“..that blows nobody any good” means essentially that there is often some advantage to be derived from a difficult situation – if we are prepared to look for it. The phrase comes from an old sailing metaphor where a destructive windstorm might ruin one ship's journey while pushing another ship forward. The first printed record of it dates back to John Heywood's 1546 collection of English proverbs. As a rather mundane example this week I was hurrying (as always) to the local tip with a car full of rubbish, when I was mildly annoyed to have to reduce speed behind a slow car who in turn was held up by a learner driver. However, as we all proceeded round a bend at or below the speed limit, we came across a police speed trap with three officers and a police car. Without the unexpected impediment I rather suspect I may have been exceeding the speed limit, and would have got a ticket or at least had an awkward conversation and a warning.
 
In a professional context a good example is failing to win or be down selected for an IT contract following a bid process in which a supplier has invested heavily. On one level this is a complete disaster. However, firstly there are always lessons to be learned to improve future performance. See this short Forbes article How To Reflect, Learn And Win After Losing A Contract which reminds us that you just cannot win them all, with research showing the average sales win rate is less than 50%. From my experience the rate for complex IT outsourcing contracts, especially where the incumbent supplier is bidding, can be even lower. The article suggests that in addition to a debrief “rereview your proposal through the eyes of the client ….. and objectively critique your submission while keeping in mind: "Am I selling my company’s product or service as it benefits the client?"” 
 
Secondly there may be other advantages despite having to write off the bid expenses, not least that skilled people in short supply earmarked for this project are freed up for other work. If winning would have meant being ultra-competitive and “scrubbing costs” (the aggressive, line-by-line slashing of proposed prices and resource allocations), delivering the service and making a reasonable return could well have been a challenge. I have observed the painful reality for a client forced to deliver “an onerous contract” which it won at a price its own governance said would not result in a profit. In addition to bitter internal recriminations (which are not good for company morale), there is a sort of inevitable downward spiral where costs are duly cut, but successful delivery is then jeopardised. The customer then becomes unhappy and the supplier’s reputation in the market potentially suffers.
 
See this Harvard Business School article Why Failing Is Critical to Your Team’s Success which suggests that “Understanding how to fail well helps teams avoid unnecessary obstacles, encourages experimentation, and builds a culture where continuous learning is the norm. When failure is reframed as a tool for progress, leaders can move the organization forward.”
It cites the approach of Harvard professor Amy Edmondson who says it depends on how and why you fail. She is the author of the book, Right Kind of Wrong: The Science of Failing Well which “showcases how to minimize unproductive failure while maximizing what we gain”. The article concludes “Failure is often seen as a barrier, but it can be the catalyst for growth and lifelong learning. When leaders change their perception of failure, they unlock its true potential. Instead of an endpoint, failure becomes a powerful driver of innovation and progress.”
 
History is full of major setbacks in business, politics and science that forced a change in direction and led to massive success. Here are some great examples linked to highly successful individuals. 
 
Steve Jobs 
·       Setback: In 1985, Steve Jobs was ousted from Apple, the very company he co-founded, after losing a power struggle. It was a very public and painful failure. 
·       Positive: Being pushed out gave him the freedom to start NeXT (a computer platform) and fund Pixar Animation Studios. When Apple bought NeXT years later, Jobs returned to lead Apple, turning it into one of the most valuable companies in history. 
Soichiro Honda
·       Setback: Soichiro Honda faced extreme hardship after World War II when his manufacturing plant was completely destroyed by bombing and later levelled by an earthquake. To make matters worse, Toyota had previously rejected his piston ring designs. 
·       Positive: Left with no factory, Honda strapped a small engine onto a bicycle to help people get around post-war Japan. This simple, improvised motorized bicycle sparked the creation of the Honda Motor Co., Ltd, which grew into a global automotive giant.
Abraham Lincoln

• Setback: Before leading the United States through the Civil War, Abraham Lincoln suffered multiple business failures, nervous breakdowns, and a long string of lost election bids for the legislature and Congress.

·       Positive: Instead of quitting, Lincoln used these defeats to sharpen his political voice and connect deeply with the public. His resilience prepared him to become the 16th U.S. President and abolish slavery.
Thomas Edison
·       Setback: In 1914, a massive explosion and fire destroyed a huge portion of Thomas Edison’s manufacturing plant and experimental labs, burning years of irreplaceable work to the ground.
·       Positive: Unfazed by the massive financial loss, Edison famously viewed the disaster as a chance to wipe the slate clean. Just three weeks after the fire, his team delivered the very first portable phonograph.
 
So, in order to help us replicate these turnarounds in our various professional work, what are the common characteristics that enable individuals and organisations to succeed so spectacularly against the odds? Here are some ideas.
 
Individuals
·       Growth Mindset:  Seeing failure as a data point or a lesson, not as a reflection of their personal worth.
·       Radical Acceptance: Not wasting time in denial or blaming external forces. 
·       Stoic Perseverance:  Focusing entirely on the immediate response to the disaster rather than dwelling on the disaster itself.
·       Cognitive Reframing: Ability to change perspective on a situation. 
 
Organisations
·       Psychological Safety: Teams feeling safe to take risks and admit mistakes without fear of punishment or public humiliation. 
·       Blameless Post-Mortems: Focusing entirely on what went wrong and how to fix the system, rather than who is to blame.
·       Decoupled Identity:  Survival is not tied to one specific product or process.

• Agility and Decentralisation: Bureaucracy slows down recovery. High-performing organisations empower lower-level teams to make quick decisions, allowing them to adapt instantly during a crisis.

 
Ultimately it is about attitude. As Winston Churchill, who had his fair share of challenges, once said "The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees opportunity in every difficulty."

​This is a great and apt lyric from The 59th Street Bridge Song by Simon & Garfunkel. One critical competence for a professional adviser is knowing when to slow down and take the foot off the gas. This may be (1) during a deal in order to resolve a problem, or (2) when it has finished to recognise achievement and learn from it. This is particularly pertinent as we return reinvigorated from summer holidays ready to reengage in our working world with renewed energy and enthusiasm. I have been reading another book by Professor Steve Peters A Path Through the Jungle -  see my blog back in February Managing our Chimps in Negotiations. The author explains complex neuroscience with a mind model utilising a chimp analogy for the instinctive part of our behaviour. He tells a great story about an elite athlete he coached successfully to both a world championship and a world record. However, after a few weeks the athlete appeared unsettled (again) and as Professor Peters says “Their Chimp then offered me one of my favourite Chimp quotes: “I know I set a world record but I didn’t set a good world record”.!” In our busy and driven professional working lives the same “chimp” mentality or reaction as that of the athlete can be unproductive and even unprofessional. 
 
