hinders imagination!
tense situations
real intentions
1. Premature Judgement
disclosure
fear
take raw idea as offer
delay
process
confuse
fear
2. Search for Single Answer
Obstacles
No room for invention
3. Assumption of a Fixed Pie
If I win, you lose, and vice-versa
feels disloyal
Roger Fisher
emotional involvement necessary
yours
authors
4. "Solving their problem is their problem"
interests
theirs
satisfy
William Ury
Bruce Patton
awareness
book
1991
200 pages
Define Purpose
on amazon.com
Few participants
Change environment
Luciano Passuello
Before
Informal Atmosphere
A bo ut
Facilitator
Side-by-side facing problem
no criticism!
Clarify Ground Rules
Suggested guidelines
During
Brainstorm
brainstorming session
litemind.com
1. Separate Inventing from Judging
mind map
Record ALL ideas
Rank
Most promising ideas
Improve
After
set a time limit
2008
Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial 3.0
Everaldo Coelho
Crystal Clear
images
www.everaldo.com
divided by chapters
map contains full contents of book
Decide
brainstorm IS NOT finding needle in haystack
wise agreement
Don't search for single answer, make plenty of room for choices
What's wrong?
requirements
1. Problem
Current Symptoms?
efficient
improve/not damage relationship
Suggest causes
Sort symptoms in categories
Circle Chart
Possible strategies
Theoretical cures
the more you defend, you
become more committed
lock in positions
2. Analysis
Note barriers to resolving the problem
effort in "saving face"
identify ego with position
unwise
tendency to mechanical
splitting of the difference
(50/50)
3. Approaches
Broad ideas about what to do
Specific steps
4. Action Ideas
less focus in underlying concerns
3. Inv ent Options
for M utual G ain
2. Broaden your options
child
instead of crafted solution
takes a lot of time
incentives stall settlement
banker
start with extreme position
psychiatrist
Look through the eyes of
different experts
How would a ... see it?
socialist
problems
make small concessions as necessary
increase chance for yourself
slow proc e ss!
combine with Circle Chart
provisional agreement
agree on what you disagree
Invent agreements of
different strengths
second-order agreement
issues on dispute not always obvious
Prescription
Break down
positional bargaining
Change scope of agreement
on perceptions
form x substance
symbolic x practical
look for
reach agreement
emphasis
principles?
negotiation styles
agreement often based on
disagreement
ad hoc results x relationship
families
used
soft
friends
sloppy agreements
concerned with relationship
reputation x results
3. Look for Mutual Gains
beliefs?
c omparison table
values placed on time?
negotiation on the merits
forecasts?
aversion to risk?
working side-by-side
Separate the people from the problem.
People
ask for their preference
low cost for you
high benefit to them
Deciding on the presence of adversary
basic points
look for
human needs behind positions
Focus on interests, not positions.
Interests
create lots of options
Options
Generate a variety of possibilities before deciding what to do.
Criteria
Insist that the result be based on some objective standard.
give them an answer, not a problem
Principled negotiation
market value
etc.
What decision?
give them an easy decision
diagnose the situation
4. Make their decision easy
offers are more effective
Consider how they might be
criticized if they adopted
your offer.
imagine other side's most
powerful critic
narrows vision
Expert opinion
Whose shoes?
Focus on ONE person
inhibits creativity
lot of stakes
vice-versa
nobody deals with an abstract entity
not each other!
attacking the problem
All opportunities to better deal!
let them choose
all acceptable for you
anger
dominates soft
The Neg otiation
Pr oblem
progress x respect for tradition
resentment
feels bad
victory
emphasis
hard
immediate future x distant future
power
bending to other's will
economical x political
no agreement
will
hard positions
endangers relationship
identify shared interests
internal x external
walking out
higher chance
battle
small agreements
no incentive to move quickly!
stubbornly hold to it
inefficient
doctor
gather information
analysis
Making threats is not enough
organize
think about it
stages
same four above again
planning
handle people problems
one party always feels defeated
communicate
open to reason
closed to threats
based on principle
understand interests
discussion
deciding on will is costly
be
attack the problem
not pressure
not abstract representatives of "the other side"
defending position
no time
attacking position
efficient
get angry
Negotiators are People First
have egos
independent of each side's will
confuse perceptions with reality
legitimate
usually more important
Relationship
practical
if buying a house
Object of Negotiation
Should apply to both sides
how would the seller buy a house?
