Chapter 4: ‎Tactics

Contents:

Definition of Negotiation

There is a great deal written about tactics. Indeed, some books supposedly about Negotiating are little more than cook books of different tactics. Tactics fall into two classes:

First, there are those whose purpose is to compel your "opponent" to concede to you all that you require, regardless of any harm it may do him. These include looking for pressure points in his case, leverage, not telling him where the loo is and Blackmail!

Secondly, there are constructive tactics intended to enable both parties to move forward to an agreement of mutual benefit.

This programme is only concerned with the second class of tactics.

The first positive tactic we are going to discuss is THE RECESS.

A negotiation is a very demanding thing. Participants are trying to understand what others are saying, trying to work out the possible impact on their business, trying to decide what their response should be, trying to keep control of the climate and procedure and having emotional reactions, all at the same time! They are doing all this in a situation which is changing minute by minute and they may well be subject to all sorts of external pressures, such as the need to get back in time for an urgent meeting, and so on.

It is little wonder, therefore, that people should feel the need to stop and take stock at various stages during the negotiation. What is surprising is that so many negotiators keep going until they can hardly remember what they are discussing at all!

A most useful and desirable tactic, from both party's point view, is THE RECESS.

The recess is different to a break. During a break, everything stops and the objectives are to recover personally, and perhaps, to re-establish the climate. In a recess, both parties move out of the negotiating room in order to consider the progress of the negotiation, to reconsider their own position and to decide what they would like to do next. It is very rare for either party to object to a recess. Usually everyone jumps at the idea.

When should you call for a recess? The answer is whenever you want to. This will usually be:

·      At the end of a phase in the negotiation

·      Before identifying issues

·      When nearing an impasse

·      When you feel the need to talk to other members of the team

·      When your own thinking is stuck in a trough

4.1

How Do You Get A Recess

1.      State the need for one. E.g. "I think it would help our joint progress if we took a short recess now."

2.      Summarise and look forward. "We're seeking to find ways to agree on the price/discount issues, and I suggest that we both look to see if we can see new ways of coping..."

3.      Agree duration – "Would 15 minutes be agreeable?"

4.      Avoid fresh issues – if others want to insert anything further, ask them to wait until after the recess. Don't go beyond the brief spurt of energy with which people respond to the prospect of a recess.

During the recess, the main items for consideration by our party will be obvious; discussions about how to handle the next stage, calculations on matters we have been discussing, reviews of our team's performance, or fresh plans for the rest of the negotiation. But, at the same time, we need to remember and to prepare for the re-opening of the negotiations, considering plan and Re-opening statement. Ideally, with new initiatives towards agreement.

After the recess, we need to re-open the negotiation with a mini version of the steps we took to open the negotiation:

1. A few moments of ice-braking, as we again attune to the situation.
2. Restate agreed progress on agreed plan.
3. Confirm rest of agreed plan or suggest/agree changes to it.
4. Re-opening statements, defining positions and interests as they are now perceived; and paying the way to further creative development.

It is very important to be positive about taking a recess. Once the idea is mentioned, energy levels rise in anticipation. If the recess does not then happen at once, everyone slips into lethargy. It is most unwise to respond to a request for a recess by saying something like, "Can we just get the issue of quality out of the way, first?" Everyone will then go to sleep until you finish talking about quality and then amble out to their recess!

The next positive tactic we recommend is the "Golf Club".

This applies to team negotiations. It sometimes happens that matters near an impasse when members of a team get stuck in fixed positions. For example, the financial members of two teams may get locked into their respective positions. The Quality Control members may get locked into theirs, and so on. It now becomes very difficult for either set of delegates to move from their highly defended positions and the atmosphere of the room becomes charged.

In this situation, it may make sense for the leaders of the teams to go off where they can relax and be alone for an open and frank discussion. This may well be the Golf Club.

The actual venue is not important. What matters is the atmosphere. The purpose of such a break is to enable the leaders to re-establish a collaborative climate and to review progress laterally. They can make concessions without having to show their colleagues up as being wrong. For example, one might say," I know Bill said that we could not move on price, and of course he is right. However, I do have a proposal in front of the Board at the moment which he does not yet know about, which might enable me to give a little here if you can come nearer to us on…" and so on.