See this briefing 8 situations where it's better to slow down at work which reports on an article in the Wall Street Journal by two Stanford professors. "We all know the feeling of rushing into fix something before we even know what's going on ….And we know what happens: We not only don't fix anything, but we make the problem worse." They cite eight situations where employees should be encouraged to slow down including:
 
“1. When you have to make big, irreversible decisions
 
According to Amazon founder and former CEO Jeff Bezos, leaders should consider whether the decisions they're making are "one way" or "two way" doors. One-way doors are "consequential and irreversible or nearly irreversible, ….and one-way decisions "must be made methodically, carefully, slowly, with great deliberation and consultation."
 
2. When you're trying to solve complicated problems
 
In a 2023 study published in Nature Communications, researchers found that individuals with higher scores in general intelligence took longer to solve difficult problems. This longer problem-solving time also led to greater accuracy since they did not prematurely leap to incorrect conclusions.
 
3. When you're doing creative work
 
According to Teresa Amabile, a psychologist and professor at Harvard Business School, people will perform poorly on creative work when they have to work quickly, efficiently, and avoid making mistakes.”
 
I also like this article A Strategic Leadership Paradox: Slow Down to Speed Up which observes “We live in a culture where “Go go go,” and “Fail fast,” are norms….. AND YET … moving too fast can cause errors, self-centeredness, misunderstandings, lack of innovation and strategic thinking, chaos, and so much more.” It sets out the costs of moving too quickly which include errors, communication breakdown and lack of strategic thinking and cites supporting research. “A Harvard Business Review study of 343 companies found that businesses that chose to “go, go, go” without slowing down enough to be strategic about their business decisions ended up with lower sales and operating profits than the compared companies, which “paused at key moments to make sure they were on the right track.”” It cites strategies to “slow Down to Speed Up”including one I consider key: “Focus on Long-Term Vision Over Short-Term Wins.”
 
In a complex high value negotiation, all sorts of time factors come into play, some more “real” or relevant than others, which impact timing and behaviour including:
 

• False deadlines.
• Fear that the deal will go to someone else. 
• Professional advisers’ fees mounting up. 
• Delay in the savings and other benefits the deal is intended to bring. 
• “Playing” the normal negotiating game with the expected engagement.

 
Ultimately as professionals I suggest we should strive to achieve a balance between urgency and concluding a successful and effective contract where both parties win and meet their expectations. When this happens taking time after the deal has closed to understand why and what went well so as to repeat the pattern is critical. Too often the pressures of private practice and fee earning targets mean we move onto the next transaction almost before the previous one has finished. Even in industry I have rarely seen successful “lessons learned” processes that actually work. Often there is a rather low-key one-off effort, but in reality, deals soon become history.
 
I propose that a separate part of the organisation from the bid team should drive this “slowing down” and conduct a post deal “lessons learned” review process designed to turn individual wins into repeatable patterns and strategies for the purchaser and the supplier. This can cover commercial, operational, legal, risk acceptance and relationship dimensions. Capturing the knowledge and documentation developed by the bid team for the benefit of the delivery team and future negotiations is vital. Key stages include:
 

• A wash up meeting with all key stakeholders within 2 weeks of signing

 

• Comparing the final deal metrics with the original objectives.

 

• Reviewing what went well and what could be improved

 

• Determining how to codify and share knowledge.

 
Actually, in my experience it is relatively easy to come up with such a process including a post deal review checklist (ClaudeAI will readily create one for you) and to hold one wash up meeting after the contract has been signed. However, then some kind of business inertia almost always kicks in and well-meaning efforts to capture and implement lessons learned simply evaporate. The window for self-reflection rapidly closes as new commercial pressures take over. There are a number of reasons for this:
 

• the cross functional deal team disbands
• a delivery team takes over with a narrower focus and less historic knowledge
• the intense push to reach contract signature leaves teams exhausted and unwilling to participate in lengthy retrospective meetings
• nobody wants to reopen sensitive issues or face criticism over complex compromises
• the focus of key stakeholders moves on to or opportunities or challenges.

 
I don’t have a complete answer to this conundrum but maybe the art here is to shift from a single exhaustive wash up to an embedded, continuous review process led by a dedicated function which as I say is independent of the bid or delivery teams. This can capture insights early, build governance into the handover, improve ongoing delivery with stakeholder support, create living playbooks and enhance cross functional ownership. The focus should be on improved processes not on critiquing or indeed praising individuals.
 
“Nature does not hurry, yet everything is accomplished.” — Lao Tzu.
 
“There is more to life than increasing its speed.” — Mahatma Gandhi.
 
“Be not afraid of going slowly, be afraid only of standing still.” — Chinese Proverb.
 

As I write this it is 34 degrees outside and rising! I am sure everyone has their own story about this summer’s challenging heatwave, brown lawns, hosepipe bans, not sleeping etc. Mine is about our feathered friends. I looked out of the window on our staircase last week onto yet another dry and scorching day to see three small birds drinking and bathing in some water that had dripped into a ground floor gutter from an air conditioning unit and become trapped by debris. Several things came together here unexpectedly which worked to the advantage of the birds. Firstly, we get the gutters cleaned every winter but clearly there had been an unusual build-up of dry leaves and twigs. Secondly, I had noticed the water and almost decided to clear the leaves and let it drain away but something else came up and I never did. Thirdly we had invested several years ago in the air conditioning, more to improve the air quality in our house than for our current heatwaves - but very useful all the same – and now it was producing an unanticipated benefit as its drain flowed into the gutter. All these factors came together to provide an unexpected, serendipitous solution for the thirsty birds in the drought. We do also have a more conventional bird bath, but this more lateral solution seemed to work well and appeal to the birds.
 
In our professional working lives, we sometimes follow such rigid plans and patterns that there is little room or even appetite for recognising and allowing innovative and unusual solutions to come to our rescue even in difficult circumstances. This is particularly true rather ironically if you are, for example, an experienced senior commercial or corporate lawyer going around the loop on an IT service contract or share purchase agreement for the umpteenth time. It is so easy to end up in the same stale arguments about limits of liability or vendor warranties. If a junior lawyer less immersed in the “normal” way of doing things tentatively proposes a different solution how often is this simply overlooked because they don’t have the requisite gravitas or experience? 
 
Perhaps the classic example of this conundrum dates back to 1939 when a statistics graduate student George Dantzig at UC Berkeley arrived late to class and copied down two problems he thought were set as homework. He went home and while he found them difficult eventually solved the equations and handed them in – to the enormous surprise of his professor. They were not homework at all but two famous unsolved problems in statistical theory. It helped that the student never knew this was impossible and simply worked out the solutions. He succeeded because he did not have the preconceived belief that the problems were unsolvable.
 
AI proposes “Taking advantage of unexpected solutions requires dropping rigid assumptions, staying open to surprise, and rapidly testing ideas that initially look wrong or odd.” I found a book on this topic called The Art of Unexpected Solutions: Using Lateral Thinking to Find Breakthroughs by Paul Sloane – “this powerful guide reveals how openness to surprise can spark breakthroughs and redefine your approach to problem-solving. By taking risks and learning from unintended outcomes, you'll find unconventional solutions that drive innovation and set you apart from the competition.”
 