egos
market value
when using Positional Bargaining
The two become entangled
precedent
Conflict
separately
deal directly with people problem
costs
examples
moral standards
yours too!
don't make concessions in the negotiation,
based on the people problem
4. Insist o n Using
Objectiv e Cr iteria
equal treatment
tradition
IS THE PROBLEM!
not reality
conflict
negotiate with roles
taking turns
perceptions
between
one cut, other chooses
maybe weak!
truth is just another argument
Fair Procedures
The most important negotiation skill
arbitrator
agree on standards first
split the difference!
different results
feel
Put yourself on their shoes
Frame each issue as a joint
search for objective criteria
Ask "What's your theory?"
Reason and be open to reason
Don't blame them for your problem
suggest objective criteria
Look for Opportunities to act inconsistently with their perceptions
strategy
when in groups
hard to raise (i.e. sell price)
alternative 2 OR
value alt 1 + value alt 2
write it down
Getting to Yes
Emotions are non-refutable!
Make explicit
Facts are refutable!
Book Summary
http://litemind.com
value other side's strong emotions
W hat is the alter native?
Allow other side to let off steam
Emotion
1. Protect Yourself
unknown BATNA
seeing the sum of values
from all alternatives
Use Symbolic Gestures
pitfalls
as
Problems
imagine
imaginative
Listen Actively
only if it's attractive
maybe non-agreement is the solution
Did I understand correctly you
just said that ... ?
if both BATNAS are good
Speak to be Understood
consider other side's BATNA
make it confidential, if possible
limit the size of the group meeting
principled negotiation
Communication
Not about them
force positions
analyze response
Difficult for them to rebate!
don't talk too much
What purpose the information will serve?
enemy attacks
Know other side personally
Build a Working Relationship
turn sides
"what would you do if you
were in my side?"
What YOU can do
never defend
seat back and relax
questions instead of statements
What if they won't play?
if they're wrong, they will be uncomfortable
positions
what you decided
interests
why you decided
one interest
Best Tools
WAIT
shared
behind opposed positions
feeling of stalemate
conflicting
interests
Ask
third party learns both parts interests
hard to make concessions
generates draft
easy to criticize
repeat
"Why?"
What interests of theirs stand in the way?
"Why not?"
Yes, But...
"one-text procedure"
final draft
easy to overlook
Can be done without third-party
Page 117 Book
V ery Good!
money
How to Identify
Case Study
about the negotiation process
examples
principled negotiation
verify assertions
"you check with your boss, and
I will also sleep on it and
propose changes"
recognition
...
make a list
phony facts
or a mind map
put it on paper
communicate
be specific
ask "How much authority you have in this decision?"
"We reached an agreement,
but I have to check with my
boss"
sense of belonging
control over one's life
usually about negotiation procedure
don't trust people
even on monetary disputes
economic well-being
be quiet, hope for the best
by default
make negotiation
independent of trust
we see as the only interest involved
may not be the case!
security
Basic Human Needs
long (not included here)
usual response
almost never true
see also: classic motivation theories
Most powerful interests
one decision: yes or no
Assume interests are the same!
Common Error
Each side has multiple interests
ask for improvements
mediate your own dispute
usually makes agreement possible!
different (neutral)
third-party
deflects positional bargaining
make assertions verifiable
deliberate deception
agreement for further negotiation
"correct me if I'm wrong"
2. Focus on Inter ests,
no t Po sitio ns
ambiguous authority
insist on reciprocity
shows openness
if they don't correct you
implies they accept your description
if you understand them
you're
Acknowledge their interests
dubious intentions
communicate
stressful situations
comment on clothes
make you wait
make you repeat yourself
personal attacks
interruptions
opponent will be
What if they use dirty tricks?
variant: prerequisites to negotiate
not purpose
looks for causes
backward
1. recognize the tactic
3. you accept
don't attack
Talk
make interests come alive
Look forward, not back
"Why?"
refusal to negotiate
forward
2 meanings
behavior determined by prior events
looks for purpose
behavior determined by free will
find their interests
choose wisely!
