of these gestures, take the time to observe religious solicitors who operate in airports or train stations. They initiate their interactions by providing little flowers or other small gifts. They then attempt to establish rapport through casual touching and sincere eye contact. It is amazing to see how quickly people who decline to make contributions try to return the flowers or other gifts they have received!

Silence

Silence is one of the most effective—yet overlooked—bargaining techniques. Less experienced negotiators often don’t realize the power of silence. They are afraid they will lose control of the interaction if they stop talking. When they encounter prolonged pauses, they feel compelled to speak. When they do so, they disclose information they did not plan to divulge, and they often make unplanned concessions.

Impatient opponents often continue to explain their positions in response to your prolonged silence and make further position changes because of the discomfort they are experiencing. By inducing them to bid against themselves with consecutive opening offers or unreciprocated concessions, you can generate repeated opponent movement that you do not have to match.

When you have something important to say, try to convey your message succinctly then become quiet. If you
reiterate what you just said, you look uncertain, may disclose additional information, and may make unintended concessions. Silence is thus especially important after you have made your opening offer and following each position change. Once your position statements have been made, it is the other side’s turn to respond. By your silence, you signal to them their need to continue the process with their own communication.

When you encounter taciturn opponents, don’t assume personal responsibility to keep the discussions going. Say what you have to say in a concise manner and become quiet. Again, it is your opponent’s turn to speak. If he or she doesn’t respond, wait patiently. If a minute or two goes by without any conversation, the time may seem like an eternity. Don’t allow your discomfort to induce you to speak inappropriately. If you wait long enough, such adversaries will almost always recognize their need to talk if the process is to continue. What should you do if they refuse to speak for four or five minutes? Ask whether they are planning a response to what you just said. Such a question places the onus on them to talk. Or get up and head for the exit. If they remain silent, you should go home or return to your office. If they ask where you are going, you can indicate you are leaving because of their unwillingness to respond to your prior offer. This is a prime example of
attitudinal bargaining.

Patience

Patience is as powerful a bargaining tool as silence. We Americans are known around the world for our talkative nature and our impatience. This is especially true during bargaining encounters. Negotiators from more patient
cultures wait calmly—and often quietly—for us to fill the silent voids with new information and concessions. The negotiation process takes time to develop. This is especially true when parties are attempting to resolve conflicts that have created strong emotions. It takes time for most people to move from a combative stance to a more conciliatory mode. If you attempt to rush the process, adversaries may become even angrier. If, on the other hand, you patiently await developments and exude a willingness to reason together for as long as it takes to achieve mutually beneficial accords, you enhance the likelihood of successful interactions.

When opponents give you specific time frames, don’t always expect them to honor those deadlines. They may promise a response to your last offer by the beginning of next week—but fail to get back to you by next Tuesday. This may be an inadvertent oversight on their part—or it may be a deliberate tactic designed to increase your anxiety level. Try not to call them next Tuesday or Wednesday to ask what they are thinking. Double their time frame and patiently await their belated response. They will usually call you by Thursday or Friday, wondering why you have not yet contacted them. If you calmly reply that you assumed they were busy and knew they would contact you as soon as they could, this will unnerve them. They had hoped to use time pressure to disconcert you, and you have demonstrated that this tactic will not work.

Guilt or Embarrassment

In his classic book
When I Say No, I Feel Guilty,
²
Manuel J. Smith described the degree to which children can generate parental guilt to obtain concessions during bargaining encounters.
The children make seemingly unreasonable requests they know their responsible parents must reject. When the parents begin to feel guilty, the children offer less outrageous alternatives that the parents feel obliged to accept. I know two attorney-parents who were discussing the negotiation process in front of their young daughter. They didn’t realize how closely she was listening to their conversation, until she responded to one of their comments regarding the need for exaggerated opening positions. She said: “Is that like when I ask you to have two or three friends sleep over when I really only want one?”

When you think that opponents have asserted unrealistic positions, don’t hesitate to make them feel guilty by calmly explaining how unreasonable those positions are. If counterparts show up late or engage in other inappropriate behavior, don’t hesitate to exploit their embarrassment to generate greater concessions from them. You don’t have to say much—just enough to cause them discomfort. Simply mention how long you have been waiting for them or how personally offended you are by their sarcastic comment. If you then wait silently and patiently, they will usually reward you with further position changes.

Never gloat when counterparts make concessions. Accept their position changes graciously, and let them know how much you appreciate their reasonableness. As you near the conclusion of a bargaining encounter, remember to leave your counterparts with the sense that they got a good deal. You can accomplish this objective by making one or two minor concessions as you conclude your interaction. If they suspect they have been cleaned out, opponents may experience “buyer’s remorse” and try to get out of the agreement. Even if they are unable to escape the present deal, they will be out for blood the next time they have to interact with you.

Let’s see the way Felicia handles the distributive stage of her job negotiations with Andersen.