See also this Indeed article Creative problem solving: unlocking innovation in the workplace which proposes (perhaps paradoxically) that “Creative problem solving involves a structured process that encourages innovative thinking to find unique solutions to challenge.” It then suggests that after identifying and understanding the actual problem “the next step is to turn these issues into creative challenges. This means framing your questions to encourage ideas and suggestions.” Then you can generate and implement the ideas. Not rocket science but we often simply don’t do this in the heat of the moment.
However, this is more than just being innovative and “creative” as discussed in my blog last year The Creative Professional. It is about having the ability to “think laterally” to solve a problem. The concept of lateral thinking was originally coined by the Maltese physician and commentator Edward de Bono in 1967 in his book The Use of Lateral Thinking where he describe this ability to solve problems by imagining solutions that logic alone cannot reach, which matters most when standard playbooks (or thinking) stop working. In another book  Lateral Thinking: A Textbook of Creativity he explains this quite subtle but clear distinction. “Lateral thinking is closely related to creativity. But whereas creativity is too often only the description of a result, lateral thinking is the description of a process. One can only admire a result but one can learn to use a process”. I was privileged to attend a talk he gave at the Institution of Electrical Engineers in London where he illustrated different ways of thinking with examples. When English drivers see a traffic light going from green to orange and then red, they slow down and stop. Italian drivers when they see the lights changing speed up to get through! He explained how the perspective on topics can change and drive solutions. 

See this BetterUp article What is lateral thinking? 7 techniques to encourage creative ideas which cites Edward de Bono – “He proposed lateral thinking as a new way to move past our cognitive biases and be more inventive:

• Vertical thinking, the opposite of lateral thinking according to de Bono, is reason-based. You gather all available data and move sequentially from one step to the next until you reach a logical conclusion. This is what he says the human brain does naturally.
• Lateral thinking instead combines imagination and intuition. You consciously try to generate ideas and scenarios that imagine uncertainties outside the information you already have. It places more importance on the ideas themselves and doesn’t dwell on the outcome until later.”

​It proposes techniques to encourage this approach including ask why, consider all the alternatives, invite external stimuli and mind mapping (breaking a problem into smaller pieces). It concludes “Lateral thinking leads to more creative collaboration and greater innovation. You could also uncover inefficiencies in your business you never knew were there.”

Sometimes the solution to a problem requires this sort of "out of the box" lateral thinking as opposed to a more conventional approach. An Alaskan telecoms company once had a difficult operational challenge - its telegraph lines became covered with snow every winter and eventually collapsed. It summonsed all its managers to brainstorm the problem, and they were encouraged to say what they thought no matter how far-fetched or ridiculous it might appear. One attendee jokingly said they should get a grizzly bear to go from post to post shaking the snow off. "How can we make a bear move?" asked somebody else. "Drive it along with a helicopter." came the reply. And then they realised the answer to their conundrum: fly a helicopter low along the lines and let the wind created by its rotors blow the snow off. Later engineers even developed helicopter-mounted devices that mechanically vibrated or brushed the lines to knock the ice loose.
 
"You cannot dig a hole in a different place by digging the same hole deeper." — Edward de Bono.
 
“If you always do what you've always done, you'll always get what you've always got." — Henry Ford.
 
"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." — Albert Einstein.

I am privileged to belong to a tennis club with landscaped grounds. After taking a break for a swim earlier this week, I sat on the terrace having lunch by the lake with fountains, waterfowl and dragon fly. A Canada goose climbed out of water to look for titbits. Large carp were swimming in the water. However, while I was waiting for my meal what did I do? Did I take in this magnificent scenery and relax? No, after a quick glance at the lake I picked up my phone and started browsing my work and personal emails, WhatsApp messages and even Amazon deliveries. I caught myself just in time and putting my mobile down focused on the here and now and just enjoyed the view. As you sit by the pool or on the beach on your summer holidays, I commend you to ditch your smartphone and allow yourself to enjoy the moment. Some years ago, a colleague’s wife locked his Blackberry (remember those forerunners of iPhones and Samsung Galaxies) in the glove compartment of their car at the airport car park on their outward journey. Wise move.
 
In 2024 I wrote about the importance of Concentrating on the Present Moment at work. The increasing and almost obsessive use of electronic communication devices challenges this capability. It can be frankly detrimental to our professional work to ignore our colleagues and immediate environment and keep our nose glued to a mobile screen. When attending a crucial in person kick off meeting for a complex transaction, it really pays to be focused. This is when the ground rules for the transaction are laid down and is a great opportunity to get to know and understand the other side and their motivations. It used to be the case pre social media and our “always on” working and personal world that there were far fewer distractions. If someone was reading the paper or on the phone it was very obvious and generally frowned upon. At the start everyone greeted each other by shaking hands and making small talk that broke the ice and set the tone. Now as you sit down you often notice the other participants are so intent on their smartphones or whatever device(s) they are using, that they hardly look up and barely acknowledge your or anybody else’s existence. This is hardly an auspicious start to the multitude of interactions inherent in any complex IT contract negotiation.
 
Perhaps we have now gone beyond merely using devices for work (and our social lives) in a controlled and sensible manner to a form of addiction. See this blog Social Media And Device Addiction – The Hidden Cost For Employers and some related content Social Media And Device Addiction – Is It Time To Switch Off? and Social Media And Device Addiction – Tips To Manage Device Overload And Boost Productivity which propose that “Smartphones are a powerful tool. But in the workplace, they can be a source of distraction and reduced productivity.” It observes that “According to a study by Whistle Out, the average person will spend 76,500 hours on their smartphone over their lifetime, that’s 8.74 years of your life spent staring at a screen.” It is hard to put your phone down because “Every ping or buzz can trigger the release of cortisol (a hormone linked to stress) as your brain flags it as something that needs immediate attention. Similarly, it also releases dopamine, creating a sense of anticipation and reward, leading to compulsive checking.” Potential solutions include:
 

• Promote awareness 
• Encourage breaks away from screens – set phone free times 
• Managers leading by example and modelling healthy device habits. 
• Turn off non-essential notifications
• Cap daily use of apps (some apps can do this).

 
To gain some perspective from a different profession (and generation) I discussed this topic with my son who is a senior university lecturer. We agreed on three important things.
 
1 It is a Leadership Issue
 
This is not just about the behaviour of individual participants in a business meeting or lecture. The organiser can and should set the tone and indeed rules for the session and regulate the use of electronic devices, seeking agreement to limit the use of mobile phones to something related to the session.
 
2 Online Devices Can be a Valuable Resource
 
Mobile devices are of course by no means all bad and disruptive. Having online side communication during meetings can be very useful. For example, your side can discuss progress using Teams or a WhatsApp group in real time and say agree when to have a break to resolve a sticky issue. 
 