There is a danger with the "Golf Club". It can threaten Team Maintenance. It may appear to the teams that it does not matter what they do, since the leaders will carve it all up in the Sauna, or wherever.

To avoid this, it is essential to keep your own team fully briefed about what you are doing.

Before you reconvene the negotiation, you must brief your team on the outcome of your meeting and fully explain any concessions you may have made.

The "Golf Club" is not an alternative to Teamwork.

It is an aid to it when things get tough.

It is unlikely that anyone would use this tactic more than once in a single negotiation.

4.2

Personal Impact

4.2 Personal Impact 

The behaviour of people in the negotiation has a large impact on the outcome.

We have talked in earlier modules about the need to be co-operative, to seek agreement rather than conflict and so on.

It is worth emphasising once more, because it is so important, that LISTENING is a key skill and a key attribute of successful behaviour. You should LISTEN. You should CLARIFY and you should QUESTION. These are as opposed to Telling, Presenting, Demanding and so on.

Non-verbal behaviour is very important.

What people see has much more impact than what they hear. If you say co-operative things, you must look as though you mean them. If you say how much you appreciate meeting the other party, and how excited you are about the possibility of working with them, and if you look bored out of your skull, the other party will perceive that you are not particularly interested in the outcome of the negotiation.

4.3

Teamwork

Teamwork is a major subject and much of it is beyond the scope of this programme. If you are regularly going to negotiation as the leader of a team, you should consider studying leadership as a subject in its own right. You should, in any case, not lose sight of the fact that your team will have needs of its own in terms of the need to maintain coherence and purpose, and that individual members of your team will have needs of their own. All of this is in addition to the needs of the task facing the team to reach a settlement with the other team.

For now, we will assume that the issues of team selection, team balance and so on have been resolved and that you are part of a team which is participating in a negotiation.

The most important rule is always to support other members of the team.

It sometimes happens that you cannot understand what another member of your team is trying to do. In this circumstance, ask for a recess, so that the team can get onto the same track. If a team member seems to be going off in a different direction, do not challenge him or her in the negotiating forum. Recess to find out what they are up to.

Remember that non-verbal support is very important. If one team member says that agreement looks near, nod enthusiastically. Look worried when a team member says that it would be a real problem to move on a particular issue. And above all, do not look surprised or exasperated when a team member says something you would not have said. Make sure that the respective roles and responsibilities of team members are clearly understandable. Do not take it for granted. Agree clearly before meeting the other team. Even if an accountant and an engineer are acting together, do not assume that the one will handle the financial issues and the other the technical ones. Discuss beforehand who will do what. As we said in module 3, it is a good idea, when working as a team, to make one member of the team responsible for procedural issues checking progress, reminding everyone about time and so on.

Finally, because of the dynamics of a negotiation, it is unlikely that a team of more than four people will be very effective. Four is about the maximum that a leader can manage. If more expertise is needed than can be accommodated in four heads, the wise approach is to bring in extra people to advise the team members, without actually giving them a speaking role in the negotiation.

4.4

Danger Signals

Throughout this programme, we have been advising a collaborative approach aimed at reaching a "win-win" agreement. Most people will respond well to this approach.

Most people conducting negotiations have had NO TRAINING AT ALL in negotiating. You, therefore, have head start over 80% of the parties you are likely to negotiate with. One consequence of this is that most parties will approach a negotiation with considerable apprehension and will be expecting aggression. They may appear to be furtive and aggressive themselves. In this situation, you will be able to take charge easily and steer them along the route advised in this programme. They will be only too pleased to co-operate and discover you are not the ogre they feared.

In a few, a very few cases, you will encounter a tough negotiator who is out to win at any cost.

This person will eat you up if you are honest with him or her. Such a person sees attempts to co-operate as weakness.

The first thing you need to be able to do is to recognise this kind of person and differentiate between this approach and the merely inept.

There are three danger signals to watch out for.

