Compare Negotiation Styles: Hard vs. Soft

Negotiation often involves a back-and-forth where both sides stick to their positions. They haggle over these positions and refuse to budge. This kind of bargaining leads to many decisions, like what to offer or reject, which can make the process long and boring. Tactics like refusing to cooperate or threatening to leave are common. This approach makes reaching an agreement costly and time-consuming, and sometimes no agreement is reached at all. It can also harm relationships, creating lasting bitterness.

Some people avoid hard bargaining and take a friendlier approach. They see the other party as a friend and aim for agreement, not just winning. They make offers, are friendly, trust the other side, and try to avoid conflict. This softer approach is quick but may not lead to the best agreements, as it doesn't always consider each party's true interests. Negotiations focused on maintaining relationships can result in poor agreements. People using this approach can be taken advantage of by tougher negotiators.

Revolutionize Your Negotiation Tactics

Should you use soft or hard positional bargaining? Neither. Instead, "change the game?

The Harvard Negotiation Project came up with a game-changing approach called "principled negotiation" or "negotiation on the merits." Here are the four key principles:

1. Focus on People: People often mix up their egos with their positions, making communication murky. Instead of attacking each other, let's focus on solving the problem at hand.
2. Consider Interests: Rather than getting stuck on positions, let's dig deeper into each other's interests. By understanding what truly matters to each party, we can find solutions that satisfy everyone involved.
3. Explore Options: Coming up with the perfect solution under pressure is tough. So, let's set aside time to brainstorm multiple options that benefit both sides. This way, we can unleash our creativity and find innovative solutions.
4. Base Decisions on Fair Criteria: Some negotiators try to get their way by being stubborn. We can counter this by insisting on fair and objective criteria. Let's base our agreement on unbiased standards like market value, expert opinion, or established laws to ensure a fair outcome for everyone.

Negotiation Against the Odds

What if the other side holds all the cards? They're richer, more influential, or better connected. It might seem like talking about interests, options, and standards won't make a difference. But here's the thing: every negotiation has its tough realities. And sometimes, while you're trying to tackle the problem head-on, they might come at you instead. Sure, it's smart to focus on interests, explore options, and set standards. It keeps things smooth and friendly. But what if they refuse to play fair? That's when you need a strategy to turn the tables, to shift the game back to a fair "principled negotiation."

The Cost of a Rigid "Bottom Line"

Negotiators often set a "bottom line" to safeguard themselves from unfavorable outcomes. It's like a safety net to resist pressure. But, here's the catch: this protection comes at a high price.

Imagine if you go into a negotiation with a fixed bottom line, convinced nothing could sway you. Well, that's a recipe for trouble. It blocks you from being flexible and creative. You miss out on the chance to find unique solutions.

Know Your BATNA

Having a bottom line in negotiations can protect you from agreeing to something bad, but it can also stop you from finding a good solution. Instead, you should know your Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA). Compare any proposed agreement to your BATNA. This way, you won't accept a bad deal, and you won't reject a good one. A BATNA lets you think of creative solutions. Compare your proposal to your BATNA to see which is better for you.

If you don't think about your BATNA, you're negotiating blindly. You might be too optimistic, thinking you have many other options. Even if your alternative is fixed, not thinking carefully about it can lead to problems if you have to use it (like a lawsuit or strike). Being too eager to make a deal is also dangerous. It's important to have a plan if negotiations fail. Your negotiating power depends on how good your BATNA is, not on things like money, strength, or connections. Having a lot of money can sometimes make it harder to get a lower price. The relative negotiating power depends on how good the option of not agreeing is for each party.