3 Use Technology to Manage Technology. 
 
Gamers who have been subject to these online challenges for several decades have an invisible mode where they can see but not play if they want a rest. We can do this for meetings as well – using technology as a control tool - setting a thief to catch a thief as it were. Although there are limits associated with privacy and possible intrusion into our personal lives.
 
Here with assistance from Claude AI are suggestions to be used where relevant and sometimes in combination to manage the use of mobile devices in a professional working context – though some may also help in our personal lives. 
 
Software Tools
 

• Meeting-mode apps such as 

 
Forest a productivity and time-management app designed to help users beat smartphone addiction and stay focused. You plant a virtual seed, set a timer, and watch it grow into a tree while you work; if you leave the app, your tree withers.
 
 Flipd a digital productivity timer and habit tracker designed to help users minimize screen time, focus on tasks, and study.
 
One sec a digital wellbeing tool designed to reduce screen time and mindlessly opening addictive apps. It works by forcing a brief mindful pause—such as a deep breathing exercise—every time you launch targeted apps like Instagram or TikTok.
 

• Focus time features in Google Calendar and Microsoft Outlook which help protect work by blocking schedule slots, silencing notifications, and declining meetings - built-in tools to manage uninterrupted work periods.

 

• Screen Time/Digital Wellbeing - a built-in tool on Android devices that tracks screen time, app usage with limits set to trigger automatically during work hours.

 
Physical/hardware solutions
 

• Signal-blocking pouches (Yondr Pouch) that lock phones for the meeting’s duration — common in schools, increasingly used in corporate settings. This is a secure, lockable virtual container used to keep mobile phones off-limits. Users keep physical possession of their locked device, and the pouch can only be unlocked using a special magnetic base at exit stations.

 

• A designated charging station or “phone basket” outside the room.

 

• RF-shielded meeting rooms (rare, expensive, usually reserved for high-security contexts).

 
Network-level controls
            

• IT functions can restrict certain apps/sites on the guest or meeting-room Wi-Fi during booked slots.
• MDM (mobile device management) policies that push temporary app restrictions to company-issued phones during calendar-flagged meetings.        

 
Meeting-tool features
 

• “Focus mode” in Zoom, a host-controlled feature that lets the meeting host and co-hosts view all participant videos and shared screens while preventing participants from seeing or being distracted by one another. There has however been a privacy backlash to the use of such controls.

 
This last point highlights the challenges in a work context. How and to what extent should professional practices seek to manage the use (or overuse) of electronic devices at work? Many have the same mobile for business and personal use. I tried having two phones, but it is a real hassle.  But this is not just about private versus office use. It is about effective focus on the task or meeting in hand. I facilitated an in person commercial contract training session where attendees kept using their laptops to work on their day job. This is disrespectful and negates the point of attending. Some management of device usage at work seems worthy of consideration.
 
 As the author and speaker Simon Sinek observed “When we show up for a meeting, or we sit down for dinner with our families, and we put the phone on the table, it sends a psychological message to everyone sitting there that you are not the most important thing to me right now.”
​

I was privileged to get some tickets through the LTA ballot for myself and my son to the Wimbledon tennis last week. We watched from Henman Hill and No 1 Court. Great day out. I travelled by car paying half price for the official parking as it is electric. On the way I had “an argument” with Google Maps! Don’t get me wrong I think this a fantastic app and service, and I use it all the time. BUT if you set a particular route, it can be very obstinate and keeps taking you back to this chosen route. I wanted to go a particular way at a junction to avoid road closures in Wimbledon Village. Instead, it insisted I turned left off a dual carriageway when I was in the middle lane and did not really want to. As I rather distractedly attempted to change lanes the yellow lane warning sign came on in my car’s wing mirror (really useful add on) and as I glanced left, I saw a car in the lane I was approaching. I stopped the action and avoided a collision. I was fortunate and knew when to stop a potentially damaging or dangerous action.
 
This principle applies equally in our professional working life. It’s not all about planning and doing things well, but also having the knowledge, instinct and experience to know when to stop doing something rather than carrying on regardless. As a manager conducting a performance appraisal sometimes you have to bite your tongue and avoid saying something over critical or derogatory. This can leave the employee resentful or disengaged. There are generally better ways to get your point across. A very good junior solicitor once came to me for a review of a short but critical agreement. It was not well drafted. I almost told her it was rubbish but just stopped myself. She did not need this criticism, and just looking at me and then back at the agreement herself observed it was a very poor and hurried effort and she would start again. 
 
In IT contract negotiations there are so many times that jumping in with a critical or negative view is far more damaging than intended – especially to people’s delicate ego’s! - and can be really detrimental to progress. It is far better to say nothing aggressive and think of a more constructive way to make the point. Specifically in negotiations some simple “stopping” techniques that help are:
 

• Use silence deliberately. If you feel a reaction rising, pause before responding — even a few seconds allows a reset.
• Reframe the other side’s tactics as moves, not attacks. “They’re anchoring low” is less threatening than “they’re disrespecting me.”
• Ask questions instead of reacting – and then wait patiently for a response. “Help me understand how you got to that number” buys time and shifts from defence to information-gathering.
• Call a lunch break or even stop for the day to allow emotions to settle and solutions to appear.

 
See this Harvard Law School blog Emotional Triggers: How Emotions Affect Your Negotiating Ability which observes “Emotions—of all kinds—shape our thoughts, behavior, and even our physiology. In negotiation, researchers have long documented the impact of integral emotions—feelings triggered by the negotiation itself.” It suggests we should identify our own “personal emotional triggers” and indeed those of our counterparts on the other side of the table and concludes “By learning to recognize and label incidental emotions in ourselves and others, negotiators can reduce their disruptive effects and keep discussions focused on substance rather than mood.”
 
More generally according to AI, citing a Harvard Business Review article, professionals should stop an activity or project when data shows it no longer serves its strategic purpose. It is time to step back when your team is in danger of falling into the "sunk cost" trap - continuing simply because you've already invested significant time, money, or effort. There are several clear markers to help professionals identify when it is time to halt a specific activity or initiative including:
 

• Lack of Strategic Alignment.  A project should be stopped when regular monitoring shows the gap between the effort put in and the outcome is consistently widening. Letting go is a sign of good stewardship, not failure.

 

• Diminishing Cognitive Returns. Proactive engagement  demands intense mental effort. Research shows that forcing extra effort on a routine can deplete cognitive reserves, leading to more errors. If an extra activity is making you worse at your overall job, it should be stopped.

 
This links into managing our work on a daily or weekly basis. It can be important to be aware when to say no to some proposal or activity - see this article Learn when—and how—to say no in your professional life which suggests “We strongly recommend getting into the habit of being deliberate about what invitations to say yes to, even before you get to the point of filling up your weekly calendar. You can do that by conducting an informal cost-benefit analysis.” This is especially true in our interconnected and always on working world where demands and requests come not just across negotiating tables but through Teams, e-mail and instant messages – and even by phone (remember phone calls?). 
 