The first occurs during the icebreaking phase at the beginning of a negotiation. We have advised you to stay neutral during this phase and concentrate on the climate. The aggressive negotiator will use this phase to probe for your weaknesses. He will be looking for things he can use against you later on. For example, he may say something like, "How is business – OK? (Mental note: not much leverage there) – and are you still having the same difficulties about the quality of your suppliers? – You are? (Got him!) – And deliveries? (Maybe they are short of business, after all)" and so on.

He may even be looking for personal weaknesses, "You remember that night we had out together in Hamburg? Bet you haven't told Betty about that, eh!"

Now, the untrained negotiator may think it is professional to get straight down to discussing business. The fact that the other party starts this way does not of itself mean that he or she is being aggressive. The way to handle this is to deflect the other party into neutral ground, "Yes, I'll tell you all about our business. I'd like to hear about yours, too. Let me take your coat. Coffee? How were you journey? "and so on.

The less experienced negotiator will be happy to follow your lead. If you find you are unable to steer the other party into an icebreaking phase and subsequently to discuss procedure, you have a danger signal.

The second stage at which you can check the approach of the other party is during the discussion of procedure. If the other party is concerned mainly to agree with you on procedure, then you have a green light. He or she may, of course, have a different view to yours about procedure, but the way in which he or she defines and asserts that view is what gives you the clue about the colour of the light. Extreme determination to assert his own viewpoint is clearly a red light. You have now seen lights at the icebreaking and procedural stages. If they appear red, ask the other party to make an opening statement. If you get a blast of aggression, you can be pretty sure you are up against a tough, competitive, "win-lose" negotiator.

This programme deals with constructive negotiating. You must now make a judgement as to whether your approach is going to be able to help you and the aggressive party reach an agreement acceptable to you. It is a good idea to take a break to consider your position. Since you are up against aggression, you will have to assert yourself here. You may simply say, "Excuse me a minute. I shan't be long" and disappear.

You must then decide whether you want to do business with this person. If you do not have to, you may well decide to set out your ideal position and offer it to him on a take it or leave it basis. He will leave it and you can invite a more acceptable party to negotiate. If you do decide to fight, or if you have no choice, prepare your bids again, psyche yourself up for tough bargaining and go back in!

Bear in mind, though, that there are very few genuinely unreasonable people around.

4.5

 Progress Review

In Module 5, you will have the chance to review what you have learnt in the course of this programme. You will also have the chance to assess your current profile as a negotiator and to plan your development over the next three months and in the longer term.

It seems sensible to review the points covered in the programme so far before starting the final module. Figure 4.1 shows the framework we have developed.

Figure 4.1: Developed framework

Figure 4.1: Developed framework

The subject matter proceeds through the stages of EXPLORATION, BIDDING, BARGAINING and SETTLING.

Throughout these stages, certain skills and principles are applied.

These include LATERAL APPROACH, SEEKING AGREEMENT, ASKING QUESTIONS, CLARIFYING, MAINTAINING A CONSTRUCTIVE CLIMATE, and CONTROLING THE PROCESS AND SUPPORTING YOUR TEAM. The procedure involves agreeing your PURPOSE, PLAN and PACE at the outset. As the negotiation proceeds, you should check on procedure every 15 minutes or so. A check involves SUMMARISING PROGRESS, EMPHASISING AGREEMENT and AGREEING WHAT NEXT. Procedure is the key to reaching a settlement. You use procedural control to STEER TOWARDS AGREEMENT.

The climate IS DECISIVE. To maximise the chances of success, the climate should be CONTROL, CO-OPERATIVE, BRISK and BUSINESSLIKE. In addition to establishing it at the beginning, it must be maintained throughout.

Figure 4.2 shows how energy varies as the negotiation proceeds.

Energy is at peak at the outset and what happens here has more impact than what happens anywhere else. Energy rises in expectation of a settlement or of a break. Do not cheat participants of their expectations at these points or their energy will collapse.

 Figure 4.2: Energy variation through negotiation

The philosophy of CONSTRUCTIVE NEGOTIATING is that parties search TOGETHER for a deal which is of benefit TO BOTH OF THEM. They are on the same side against the issues. Enjoy the rest of the program. We wish you many enjoyable and fruitful negotiations.