I once acted for a software company when I was a lawyer in private practice. On one negotiation the CEO perceptively suggested that we should seek to understand what the individuals in the customer we were dealing with would get out of the transaction. If they were owners of the business, like partners in a professional practice, they would have a different perspective from a salaried employee in a large organisation.
Business owners might take a strategic view of the value of the deal to the development of their business. However, a salaried procurement officer would simply want to continue to get his or her salary plus any bonus they may be entitled to and to meet any related objectives. Sometimes procurement advisers may be tasked to reduce spend by a given percentage – and that is what they will seek to do regardless of the quality of the deals they strike.
And that is fair enough. They are beholden to their employer who pays their wages. As Alexander Hamilton the American statesman and one of the Founding Fathers of the United States commented In the general course of human nature, a power over a man’s subsistence amounts to a power over his will.
Being armed with this understanding of what makes the person on the other side on the table tick, what fundamentally drives them is a critical part of achieving a successful outcome. This means as a crucial part of the preparation for a negotiation taking the time to research and understand who you will be dealing with and their background and likely motivation. Are they for example part of the business itself or are they external advisers whose motivation may include making money or doing a good job to impress a new client – or simply showing off how good they are at their job.
It may also mean it is easier to recognise when there is no point in dealing with a given individual and they will either have to be side-lined or the matter escalated to somebody who will make a more reasoned and rational decision.
It is also quite interesting to turn this exercise around and examine what drives your team. Does the sales lead have so desperate a need to meet his quarterly sales target that he will agree to any risk? Are the technical people more interested in proving their technology works than in actually selling it? Are external advisers “showboating” to demonstrate how good they are to their client?
And until robots using artificial intelligence negotiate dispassionately on our behalf these emotional or human drivers will motivate us all. A Harvard Law School blog quoting Carnegie Mellon University professor Laurie Weingart suggests there are:
Four basic types of social motives drive human behavior in negotiation and other competitive situations. These types of social motives correspond to four basic negotiation styles:
Individualistsseek to maximize their own outcomes with little regard for their counterparts’ outcomes. About half of U.S. negotiators have an individualistic negotiating style, according to Weingart.
Cooperators, about 25% to 35% of U.S. negotiators, strive to maximize both their own and other parties’ outcomes and to see that resources are divided fairly.
Competitives, comprising about 5% to 10% of U.S. negotiators, seek to get a better deal than their “opponent.” They behave in a self-serving manner and often lack the trust needed to solve problems jointly.
Altruists, who are quite rare, put their counterpart’s needs and wants above their own.
Understanding what is going on in the hearts and minds of people across the table may not only influence how to negotiate a good deal, but whether it is worth doing so in the first place. As John F Kennedy said You cannot negotiate with people who say what’s mine is mine and what’s yours is negotiable.
Howard Baker the American politician and diplomat said The most difficult thing in any negotiation, almost, is making sure that you strip it of the emotion and deal with the facts. And there was a considerable challenge to that here and understandably so.
I think that’s true up to a point. You also have to understand and deal with the emotion and the motivation and the pure facts and bring them all to the negotiation party.
Business owners might take a strategic view of the value of the deal to the development of their business. However, a salaried procurement officer would simply want to continue to get his or her salary plus any bonus they may be entitled to and to meet any related objectives. Sometimes procurement advisers may be tasked to reduce spend by a given percentage – and that is what they will seek to do regardless of the quality of the deals they strike.
And that is fair enough. They are beholden to their employer who pays their wages. As Alexander Hamilton the American statesman and one of the Founding Fathers of the United States commented In the general course of human nature, a power over a man’s subsistence amounts to a power over his will.
Being armed with this understanding of what makes the person on the other side on the table tick, what fundamentally drives them is a critical part of achieving a successful outcome. This means as a crucial part of the preparation for a negotiation taking the time to research and understand who you will be dealing with and their background and likely motivation. Are they for example part of the business itself or are they external advisers whose motivation may include making money or doing a good job to impress a new client – or simply showing off how good they are at their job.
It may also mean it is easier to recognise when there is no point in dealing with a given individual and they will either have to be side-lined or the matter escalated to somebody who will make a more reasoned and rational decision.
It is also quite interesting to turn this exercise around and examine what drives your team. Does the sales lead have so desperate a need to meet his quarterly sales target that he will agree to any risk? Are the technical people more interested in proving their technology works than in actually selling it? Are external advisers “showboating” to demonstrate how good they are to their client?
And until robots using artificial intelligence negotiate dispassionately on our behalf these emotional or human drivers will motivate us all. A Harvard Law School blog quoting Carnegie Mellon University professor Laurie Weingart suggests there are:
Four basic types of social motives drive human behavior in negotiation and other competitive situations. These types of social motives correspond to four basic negotiation styles:
Individualistsseek to maximize their own outcomes with little regard for their counterparts’ outcomes. About half of U.S. negotiators have an individualistic negotiating style, according to Weingart.
Cooperators, about 25% to 35% of U.S. negotiators, strive to maximize both their own and other parties’ outcomes and to see that resources are divided fairly.
Competitives, comprising about 5% to 10% of U.S. negotiators, seek to get a better deal than their “opponent.” They behave in a self-serving manner and often lack the trust needed to solve problems jointly.
Altruists, who are quite rare, put their counterpart’s needs and wants above their own.
Understanding what is going on in the hearts and minds of people across the table may not only influence how to negotiate a good deal, but whether it is worth doing so in the first place. As John F Kennedy said You cannot negotiate with people who say what’s mine is mine and what’s yours is negotiable.
Howard Baker the American politician and diplomat said The most difficult thing in any negotiation, almost, is making sure that you strip it of the emotion and deal with the facts. And there was a considerable challenge to that here and understandably so.
I think that’s true up to a point. You also have to understand and deal with the emotion and the motivation and the pure facts and bring them all to the negotiation party.
RSS Feed