See this Warwick Business School  Careers blog: The importance of saying no which advises “The ability to say no is a crucial career skill that could prevent burnout while protecting your wellbeing. By declining certain commitments, you preserve time and energy for high-priority work, establish professional respect, and contribute to the creation of healthy workplace dynamics.” There is even a book on this topic Defy: The Power of No in a World that Demands Yes  summarised as follows. “Many of us comply much more than we realize. How many times have you wanted to object, disagree, or opt out of something but ended up swallowing your words, shaking your head, and just going along? Analyzing cases ranging from corporate corruption and sexual abuse to everyday acquiescence at work, the doctor's office, and in our personal lives, award-winning organizational psychologist Dr. Sunita Sah delves deep into why the pressure to comply is a corrosive and often invisible force in our society.” 
 
The American comedian Bill Crawford observed “Sometimes knowing what to do is knowing when to stop”.
 
While the Australian cricketer Spencer Johnson suggested "… letting things go is an act of far greater power than defending or hanging on."  
 
And as the French fashion designer Hubert de Givenchy put it “You have to know when to stop – that’s wisdom.”
​

​I have for the past two months been organising a tennis session on a Sunday morning at the club I belong to. Not particularly taxing you would have thought, but in practice surprisingly challenging. First, you need to book 4 courts every week in advance, but as the club will not allow block bookings (I tried challenging this policy but to no avail), you need a team of 4 fellow members to be bookers. This means going online to the club’s website at 8am 6 days beforehand. You have to be on time because others compete for the courts and time slot we want. Also, although in theory you can book any court, mid-way through my stint some lady players complained to a colleague and to the chair of tennis that we were booking “their” courts! Then once the courts are sorted you need to find the players from a pool of some 55. Again, should be easy but people are busy, get injured, have other commitments or just change their availability. Or their response goes to junk mail. Sometimes we had 16 and sometimes only 6 players. All had to be paired with someone they had not played with recently. 
 
Anyway, it all went well and looking back on it I realised this was at least to some extent because I planned carefully, almost as if it had been a professional transaction. In addition to the team of 4 bookers, I had 2 reserves who were both required at various times. I created Word templates for the bookers and again for the players on the actual day. Not rocket science I know, but the point I want to make is that while we all readily criticise poor or even non-existent planning (see my blog 2 years ago Walk the Week - XXXX Poor Planning), we should also recognise when the best-laid plans of mice and men (to paraphrase badly) actually do work out and deliver.
 
By way of a more work-related example, some years ago when I was in private practice a very large client who was procuring some very complex and expensive technology invited me to an in person planning session. I was surprised because normally as lawyers we are only asked to attend the actual contract negotiation, with perhaps a short pre-meet in a café. This was different. Every member of the team covering all the disciplines – commercial, procurement, technical, finance, legal, operational and management – were present. The team leader (who had invited me - not interestingly the in-house legal team though they concurred) led us through creating a procurement and negotiation plan in great detail. We role played and filled a conference room with flip chart pages of notes capturing our work and the plans we arrived at. And all this was well before any contact with would be suppliers. Not surprisingly the procurement was a success, although there were subsequently some delivery challenges as there often are with the introduction of new technology. Even then we were well placed to advise again (with the rest of the team) because we had been on the whole journey, and not just called in to negotiate the terms and conditions.
 
A way of looking at this is as “scenario planning” which at an industry level was pioneered by Royal Dutch Shell in the 1970’s. Confronted with unpredictable oil markets, Shell pioneered formal scenario planning rather than relying on linear forecasting. This foresight allowed the company to survive the 1973 OPEC oil crisis largely unscathed and eventually become one of the largest energy companies globally. Scenario planning is a strategic management tool used to map out multiple plausible futures. Instead of predicting a single outcome, organizations identify critical uncertainties to prepare for "what-if" moments. This enables proactive risk management, robust decision-making, and long-term resilience. See this IBM article What is scenario planning? which discusses “the process of creating multiple scenarios for potential futures, based on a range of different uncertainties”. It comments that “With scenario planning, organizations can visualize different scenarios and reveal critical uncertainties long before a crisis occurs. This process can provide a competitive advantage by enabling enterprises to brainstorm and think through ahead of time what actions might need to be taken”. It proposes steps to create a scenario plan and discusses some different types including exploratory, operational and strategic.
 
I propose that this sort of approach can be applied just as readily and effectively to contract negotiation as to business or function strategy. AI suggests that “Scenario planning in a negotiation means mapping out multiple potential futures and preparing specific responses for each.” Harvard Law School discusses this approach in The Program on Negotiation suggesting that “Studying and examining negotiation scenarios allows us to sharpen strategic judgments, manage feelings before, during, and after a negotiation, and allow implicit ideas, assumptions, and theories to surface.” Staying in Boston this Harvard Business School paper How to Prepare for a Negotiation proposes that “Planning for expected and unexpected outcomes is essential to negotiating effectively. Negotiations are unpredictable. It's often difficult to know how the other party will respond. Preparation can make the difference between success and failure.”
 
My research suggests that it is very easy when considering this topic to stray into negotiation tactics, which is a laudable but, in some ways, narrower subject. Looking across the whole of a procurement with the negotiation and delivery teams at a strategic level before any negotiation shot is fired is a different and more profound activity. It also has the incidental benefit of creating not just a negotiating team with a common purpose and objectives, but a set of people who understand the project and can be reengaged if it starts to go off the rails. This happened with the example I cited above and meant we could reconvene as a team to reset and stabilise the project.
 
Nowadays I think technology such as AI can help with this process, but as yet anyway, is no substitute for getting people together in a room to discuss and develop a common purpose and approach.
 
As Benjamin Franklin said “By failing to prepare, you are preparing to fail.”
 
While the American baseball player Yogi Berra shrewdly observed “If you don’t know where you are going, you’ll end up someplace else.”
 
And the racing car driver Bobby Unser proposed “Success planning is where preparation and opportunity meet.”
 

​I confess to being a football fan and like millions of others around the globe am watching the world cup in North America with increasing enthusiasm. My family has accused me, quite rightly, of being a bit fanatical over sport such as football or tennis – getting really upset when my team or player performs badly or loses and overly ecstatic when they win. But why is this? What is the cause of this mildly irrational behaviour which I am sure I am not unique in experiencing. In my blog back in February Managing our Chimps in Negotiations I referred to The Chimp Paradox by Professor Steve Peters, a sports psychologist who proposes that our brains that can be characterised as the Human, the Chimp and the Computer. He suggests that “For supporters, the intense highs and lows of a match are driven directly by the inner Chimp. When a team loses or a referee makes a bad call, the Chimp often takes control, leading to frustration, anger, or irrational panic. By understanding the model, fans can learn to acknowledge these emotions, manage them, and rationally accept outcomes.” This certainly makes sense to me, and I suspect will also to many of my readers. However, why you may well ask is this relevant in our professional world?
 