Generate Your BATNA

Creating your BATNA, or Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement, is crucial for successful negotiations. Here's a straightforward method to do it:

• Step 1: Brainstorm Options: Start by brainstorming a list of actions you could take if no agreement is reached. Think about what you would do if negotiations fell through.
• Step 2: Polish Your Ideas: Next, take the most promising ideas from your list and refine them into practical alternatives. Consider how you can improve these alternatives to make them more effective.
• Step 3: Choose Your Best Alternative: Finally, tentatively select the best alternative from your refined list. This becomes your BATNA. Having a strong BATNA gives you confidence in negotiations and allows you to assert your interests more forcefully.

Understanding the other party's BATNA is also important. It helps you anticipate their actions during negotiations. If their BATNA seems too favorable, think about what you can do to change it. For example, if a company's BATNA involves ignoring community protests against pollution, you might consider legal action to halt their operations. This makes their BATNA less appealing.

Sometimes, both parties may have attractive BATNAs, making it difficult to reach an agreement. In such cases, it might be best to walk away amicably rather than force an agreement that doesn't benefit either side.

The Art of Negotiation Jujitsu

When your BATNA strategy doesn't work in negotiation, you can try a different approach called "negotiation jujitsu." This means countering the other side's moves in positional bargaining to focus on the merits of the case. In positional bargaining, defending your position or attacking theirs can lead to a cycle of wasted time and energy. Instead, try not to react when they attack. Just as in judo and jujitsu, you can use their strength against them by skillfully stepping aside instead of directly opposing them.

In the art of negotiation, you'll often face three common challenges:

1. Forceful Opinions: When the other party comes in strong with their stance, don't clash head-on. Instead, see it as just one option on the table. Dive deeper to understand their underlying interests. Every stance they take aims to address concerns, so explore how it tackles the problem at hand. By discussing hypothetical scenarios, you can show them the flaws in their stance and open up to alternatives.
2. Attacks on Your Ideas: If your ideas come under fire, don't go on the defense. Embrace criticism and seek advice. Instead of pushing for acceptance, ask what's lacking in your ideas. By understanding their objections, you can refine your ideas from their perspective. Turn criticism into a constructive part of the conversation. Ask for their input, putting them in your shoes to tackle the problem together.
3. Personal Attacks: When things get personal, resist the urge to fight back. Let the other person vent, and show that you're listening. Once they've aired their grievances, redirect the focus back to the problem at hand. By reframing personal attacks as challenges to solve, you keep the conversation on track and productive.

Key Tactics of Negotiation Jujitsu

In negotiation jujitsu, there are two powerful tools: asking questions and using silence. Instead of making statements, ask questions to get answers and reduce resistance. Questions let the other side explain their perspective and confront the problem. They educate rather than criticize.

Silence is your secret weapon. If you don't get a satisfactory answer to your question, stay quiet. People get uncomfortable when they doubt what they've said. They'll often break the silence by elaborating on their answer or suggesting something new. So, ask a question, then pause. Sometimes, your best negotiating happens when you're not talking.

One-Text Procedure: Bringing in a Mediator

When everything else hits a dead end, the final solution is to bring in a neutral third party. Mediators can untangle people from the problem and steer the conversation toward interests and options. They often suggest a fair way to make decisions, reducing the number of choices needed to reach an agreement.

The "one-text procedure" is a method aimed at helping mediators achieve these objectives. Instead of asking negotiators what they want, mediators inquire about why they want it. They emphasize that they aren't asking anyone to abandon their stance; rather, they're exploring the potential for making a recommendation " which is still uncertain at this stage.

Mediators

Mediators compile a list of interests and needs based on this information. They then invite each side to critique the list and suggest improvements. Criticizing is easier than giving in. Mediators use these critiques to draft a preliminary agreement, acknowledging its flaws but seeking input from both sides before proceeding.

This feedback is incorporated into subsequent drafts, each one better than the last. The process repeats until the mediators believe the draft can't be improved further. Then, they present it to both parties. Each side now faces a single decision: yes or no. The one-text procedure shifts the focus away from sticking to fixed positions and simplifies the process of generating options and jointly deciding on one. This method is almost indispensable for complex negotiations involving multiple parties.