Free AI web copilot to create summaries, insights and extended knowledge, download it at here

Abstract

s, which will enable you to maintain perspective and achieve a mutually beneficial outcome.As an example of the first naive negotiation where I achieved success, I will use the 1988 case of a now-defunct airline terminal manufacturer who sold a terminal to the Spanish airline and railroad companies to print their travel agents’ tickets in small travel agent kiosks countrywide — the customer thought they were buying a PC. When I took over the struggling project the customer’s project manager told me that they were going to sue my company for misrepresentation, and I would lose my job. Six months later, the project was signed off and was the most profitable product ever shipped — the same project manager sent sweets home to my young children for the next four years.I subsequently applied the four principles and found they worked — at the time, I was highly stressed, and previous people responsible for my project had been removed after denigrating the customer to their face.<ul><li>Separate the People from the Problem</li></ul>The customer made it very personal as they had been professionally embarrassed by being fooled by what they claimed were false promises — the project manager’s wife travelled to Mexico on her own for the first week of their twenty-fifth wedding anniversary holiday.By refusing to react and respond to emotional outbursts and seeking to define the issues in terms of problems that could be resolved rather than product expectations, the issues could be addressed sequentially, logically and unemotionally. What they wanted was one printer and one terminal in a small kiosk for printing airline and rail tickets that currently required a large stock of preformatted tickets and a separate terminal and printer for the airline and rail companies.This was shown to work by writing a PC-like BIOS for the multi emulation terminal so the “dumb terminal” became “PC-like” and achieved the customers’ business objective.<ul><li>Focus on Interests rather than Positions</li></ul>The customer did NOT get the PC they expected — but their interest in reducing clutter in travel agent kiosks and complex stock management in each kiosk was eliminated with one printer and one very robust terminal, which met all business objectives<ul><li>Generate a wide variety of options before settling on an Agreement</li></ul>The customer could have sued my company and started searching for a new vendor, but, we may not have had the p

Options

roduct they expected, but we did have the expertise they needed. So when we were allowed to demonstrate that the solution met their business need, they opted to progress the project to completion.<ul><li>Insist that the Agreement be based on Objective criteria</li></ul>With business objectives met and relationships repaid, it became increasingly difficult for customers to maintain their entrenched initial position.The result was satisfactory, but I still remember being in shock after the final acceptance — almost impossible to believe the positive outcome.<h1 id="6cff">Practice makes perfect</h1>In recent intensive negotiations, I was more skilled and used a similar approach — even though our far more powerful customer was intent on a win-lose outcome which would have closed my business and caused damage to all parties, including themselves.By finding interested parties and their shareholders and slowly detailing the impact and options to fix the problems, all parties could agree on an acceptable win-win solution. This was against all odds as the problem origins were eight years prior in 2013.How can you use these concepts to your benefit?I always start by specifying what is the worst that can happen. I include everything — jail, bankruptcy, litigation, job loss or all of these, and communicate the same — focus on problems which can be fixed as people’s emotions cannot.Then, I detail options that can avoid the worst outcome, all possibilities and outcomes from win-win to lose-lose. This enables consequences to be evaluated rather than feared — passionate evaluation of interests produces results, and impassioned statement of positions always fails.<h1 id="b830">Getting to Yes</h1>Most of the solutions will be weighted towards the most powerful participant in the negotiation; however, many of the outcomes that are disastrous for me may be highly undesirable for them, too — objective criteria eliminates emotions.Again, when the problems, interests and options are detailed — agreement is possible, and formally documenting the same provides “stickiness” that ensures no backsliding by the parties to previously entrenched positions.My sanity is likewise preserved because I may start by thinking the other party is crazy, but I eventually see their point of view, and the same happens to them.The alternative is the path to madness.</article></body>

Getting to Yes without going mad

We negotiate everything every day — but mostly we are not conscious of these negotiations we call living.

Negotiating takes time and time is money — so we tend to rush to a resolution which may be sub-optimal.

Time is Money in Negotiations © Ian Beckett

I have become conscious that I have been negotiating four times in my life — these negotiations took months rather than minutes or days. In all cases, I achieved success because of the negotiation principles used and, in the process, kept my sanity, even though the situation was one of immense personal stress.

You can improve anything you do with training and practice, and I became better with practice, avoiding repeating previous mistakes and getting a result faster. It’s always questionable whether the outcome could have been even better, but dwelling on “what ifs” is pointless and destructive.