I propose that these partisan principles and behaviour also occur in our working lives and can operate to our detriment and to that of our colleagues and clients. When by way of example we work for a law practice, other firms and their lawyers we encounter in deals or disputes may well come to be considered like the opposing team, the enemy, not to be trusted and to be beaten at all costs. The overriding principle becomes that we are competitors on the transaction concerned and more generally for attracting new clients and work. In fact, our common professional principles and practice are very much what bind us together and should enable us to rise above this more petty partisan behaviour. This does not mean failing to serve our clients in the best way we can. Quite the contrary. In tough situations in IT contract negotiations (or even litigation) when both sides seem to be irretrievably locked in conflict, I have found that taking my professional counterpart aside in another room or to a nearby coffee bar can result in a much more constructive and ultimately rewarding conversation. Problems and related behaviour that seemed intractable become capable of solution when looked at calmly and more rationally. These side bars can also encourage creative and innovative ways forward that were masked by the emotional atmosphere in the real or virtual room. They do work best as a one-to-one professional conversation with no “showboating” in front of clients or even sometimes colleagues.
 
AI proposes that “Professionalism in negotiations shifts the focus from a stressful battle of wills into a collaborative, value-creating process. It establishes a foundation of trust, prevents costly emotional impasses, protects long-term partnerships, and enhances your overall credibility at the bargaining table.” See this Harvard Law School blog Relationships in Negotiation: The Advantages of Rapport Building whose theme is that “Strong working relationships in negotiation help establish the trust needed to share information and craft mutually beneficial deals”. We can do this “By establishing a strong sense of personal rapport”. This prevents the tendency in my context here to “let your chimp loose on the pitch” and “to become irritated or upset by each other’s statements and behavior. Negotiators who have established rapport are less likely to resort to threats and ultimatums than those who have not.” A common profession encourages its practitioners to stand above petty behaviour and seek a mutually beneficial outcome.
 
In my field of technology law, I have always encouraged colleagues whether in private practice or in-house to participate in professional organisations such as the Society for Computers & Law in the UK or ITechLaw more globally. These provide opportunities in a “safe” environment outside of the cut and thrust of contract negotiations or litigation to meet professional colleagues in other firms or companies and to learn from and with them. Collectively it may then also be possible to improve say the contracting process for complex technology outsourcing agreements, which is always fraught with challenges. Such contact outside your practice enables informed debate and discussion on new and important topics such as the impact of AI on professionals. Younger professionals can then also learn from peers outside their own organisation. If you should subsequently encounter such “external” colleagues in say an outsourcing contract negotiation this existing common ground helps to establish an effective working relationship which ultimately serves clients better.
 
Absent such ability to rise above the cut and thrust of the negotiations (or the football game) and see things in perspective matters often seem to escalate until like opposing sports fans in a stadium there is no possible middle ground. It’s so easy to react in kind to emotional behaviour such as getting angry or upset making any meeting of minds or finding common ground virtually impossible. 
 
I like this Cranfield School of Management article Negotiation Strategy Series: 2 Building trust and managing emotions which explores strategies which “can transform potentially contentious exchanges into productive partnerships”. It proposes strategies for managing emotions such as:
 

• Label emotions. Acknowledging emotions – both yours and your counterpart's – creates space for more rational discussion.  

 

• Avoid overreaction. Strategic negotiators sometimes deliberately provoke emotional responses to gain concessions.

 

• Assess angry displays. Not all displays of emotion are genuine. Learning to distinguish between calculated anger and genuine frustration helps you respond appropriately.

 
And then sets out strategies for building trust including:
 

• Establish process transparency. Beginning negotiations with clarity about process creates psychological safety and sets expectations for all parties.

 

• Reciprocal information sharing. Opening up about priorities and constraints encourages similar disclosures from your counterpart, creating fertile ground for value creation.

 
Ultimately it suggests “Effective negotiation balances tactical skill with emotional intelligence and trust-building”.
 
Stephen Covey the educator and author once remarked “When the trust is high, communication is easy, instant and effective”.
 
While the business coach Peter Kozodoy proposed "Being open, honest and vulnerable about who you really are will inspire a lot of people".
 
And going back in time, the Greek tragedian Euripides sagely observed “Who cannot open an honest mind No friend will he be of mine.”
 

​“Serendipitous” describes an event or discovery that happens by chance but results in a beneficial outcome. I had a minor, and I mean really minor, problem in the context of daily challenges, over the last couple of weeks. I was using a small plastic bottle of Evian water which fitted into a pocket in the door of my car. It ran out in the recent heatwave. I tried for several days to buy a single replacement but could only find packs of six which I was too mean to buy. This was becoming annoying. Then I started thinking laterally and realised I was looking at the problem completely the wrong way. What I needed was a reusable stainless steel insulated water bottle, available on Amazon - and in a colour almost matching my car. These things matter! It arrived in a day and fits neatly in the pocket which was clearly designed for this very purpose. I have permanently resolved my problem and am also helping the environment by using a sustainable solution. Indeed, there have been a surprising number of important inventions throughout history which happened more by chance than careful development. See this article Serendipitous Inventions which cites as examples Velcro, matches, Coca-Cola, the microwave oven and Post-it Notes. Another such beneficial event is Alexander Fleming’s accidental discovery of penicillin.
 
My point is that in our professional lives we should always be on the lookout for these incidental improvements in our work and its associated processes which may not be immediately obvious. We can I suggest be consciously more receptive to such events. See this article from Judge Business School at the University of Cambridge Innovation at work: the power of serendipity which observes “rather than being merely an event that happens to an individual or organisation, serendipity requires ‘sagacity’ – it builds on the notion that positive discoveries are facilitated by controllable elements such as an open mind.” The authors propose that “Organisations can encourage behaviour leading to serendipity” avoiding the “functional fixedness” that may result from the “The process of professionalisation”. Their research found “serendipity triggers” such as
 

• curiosity
• alertness 
• positive emotions 
• humility (lack of dogmatism) 
• improvisation

 
They cite the example of the animation studio Pixar whose main buildings “were designed to maximise inadvertent encounters” with “a single big space with a big atrium [which] led to people bumping into each other”. As we all spend so much time working from home such opportunities for chance encounters and incidental creativity are more challenging. However why not finish say a Teams meeting 5 minutes early and open the floor to a quick and open discussion on any lessons learned?
 
Crossing the Atlantic the Harvard Business Review has some quick tips see Unlock Innovation Through Serendipity including:
 

• Encourage openness to surprises

 

• Foster cross-disciplinary interactions

 
The last rings particularly true to me as when as a lawyer who has crossed the boundary from private practice to the in-house world. In a law firm you are mainly working on a day-to-day basis with other lawyers. In industry I was exposed every day to so many more cross team interactions with colleagues in different disciplines from commercial and procurement, technical architects, and salespeople through to senior management. Once I stopped thinking (rather arrogantly) that as a legal adviser I had to be the only source of the truth, these interactions often made me reconsider my approach and practice as a professional. For example, I once watched a senior manager step into a convoluted project crisis he knew little about at a pre meet in a café at Swindon railway station. Not ideal for the complex negotiation to follow.  However, he simplified everything by asking us to create a timeline of events which ultimately not only gave him an effective understanding, but enabled us to unravel the intertwined issues and ultimately resolve them.
 
