3.0.0 - NEGOTIATING TECHNIQUES
Few negotiation sessions sail through the four phases of the negotiation process:
1.
Preplanning,
2.
Planning,
3.
Person to person, and
4.
Follow-up without either or both parties employing at least a few of the techniques and tactics which follow.
3.1.0 DUMB IS SMART
Participant acts unusually unintelligent to gain time and/or information. He or she asks you to explain and define virtually every statement. This tactic is often used to stop the other party from changing the agenda or to keep the other party on track. It is a very effective method when you are out maneuvered or when negotiating with a superior or a higher level member of management. It may also be used merely to stall for time if the other party is aware that the time available to you is brief. Suggested response: carefully explain, check the agenda, reduce your goals. Dangers in its use: other party may lose patience, harbor bad feelings, or believe that you are that dumb and thus not want to do business with you.
3.2.0 I AM IN CONTROL
Participant acts as though he or she has the authority to authorize expenditures until the final moments. At this point, the participant states they do not have sign -off authority for the sum under study, or that they need a final sign-off by a higher authority. This tactic is used as a basis for further negotiation, usually to the detriment of the o ther party.
Suggested responses: clarify authority at the beginning of the person to person or in the planning phase. If clarification is not possible, include slack in your proposal and state that you, too, must take the proposition to a higher authority. Danger in its use: bad feelings on part of the other party, and it is time consuming since it requires additional time to gain an agreement.
3.3.0 THE FLINCH
Participant acts repulsed and recoils at the other party's offer. Suggested responses: state,
"where did you learn to flinch like that?" or, "great flinch!" Dangers in its use: other party might really be repulsed, or harbor bad feelings.
PROJECT MANAGEMENT PARTICIPANT MODULE 3

3.4.0 CRAZY BUCKS participant acts as though the difference in dollars, time schedule, etc., between the two of you is either minuscule or large depending upon buyer or seller perspective. For example, if the dollar difference was $36,500.00, and the project's duration was a year, the party employing this tactic might state, "we are only talking one hundred dollars a day or a little over $4.00 per hour difference. Why are you counting pennies?" Suggested responses:
"$36,500.00 is over 7% of the total package. Do you know what the average profit margin is for a sub like me? Hey, I am in the business for profit, cut me a break." Dangers in its use: bad feelings.
3.5.0 I'M OUT OF HERE
Participant acts as though he or she is insulted or the other party is unreasonable, he or she literally walks out of the person to person phase. Suggested response: follow-up telephone call if you want to do business with the other party. Dangers in its use: no one will call and you will lose an opportunity.
3.6.0 DR. JEKYLL / MR. HYDE
Participants act like the good cop/bad cop as seen on television dramas. One person is easily offended and leaves the person to person. The partner remains, states that he or she could intercede on behalf of the other party if certain conditions were changed. Suggested responses: find out what the changes are, and if reasonable, play along, or walk away and tell them to call when both parties are more reasonable. Dangers in its use: bad feelings.
3.7.0 FEEL, FELT, FOUND
Participants use this counter tactic to fend off either a highly emotional response, or an apparently strongly held belief without insulting or ridiculing the other parly. An example of this counter tactic follows: "I feel that you believe what you are proposing is fair. In fact, over the years I often felt that similar responses were fair myself. However, our experience has found...." Suggested responses: listen carefully, offer more current data, or accept the statement. Danger in its use: ordinarily little danger as long as your data is correct.
3.8.0 ARBITRATION
Participant suggests that the only way to solve a particular issue or set of issues is to resort to arbitration. Suggested responses: remain silent for 10 seconds, then state: "do you t.VnT?fr that a person who is not involved in our business can run your business better than you?" or "I think that if we take a little more time, we can solve this together. Let's not allow the arbitrator to eat our profit." Then suggest a ten minute break. Danger in its use: the other party may still go to arbitration. Arbitration may be required! Arbitration should not be used except as a last resort.
NEGOTIATIONS
—MODULE 3

3.9.0 THE SCRIBE
Participant acts as the writer to sum up all decisions agreed to during the person to person.
By so doing, agreements are in the words of the author or scribe. On some occasions, the scribe may take poetic license and edit the agreements to meet one party's needs only.
Suggested responses: act as the scribe, read carefully, be prepared to renegotiate. Dangers in its use: loss of trust, loss of gains made, elimination of future business between the two parties due to lack of trust.
PROJECT MANAGEMENT PARTICIPANT MODULE 3