- it is consistent as regards the object of negotiation. Hard on principles, but somewhat soft to the negotiators;
- no tricks, no posturing, no (excessive) bluff;
- focuses on the importance of the problem, not on the accession to negotiations. Both negotiation parties approach one task;
- uses (preferable quantitatively) argumentative explanation why proposing the change. Not based on will, rather on rationale.
4 basic points
- Focus on interests, not on positions: let the interests lead to the conclusion... NOT VICE VERSA!
- Separation of the people from the problem of negotiation. Not personal - separation of emotions from objectivity platform for negotiations. Communication focus on the problem, not on the deficiencies facing the negotiators on the opposite site of the table. Carry on in a way that will contribute to future negotiation
- Collaborating in design of options and potential solutions in mutual benefit. Looking for bigger, synergistic benefits - not focus only on “my piece of the pie”. This allows the use of common interests and benefit of both.
- Insistence on objective criteria. If the opponent insists on position and not on (mutual) interests – “reset” him /her using (measurable) the arguments.
Let’s
describe this approach a bit more…
Focus on interests
With intention to do so, we have to:
- define the problem or, better, the challenge to be solved, the change of present agreement to be implemented by process of negotiation
- once we know what we would like to change, we need to know, why we would like to change it, what is our point of (mutual or individual) interest(s)
And be
careful – strongly differentiate between the interests and the position. First, let
us clear out the terminology and meaning: in a process of negotiation, positions
can be viewed as the stated stands and (set of) objectives of the (either)
negotiating party, whereas the interests are the underlying reasons that
explain positions. And second, the use of one or another: if positions might easily enter the “Theory ofgame” type of negotiation strategy, the primary focus on interests leads to the
principled negotiation. With principled negotiation concerned with the
interests, we are able to satisfy true underlying reasons why we would like to
change something, not what we would like to achieve by this change.
Let me
give you an example of the importance on good knowledge on our or mutual
interests as well as awareness why interests and positions are substantially
different. Try to draw parallels with business – to measure effectiveness and
efficiency of the business (process) we often use KPI’s, the Key Performance Indicators.
The set of KPI indicators - as thermometers in healthcare measures body
temperature - measure “heat”, t.i. indicate on performance of the business.
But they are only “business thermometers”! They “just” measure state, or the
future goal, so - the position. In order to make and manage the change, you
need to know KSF – the Key Success Factors. In healthcare, at fever detected by
thermometer, in order to decrease the temperature, you would be prescribed with
painkiller and ordered to bed. In business, the KSF are those levers which
explains not only the target, but also point the path of change – how we can
successfully move from one to another (better) position. And, yes, after the
change is implemented, the KPI “thermometers” should measure the difference of
a changed state.
How to overcome frailty EQ reactions while proposing to change with emotions imbued past solutions? Simply (?!) by intensifying IQ over EQ, separating people involved from the problem, describing the proposed change using metaphors, … By doing this you create another, temporary, parallel world, the emulated business surrounding. This environment is to be used as a playground for the purpose of toying with the ideas and proposals during the negotiation only. All these with intention to present the rationale of change “on some other case”, with “some other names” to reach a principled consent “yeah this might work…” from the opposite negotiation party. And the results of the parallel world should be later transplanted in the real business environment. All with a view not only to decrease probability of potential misunderstandings but, of equal importance, not to distract the negotiation with potential conflict that could arise from hurting personality of the negotiators by bringing him /her out of the comfort zone (too deep or for too long).
All these
enable higher level of collaboration during negotiation and increase probability to conclude with a win-win agreement. To end the negotiation with
an untouched self-respect and good opinion on the process itself. And to
assure, that also this negotiation will add a piece to a mosaic of entire
relationship with the counterparty.
Arguments over EQ! Do we have
possible communication problem?
By
separating the people and the problem, using arguments and rational rather than
wishes and fillings, you might enter a communication problem. Many sources
refer (and we will argue them in our next blogs) the structure of
communication that over 90% of the communication is body language or nonverbal
communication. Being more specific: with the percentages of importance of
varying communication channels should indicate that 55% of communication is body language, 38% is
the tone of voice, and 7% is the actual words spoken.