Be concrete, but flexible
1. announce publicly desired result
create a time window
invert pressure
ignore it and keep talking
introduce new solutions
point out what they loose if
you don't reach agreement
ask them justify what they did yesterday
who should do what tomorrow?
An open mind is not an empty one!
escalating demands
reopen agreed issues
find him and speak with him!
ex: instead of
extreme demands
ask for justification
"I would be happy to accept,
but I have to talk to..."
not preparing arguments
cause
people frequently argue based on
goal: lower your expectations
worth listening
hearing you
conclusions/proposals later
psychological warfare
good-guy/bad-guy routine
for every concession, ask for a new one
sympathetic
explicitly
reasoning first
Put the Problem before the answer
1. bad guys plays hard
2. good guy interrupts and
make little concession
make ridiculous even for them
intelligent
People listen better if they fell that
you have understood them.
joint draft (both can change)
seems like he's doing you a favor
raise explicitly
multiple positions that satisfy it
silence
they will try to break
Sit at same side of table
partners facing problem
recast it!
honest question +
insufficient answer =
generating suggestions
answering your question
meet informally
Face the Problem, not t he People
you
as attack on problem
reveal information
arrive early
find about likes and dislikes
Prevention
Negotiation Jujitsu
let them let off steam
harder to reach agreement
disclosure of flexibility
Speak for a purpose
your ideas
ask what's wrong with it
ask for advice
can't be resisted!
"You're a racist."
Prevent defensive reactions
invite
don't ask for acceptance
find interests
"We feel discriminated against."
Example
Speak about yourself
Tips
don't defend!
improve ideas
No persuading of third parties!
Negotiation is not a Debate!
look for interests
advice
being heard
being understood
disclose BATNA
the rest of the book
criticism
...and later refute it!
not killing time
satisfaction to other party
neither reject or accept
treat as one possible option
put their case better than them!
2. Make the most of the deal
selecting
best
hearing only your people
(constituency)
develop your BATNA
improve alternatives
alternatives
make them take sides
busy thinking about arguments
2. Not hearing
3. Misunderstanding
alternatives
make practical
impress
audience
1. Not talking to each other
pow er = BATNA
list of actions
if agreement is not reached
Visit to Cemetery
Small Present
Eat Together
What If they're more powerful?
too committed to reach agreement
attractiveness of NOT reaching agreement
spiral
Note of Sympathy
Techniques
you will have to choose!
ask for more!
listen quietly
Don't react to emotional outbursts
BATNA
seeing
avoid other part's ridicule
yours
be aware
1. Sep ar ate the People
fr o m the Pr o blem
bottom-line
What price you "ought" to get...
psychological
alternative 1 OR
ownership
self-image
theirs
Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement
be too optimistic
make easy for the other part
explain the agreement
Face-Saving
inhibits imagination
right question!
otherwise, may reject even if favorable
Give them a stake in the outcome by making sure they participate in the process
refuse to budge except with reasoning
wrong question!
will resist
better wording
Discuss perceptions
Never yield to pressure
too rigid
ignores what you learn during negotiation
will become defensive
under attack
bribe
threat
manipulative appeal to trust
same emotional force as his
Don't deduce their intentions
from your fears
ask third party
invite them to reveal reasoning
try to believe
not same as agreeing!
Perception
right standard
his point
try to understand
two standards
without knowing who's
proposing what standard
don't mix the two!
not just useful to know
their thinking
reciprocity
pretend he used objective criteria
theirs
Separate them!
what a court would decide
picking among a collection
Object of Negotiation
Fair Standards
efficiency
before deciding who's on each role
Relationship
trade-off
Two Interests
scientific judgement
professional standards
interests
commit
lock-in tactics
not positions
spend aggressive energies there!
positional pressure tactics
hardhearted partner
Desire to be conciliatory
Hard on the problem, soft on the people
don't allow it to stop you from
doing justice to your problem
positive support
calculated delay
human being
vigor which you emphasize the problem
Tip
at first
later
normally is enough
2. raise the issue explicitly
3. question legitimacy and
desirability
"you put me facing the sun"
"I am having trouble with the sun"
Equal strengths
cognitive dissonance
Psychologically
"Take it or leave it"
ex: separate people from problem
getting-to-yes.mmap - 1/28/2008 - Luciano Passuello
use the 4 principles
people try to dissipate ambiguity
helps him dissociate people
from problem