This is even more true in our world of continuing technology advance which I have witnessed as an IT lawyer over many years. AI observes (if that is the right word) “In the AI age, serendipity—the accidental discovery of valuable ideas while pursuing something else—is your most valuable human differentiator. While algorithms prioritize hyper-personalization and efficiency, true professional innovation requires cultivating a "prepared mind" that connects unrelated dots across your industry.”  But there are inherent dangers. See this article In Support of Serendipity from the INSEAD Business School which observes that “AI-driven recommendation algorithms… may ultimately constrain our self-determination.” Therefore, we should introduce serendipity “developing AI systems that are more flexible and less tied to past preferences”. It summarises a more detailed academic paper from the University of Chicago How Artificial Intelligence Constrains the Human Experience. This suggests that whilst “powering breakthroughs” “AI systems can also have the opposite effect: reducing and constraining the range of experiences that are available to consumers”. It observes that “One of the joys of life is serendipity, making fortunate discoveries by accident. …. However, recommendation algorithms often limit our experience of serendipity”.
 
I think to take advantage of serendipity in our working, and private lives we need not only to adopt an open and receptive mindset, but also to have a sense of humour even of the seemingly absurd. AI suggests “Humour and serendipity are two sides of the same psychological coin: both require a playful mindset that embraces the unexpected and recognizes the hidden connections in everyday life.” Why, well because they sort of go hand in hand:
 
Cognitive Flexibility: Both humour and serendipity thrive on your ability to hold two conflicting or distinct ideas at once and suddenly see how they connect.
 
The "Precipice of a Smile": Walking through life with a state of receptiveness—expecting to be delighted rather than disappointed—puts you in a position to notice accidental comedy and fortunate coincidences.
 
Building Trust: Laughing with someone over an unexpected coincidence releases oxytocin, forging rapid emotional bonds.
 
More generally on the concept of serendipity Loius Pasteur observed that “In the field of observation, chance favors only the prepared mind.
 
While Isaac Asimov suggested “The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not ‘Eureka!’, but ‘That’s funny …’”.
 
Ultimately “Most discoveries even today are a combination of serendipity and of searching.” The Indian physician and biologist Siddhartha Mukherjee.
 

​I travelled by plane to France last week to set up our apartment for the season. I again upgraded to business class to benefit from the advantages I explained in my blog Reducing Hassle at Work. These include fast track check in at Heathrow which if you have bags avoids an hour’s queue. However, this time I was the beneficiary of a cacophony of unsolicited and largely unhelpful online noise related to my travel generated no doubt by some AI engine. 

​




​Here are some examples.

• The business class check in was closed for refurbishment 
• The flight departed from the satellite gates at Terminal 5 which adds 20 minutes to the transit time. 
• My travel to the airport would be affected by the closure of the London Piccadilly tube line. Not particularly relevant as I was travelling by taxi from Surrey! 
• Constant updates on the day of flying from something called Microsoft Live Activities about my and other flights I had no interest in at all.
• The new biometric immigration system for non-EU citizens would mean 3-hour queues at immigration in Nice, and leaving would take so long I might miss my flight.
• European airlines would run out of aviation fuel in a matter of days because of the crisis in the Straits of Hormuz.  

 
AI and the current way news is pushed at us and exaggerated in this way is both helpful and annoying. Like the weather warnings of storms in Surrey or wherever you live which pop up on your phone but rarely materialise in any severe form. As a result of the predicted hassle at Heathrow, I moved my taxi earlier. I need not have bothered. The work on the check in was Monday to Thursday only - which to be fair the notification did say in the small print – but it did not draw this to my attention even though it seemed “to know” I was travelling on a Sunday. The flight also did not depart from the satellite terminal - in fact this particular flight rarely does. I reserved and paid for a seat at the front of the plane and at Nice Airport was third off and almost ran to passport control - where there was no queue whatsoever! Once I presented my passport the right way round it was quicker than the old system. Leaving was also reasonably fast. The planes there and back also seemed to have enough fuel as they made the journey both ways. 
 
AI and its associated information and newsfeeds can easily result in this sort of overload. It reminds me a bit of an over eager junior professional rushing to please a client or speed up a transaction. The result is often too much information including incomplete or irrelevant work. Decisions then get taken precipitously which are later regretted or are at the very least counterproductive. I have been using AI like ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot and its underlying search engine Bing for some time and just started trying Claude. I find these very useful in my personal and professional life, but they need careful direction and management rather like the younger professional learning the ropes - if he or she can find a job which has not been replaced by an AI engine in order to do this!  
 
So how can we as professionals filter all this (sometimes helpful and at times annoying or downright wrong) electronic data and information which is constantly being pushed at us? It is after all as demanding and complex in our working as in our personal lives if not more so. I certainly find this running my consultancy practice and letting out our French property. It seems to me we need an electronic amanuensis (I have long wanted to use this word!) performing the tasks that secretaries and PA’s used to do managing our calendar and daily contacts and organising our busy daily lives. It used to be as important to know and get on with your boss’s secretary as the man or woman themself!
 
I know that there are lots of discrete ways we can use AI to help us in our work such as:
 
1. Intelligent scheduling and time-blocking
 
2. Streamlined communication and meeting management
 
3. Automated project and task management
 
4. Research and document synthesizing
 
5. Task automation.
 
However, I propose we need to go beyond this and use a thief to catch a thief as it were and have our own personal dedicated AI assistant we can talk to which filters all the unwanted noise and provides only the information and assistance we want and need that is relevant to our particular professional lives. To some extent this capability exists and is reasonably helpful. I tried asking ChatGPT: “I need to go for Nice on a business trip with the least hassle possible travelling out on a Sunday morning and returning on a Saturday a week later. Please provide me with the options and when I agree organise everything for me”. It did come up with a sensible range of proposals for travel and car hire, though it was a bit on the expensive side. What it could not yet do is book anything for me. It also would need to know more about my personal circumstances to be truly helpful. And it would not block out the unwanted AI chatter.
 
This 2024 article A complete guide on AI-powered personal assistants with examples explains the key features such as Natural Language Understanding observing that “Bill Gates has commented that soon, everyone will have their very own personal assistant through Artificial Intelligence (AI). He believes that as Information Technology develops and improves, we’ll move away from having separate apps for specific functions, and we’ll be able to vocalise to our devices what to do.” It identifies leading AI powered personal assistants and explores use cases and concludes that “the acceleration of AI personal assistants, including AI assistant devices, is reshaping our professional and personal lives, offering transformative benefits”. 
 