Even if these numbers are discuss-able, it is true that body language plays important role. Namely, by removing the temperament part of our communication weapon arsenal out of negotiation, we have to strongly emphasize on remaining available communication skills. This makes principled negotiation much harder in comparison to - for example - positional bargaining, where you are “satisfied” also with win-lose situation.
Such
situation is not in benefit even of IQ minded negotiators, even if might be
differently seen at first glance. It requires extensive training in skillfulness
of »allowed« non-(too) emotional communication and much, much more effort
during the preparation of the negotiation. Preparation - especially to define
principles, interests and to solidly argument it in order for both parties to
accept argument as a substitute to emotional power based negotiation
extensively using non-verbal communication which excite human mirror neurons[1]
Provide solutions in mutual benefit
Isn’t it
great!?! You are starting to build up the relationship with the opposite party!
Well, you
seldom meet entirely new stories and people in it. Even with the inventions as
the subject of negotiation, you are always possessing some relations, data,
information that would help you start the negotiation with “something on the
table” what should empower both parties with clearer understanding of the
interests at issue. So, rather than establishing new, we most often adapt,
improve existing relationship.
Once you’ve
defined the interests of both, yours and your opposite negotiation party, when
you’ve separated personal fillings from the scope of the negotiation, you need
to find several options and alternatives. The elaboration of which should enable
problem solving and bring you to win-win solutions in benefit of both
negotiating parties. Therefore, fulfilling their interests.
At generation
of different options that should lead to solution of a problem, to supplement
existing both processes of the participants are dearly welcomed. For that,
many possible different mechanisms and approaches (i.e. additional information
gained by RFI, brainstorming, Delphi method, negotiation coaching,
communication training …) that can add to creative thinking are to be adopted.
While designing the options, use multidisciplinary team consist of not only of
specialist for the subject of negotiation, the procurement and law office, but
all that are involved in either designing the change, responsible for the
change implementation and those who will daily live with the change. With
negotiation team members, try with hired outsider specialized in integration
and negotiation of core elements of different interests of both negotiation
parties. All these would enable you to enhance an out-of-the-box thinking.
For two reasons:
- to minimize the fear of the foreseen change, and
- to define the rules how you will concede from your initial bargaining offer
Absence of defined principled criteria can lead to a contest of wills, bitterness, and deadlock.
How to define objective criteria? The ethical principles are easy to write but harder to comply with. It helps if written ethical or moral standards exist. Both remaining, the business and the professional are easier to define since several rules and laws are written for those two areas of interest. You can use standards or “just” business practice, a professional judgment, precedents, performed research works and/or analyses, experiences possessed in the long-term know-how, excellently implemented past business decisions, usances, tradition, … Apply these standards and arguments to the negotiation - you should for sure increase the probability of conducting the negotiation in more constructive way, with solid argumentation of the problem, setting adequate options and alternatives as base for value-adding solutions. With increased prospect to conclude the negotiation in a win-win manner.
If you will conduct the negotiation process in a way to have possibility of equitable participation of both parties, including co-designing the interests, defining the agenda and setting the infrastructure for the meeting, co-leading the negotiations with clear invitation to jointly decide on all (relevant) issues. This, in combination with open, honest approach, contributes to “your face”, to trust in you, as well as to perceived equality of the negotiation process for both parties, satisfy them with the results and, by improved relations, reinforce and confirm excellent base for further cooperation.
[1] See Giacomo Rizzolatti and his Italian scientist tram discovery. In short: mirror neurons is a system that provides the physiological mechanism for the perception/action coupling. They argue that mirror neurons may be important for understanding the actions of other people, and for learning new skills by imitation. Some researchers also speculate that mirror systems may simulate observed actions, and thus contribute to theory of mind skills, while others relate mirror neurons to language abilities).
http://www.avanton.si
http://www.avanton.si
Ni komentarjev :
Objavite komentar