Felicia informs Solomon that Andersen’s health coverage and pension plan are acceptable. She expects a higher salary, more than two weeks of vacation, and the right to take relevant training courses at firm expense. Solomon quickly indicates a willingness to provide her with a $60,000 salary and with three weeks of vacation. He acknowledges the changing nature of the technology field and suggests that Andersen would be willing to pay “several thousand dollars” each year for computer courses, if Felicia promises not to allow her time at these classes to adversely affect her work. She says that she would work nights and weekends, if necessary, to be sure Andersen’s networks continue to operate efficiently during her training programs.

Felicia asks Solomon if he has additional flexibility with respect to her salary. She is surprised when he replies that Harry Andersen, the company president, is not inclined to authorize a higher base salary for that position because he is not sure how fast they can expand their e-business. Felicia attempts to circumvent this issue by asking if the firm would agree to provide her with annual bonuses based on the degree to which their e-business is growing. Solomon seems to consider this a fair compromise and suggests a bonus of up to $5,000 based upon annual e-business revenue growth. He says that greater bonuses may be available in future years once the firm’s e-business has become established.

Felicia next asks Solomon if he would agree to evaluate her performance in six months and increase her salary if he is satisfied with her work. He says he would be willing to do this and provide her with an increase of up to $2,500 for good performance.

Felicia indicates that she would participate in the firm’s stock option plan, and Solomon explains the details of that program. Solomon says that the firm would reimburse her for moving expenses up to a maximum of $3,000. He then offers her a $1,000 signing bonus. Felicia says she appreciates his flexibility with respect to these issues. Both Felicia and Solomon are confident they will achieve a mutual accord.

Solomon finally asks Felicia how soon she can start work. She says she would like to begin in eight weeks to give them time to find a house and relocate. He looks disappointed and wonders if she might be able to start sooner. She promises to discuss this matter with her husband and get back to him.

S
UMMARY
P
OINTS

• In the Distributive Stage, the parties divide the items they have discovered in the Information Exchange. This is a highly competitive part of their interaction because it determines what each side gets.
  

• No matter how much the participants strive for “win-win” results, both sides will want some of the same items, and they will dispute the division of these terms. Because the level of competition is so intense, adapting your style of bargaining accordingly is particularly important.
  

• Skilled negotiators establish principled opening positions and are guided by objective criteria.
  

• Because concession strategy is critical, Intelligent Negotiators plan their concession strategies carefully.
  

• The elements of a successful concession strategy are self-confidence, principled positions, careful planning of size as well as timing of concessions, and always keeping in mind your own and your counterpart’s non-settlement options.
  

• Various bargaining ploys can be useful during the distributive stage. These include arguments, threats, warnings, promises, humor, control of the agenda, intransigence, directness, flattery, manipulation of contextual factors, silence, patience, and creation of guilt.
  

P
ART
III
T
HE
E
XECUTION

C
HAPTER
6
N
EGOTIATING
T
ECHNIQUES

S
killed negotiators employ various techniques to advance their interests during distributive encounters. Whether you use a cooperative, innovative, or adversarial negotiating style, you will need to employ different techniques along the way to facilitate your bargaining. Since it is impossible to change your true personality to suit a particular technique, select a bargaining style and tactics that are consistent with your natural disposition. When done well, some of these techniques can become natural extensions of the people using them. For example, aggressive people may adopt an aggressive negotiating style, while laid-back individuals may use a calm and deferential approach.

Negotiators use a limited number of techniques during bargaining interactions to enable them to claim what is on the table. If you can identify the bargaining tactics your negotiating counterparts use against you and understand the
strengths and weaknesses associated with each tactic, you can effectively neutralize their negative impact. This will enhance your bargaining confidence. It also helps you determine what tactics you should employ to advance your own interests during particular bargaining encounters.

B
ARGAINING
A
LONE
A
GAINST
S
EVERAL
C
OUNTERPARTS

Most bargaining interactions are conducted on a one-on-one basis in person or on the telephone. In some situations, especially those of a commercial nature, participants try to obtain a psychological advantage by teaming up against a single opponent. They hope to use the extra person(s) to intimidate their lone adversary and to help them listen for verbal leaks and watch for nonverbal signals emanating from their opponent. They also believe that the excessive verbal and nonverbal stimuli emanating from the different members of their bargaining team will overwhelm a lone opponent who has to watch, listen, think, and speak simultaneously. Car dealers often employ this tactic when the discussions between the salesperson and the customer become serious. The sales manager may then be brought in as an extra participant. Many real estate brokers also use this ploy by working in teams of two or three.

When you are forced to negotiate alone against two or three counterparts, you almost always lose! Why? It is virtually impossible for a single individual to out-think, out-hear, out-watch, and out-perform several well-coordinated opponents. When lone participants are talking, they tend to concentrate so much on what they are saying
that they miss the nonverbal signals emanating from their counterparts and themselves. When one member of the opposing bargaining team is speaking, the lone negotiator finds it difficult to listen intently to the speaker and to look for nonverbal clues being emitted by other team members. When the participants take a break, multi-party team members are able to meet with the members of their own negotiating group to determine how things are going and to compare notes with each other while the lone negotiator has no one to consult.