Coming more up to date see this useful April 2026 article AI Personal Assistant: We Tested The 10 Best Apps (Free & Paid). Although written by one of the providers Saner it is reasonably informative and objective. It proposes that there are “Two Types of AI Personal Assistants 

• Work-focused assistants are built to integrate directly with your tools - like calendars, emails, notes, and docs. They offer a workspace where you can actually get things done, not just talk about them.

 

• Chat-focused assistants, like ChatGPT or Gemini, are mostly built around a chat interface. You have to manually upload files or paste notes to give them context, which makes them less seamless for everyday workflows.”

 
It then carries out a comprehensive review proposing that “The best AI Personal Assistants are: Saner.AI, ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, OpenClaw, Pi, Motion, Akiflow, and Reclaim.” and concludes:

• Need help organising thoughts, remembering tasks, and planning your day? Try Saner.AI - it’s made for people juggling messy info from everywhere.
• Need help writing, thinking, or summarising? ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini are powerful conversational partners.
• Just want a low-pressure space to think out loud or talk it through? Pi gives you that calming space.

 
It still however seems to me we have quite a long way to go to replace that efficient, friendly and effective PA – who if you asked nicely might even get you a coffee!
 
In this context generally I like this Forbes article 12 Quotes About AI—And How It Makes Us Better which include:
 
“AI won’t replace humans, but humans who use AI will replace those who don’t”--Sam Altman, CEO, OpenAI.
 
“AI is about amplifying human potential, not replacing it”— Fe-Fei Li, professor, Stanford University.
 
“AI is not a robotic apocalypse; it’s a tool for a better future”— Demis Hassabis, co-founder and CEO of DeepMind.
 
As a parting thought there were very good reasons why The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy, created so presciently by Douglas Adams many years ago and containing a plethora of information about travelling around the entirety of the known universe, had the words “DON’T PANIC” inscribed “in large friendly letters on its cover”.

Last weekend I played, and lost, a tennis match. It was only a club handicap tournament so hardly Wimbledon and the other pair were better, so we deserved to be defeated. Nevertheless, losing any game in sport still rankles a bit. However, it made me think of the parallels with professional life. For example, a significant part of my work as a lawyer is acting for clients in-house or in private practice during the process of bidding as a potential supplier for an IT outsourcing service contract. These can be very intense periods in our work preparing for the process, submitting several offers, participating in extensive negotiations, refining the draft contract and creating and delivering a final tender. This can go on for 6 to 18 months and during this time subsume a large part of our working lives. We typically become, or certainly should, as lawyers and commercial or procurement advisers, critical members of the bid team often working long hours in client offices or at customer premises. Close working relationships are established with others at your client and indeed the customer. Statistically however, whoever our client may be and no matter how experienced and competent the team no business can win all of the bids it competes for. So, when you get that dreaded letter saying you have not been down selected for whatever reason it is to say the least an anti-climax and a failure and all the hard work appears at first sight to be wasted.
 
However, I suggest this is the wrong way to look at it. In sport at any level if you lose you try to work out why and strive to play better next time. In business valuable lessons can be learned from a failed bid to enhance the chances of future success. Instead of despair we should rather find ways to learn from losing. Key relationships in your organisation created during the process can be fostered and improved for next time. Analysis of the process including seeking honest and open feedback from the would-be customer improve the chances of success on the next bid. For example, sometimes you lose because your bid price is too high, sometimes because your technical solution is not considered viable, but also perhaps because the customer decides not to take any risk and stay with an incumbent supplier. Each can be considered in the context of continuous improvement.
 
AI suggests that “Key lessons include securing detailed, honest feedback, analysing competitor pricing and strategy, and ensuring the submission focused on solving the client's problems rather than just listing company features.” This last is really important. I have seen clients convinced their “standard” solution was what a customer wanted, when in reality it was far from meeting expectations. See this short but to the point blog  Win-Loss Analysis: How to Learn from Every Tender Outcome which observes “Understanding the outcome of a tender—whether a win or a loss—can be one of the most powerful tools in your bidding strategy. Yet, many organisations move on too quickly, failing to extract the valuable insights that come with a structured post-bid analysis.” It proposes a post bid audit including an internal debrief and seeking client feedback.
 
While this more detailed Harvard Business Review article How to Learn from a Failed Negotiation suggests we should avoid protecting egos and reputations, blaming others, (does that resonate!) and instead “step back, take ownership, and invest time and energy in understanding what went wrong so they can do better in the future.” It cites a book on the topic Getting Back to the Table and proposes you should first understand the reasons for failure which could include:
 

• Failure by design – expecting to fail.

 

• Not reaching agreement when it was possible.

 
It then proposes Five Steps to Improvement such as:
 

• conduct a deep dive and analyse what happened and why

 

• pinpoint and fix your weaknesses that contributed to the failure

 

• come back to the table with confidence.

 
See also this Forbes article How To Reflect, Learn And Win After Losing A Contract which sagely observes that “Losing contracts is part of doing business. And, unfortunately, most organizations lose more contracts than they win.” It proposes three steps to improve performance and answer the question “Where did we go wrong?”
 
1 Politely request a debrief from the client to see what you could have done differently, or better, to win the contract.
 
2. Rereview your proposal through the eyes of the client.
 
3. Schedule a postmortem meeting with your team. 
 
I think we often forget that it is very much in our would-be customer’s interest to provide effective and meaningful feedback as this enhances the chance of improving competition in the market for future bids. I would recommend perhaps using somebody in your business not involved with the bid as this removes any lingering emotions and enhances the opportunity for full and frank feedback. 
 
I would also add that winning is not necessarily a recipe for success. I recall some successful bids where our clients won but then really struggled to deliver, especially in IT projects intended to transform existing services. Believe me there is more pressure on a team that fails to deliver what transpires to be an onerous contract than one which loses a bid. There are lessons to be learned here like listening to doubts about the viability of the solution expressed during the final contract governance process, but ignored in the excitement of the bid process and the momentum built up in favour of submitting without any qualifications.
 
As we rightly applaud winning, we should also celebrate the successful conclusion of a bid process, even if not down selected. It is obviously not the desired outcome, but the experience and lessons learned are valuable and should be recognised and applauded. When I managed my son’s youth football team some years ago, we went a whole season without winning BUT the team learnt, got fitter and better – and next season we started winning. It is as the saying goes as much about the journey as reaching your destination.
 
Nick Saban, the US college football coach said, “Never waste a failure.”
 
While Bill Gates observed “Success is a lousy teacher. It seduces smart people into thinking they can’t lose.”
 
And returning to tennis and a great quote from Venus Williams, one of the most successful tennis players of all time. “Losses have propelled me to even bigger places, so I understand the importance of losing. You can never get complacent because a loss is always around the corner. It’s in any game that you’re in – a business game or whatever – you can’t get complacent.”