Getting To Yes

As part of an MSc in Organisation Behaviour in 1993 I used the seminal book on negotiation by Fisher and Ury “Getting to Yes”, which clarified what I had been doing into concrete practices which enabled me to be more effective and less stressed in challenging negotiations thereafter.

The Four Principles for “Getting to Yes)

separate the people from the problem;
focus on interests rather than positions;
generate a variety of options before settling on an agreement;
insist that the agreement be based on objective criteria.

I should explain that I am a collaborative negotiator who seeks a win-win outcome. I come across bullying negotiators who are happy with a win-lose negotiation in their favour — this is part of life.

Process not Problem

If you regard every problem as a nail which, when it’s hammered down to resolve each issue, it can be a bit of a surprise when the same nail works loose and tears the ass out of your trousers in the future.

If you want details on each of the four principles you can Google it. “Negotiations” as a science or art form is extensively explored — this article focused on an approach you can use when in the middle of the negotiations, which will enable you to maintain perspective and achieve a mutually beneficial outcome.

As an example of the first naive negotiation where I achieved success, I will use the 1988 case of a now-defunct airline terminal manufacturer who sold a terminal to the Spanish airline and railroad companies to print their travel agents’ tickets in small travel agent kiosks countrywide — the customer thought they were buying a PC. When I took over the struggling project the customer’s project manager told me that they were going to sue my company for misrepresentation, and I would lose my job. Six months later, the project was signed off and was the most profitable product ever shipped — the same project manager sent sweets home to my young children for the next four years.

I subsequently applied the four principles and found they worked — at the time, I was highly stressed, and previous people responsible for my project had been removed after denigrating the customer to their face.

Separate the People from the Problem

The customer made it very personal as they had been professionally embarrassed by being fooled by what they claimed were false promises — the project manager’s wife travelled to Mexico on her own for the first week of their twenty-fifth wedding anniversary holiday.

By refusing to react and respond to emotional outbursts and seeking to define the issues in terms of problems that could be resolved rather than product expectations, the issues could be addressed sequentially, logically and unemotionally. What they wanted was one printer and one terminal in a small kiosk for printing airline and rail tickets that currently required a large stock of preformatted tickets and a separate terminal and printer for the airline and rail companies.

This was shown to work by writing a PC-like BIOS for the multi emulation terminal so the “dumb terminal” became “PC-like” and achieved the customers’ business objective.

Focus on Interests rather than Positions

The customer did NOT get the PC they expected — but their interest in reducing clutter in travel agent kiosks and complex stock management in each kiosk was eliminated with one printer and one very robust terminal, which met all business objectives

Generate a wide variety of options before settling on an Agreement

The customer could have sued my company and started searching for a new vendor, but, we may not have had the product they expected, but we did have the expertise they needed. So when we were allowed to demonstrate that the solution met their business need, they opted to progress the project to completion.

Insist that the Agreement be based on Objective criteria

With business objectives met and relationships repaid, it became increasingly difficult for customers to maintain their entrenched initial position.

The result was satisfactory, but I still remember being in shock after the final acceptance — almost impossible to believe the positive outcome.

Practice makes perfect

In recent intensive negotiations, I was more skilled and used a similar approach — even though our far more powerful customer was intent on a win-lose outcome which would have closed my business and caused damage to all parties, including themselves.

By finding interested parties and their shareholders and slowly detailing the impact and options to fix the problems, all parties could agree on an acceptable win-win solution. This was against all odds as the problem origins were eight years prior in 2013.

How can you use these concepts to your benefit?

I always start by specifying what is the worst that can happen. I include everything — jail, bankruptcy, litigation, job loss or all of these, and communicate the same — focus on problems which can be fixed as people’s emotions cannot.

Then, I detail options that can avoid the worst outcome, all possibilities and outcomes from win-win to lose-lose. This enables consequences to be evaluated rather than feared — passionate evaluation of interests produces results, and impassioned statement of positions always fails.

Getting to Yes

Most of the solutions will be weighted towards the most powerful participant in the negotiation; however, many of the outcomes that are disastrous for me may be highly undesirable for them, too — objective criteria eliminates emotions.

Again, when the problems, interests and options are detailed — agreement is possible, and formally documenting the same provides “stickiness” that ensures no backsliding by the parties to previously entrenched positions.

My sanity is likewise preserved because I may start by thinking the other party is crazy, but I eventually see their point of view, and the same happens to them.

The alternative is the path to madness.