What’s in the Negotiators Toolbox?

Negotiation Partners alumni know that there are nine fundamentally different ways to achieve agreement or resolve conflict.  Understanding how and when to use each technique is the hallmark of a skilled negotiator.

 Importantly, there are no ‘good' or 'bad' techniques.  Each technique is more appropriate in some, and less appropriate in other situations.  The effectiveness of any given approach depends on two key factors:

·       how well it applies to the specific situation, and

·       how skilfully it is being used.

 As part of our Professional Negotiation Skills program, we teach participants to choose the most appropriate techniques and to apply them skilfully.  Every technique has its use, but not every technique is useful in every situation. Here are the first four:

 1. IMPOSING YOUR WILL

 Making demands, compelling action or enforcing compliance can be useful when:

·       You are empowered to act and the situation requires immediate and urgent action

·       You have a lot of negotiation power, and the relationship is not important to you

·       You want to delay or deadlock the negotiation for a while

·       You need to block or counter overly-assertive tactics by the other side

 Downsides:  Whether imposing your will is warranted by the situation or not, doing so can foster resentment and may leave you open to potential payback when the power balance changes.  Retailers who had a habit of exploiting their market power pre-COVID suddenly found the roles had reversed when supply constraints gave suppliers the upper hand.

2. PERSUASION

Persuasion is assertive in nature, but can involve varying degrees of assertiveness from hard core selling, pitching and arguing to debating and influencing.  All of these techniques involve persuasive argument to sway the other side to adopt your position or act in accordance with your wishes.  Persuasion in its pure form does not involve coercion (that would be imposing your will) or a concession in order to induce movement (that would be a value exchange/trading).

 Persuasion and influencing can be useful when:

·       The other side is not aware of the full extent and importance of key points

·       You want to test the firmness of the other side’s position

·       You suspect the other side may yield in the face of persuasive argument

·       The other side is not yet ‘sold’ on the idea

·       You need to create a sense of urgency for the other side

 Downsides:  Although it appears easy to do, effective persuasion and influencing requires considerable skill and judgment.  Persuasion is a useful first approach, but can be overused as a means of resolving conflict.  In commercial negotiations, positions are usually prepared well in advance and so negotiators can be resistant to change their position, even in the face of sound argument.  This can limit the effectiveness of the technique.

3. REFERRING CONFLICT

Escalating conflict to a higher authority for resolution is often a last resort when parties have reached deadlock.  That authority is often the next-up manager, an independent expert, a government authority or the judicial system.  Unless used tactically or as a means to avoid conflict, referral can be a sign of failure to resolve issues at the current level.

 Referring conflict resolution to a different level is useful when:

·       You are in a deadlock and neither side can walk away

·       You have reached the limit of your authority to negotiate

·       You are very confident that you will win your case

·       The outcome is more important than the relationship

·       You can’t force the issue, but a higher authority can

·       Other attempts to resolve the conflict have failed.

Upsides: Referring conflict requires no skill and passes responsibility for a solution to a third party.  Where negotiations were acrimonious, it can appear fair and will ultimately deliver an outcome as a measure of last resort.  Referral can also be used tactically or as a means to avoid conflict.  The prospect of lengthy and uncertain arbitration proceedings or costly court action can sometimes galvanise the parties to come to an agreement.

 4. PROBLEM SOLVING

Problem solving engages both sides to work together to identify the problem, clarify their underlying interests and then to use that understanding to agree fair and reasonable outcome.  This technique often involves the use of third party mediators, expert counsel, independent criteria.  The utility of this technique is limited unless both sides are willing to collaborate openly, which is often not the case in commercial negotiations.

Problem solving is useful when:

·       Both sides are willing to engage openly and cooperatively

·       There is sufficient time to explore each other’s underlying interests

·       The parties are in an obligatory or close relationship where neither side can easily walk away without resolving the conflict

·       You have the skills to use questioning and problem-solving techniques without being taken advantage of.

Upsides:  Problem Solving is a rational and cooperative approach well-suited to parties who are in a trusted long-term relationship.  It can create very powerful and mutually rewarding outcomes well beyond the basic win-win.  It involves a structured process and can be assisted where required by expert counsel or mediators to help facilitate the process.

All the techniques have a range of significant upsides and downsides. If you’d like to learn more about effective negotiation skills that are guaranteed to deliver results, email info@negotiation.partners to arrange a time to talk with one of our expert team or call us on 1300 730 552 

Look out for our next five ‘technique’ post soon!