Be it a job offer or a car purchase, business deal or restaurant choice, people negotiate constantly, says Debra E. Meyerson in ‘Rocking the Boat: How to effect change without making trouble’ ( >www.HBSPress.org ). Most negotiations, however, do not initially seem like negotiations, she cautions; they feel more like threats, criticisms, affronts, or outright attacks.
“But if we view these incidents as negotiations with the potential for give-and-take, and use explicit strategies for negotiating successfully, we can see more options for responding, including those that promote broader learning and change.”
The author guides by stating that you can think in terms of negotiation by thinking in terms of competing interests, differing positions and concerns, distinct sources of influence, and alternative framing of issues. “Negotiating requires discipline and action: people must participate in shaping how problems unfold.”
The framework that she recommends has four negotiation strategies, viz. stepping back, looking inward, taking stock of other person’s interests, and using third parties.
Stepping back provides a ‘place to stand’ outside the personal experience of an immediate issue, Meyerson explains. Conceding that it is particularly difficult to step back when one feels emotionally charged, she emphasises that this is precisely the time when it appears to be most important to do so.
“When people’s emotions are heated up, their thinking becomes defensive, less creative, and narrower. Taking an issue too personally blocks people from seeing the broader issues and dealing with them effectively.”
When we change where we stand, we shift our understanding of the problem and open options for influencing it, the author counsels. “When we are standing too close, we can’t see the forest for the trees.”
Alas, stepping back is easier said than done, she notes, because most of these tricky situations can make us feel deeply personal, hurting, infuriating, or demeaning us! Techniques that can, therefore, come handy are problem externalisation and influence mapping.
The second strategy, of looking inward, helps one to become clear about what one really wants, how much, and what one fears. “When it comes time to evaluate a course of action – what to do, how far to push, what to give up – this kind of self-knowledge is invaluable.”
Meyerson finds that people may reflect on their personal concerns in a casual way all the time, more so when faced with a conflict, but what matters is a disciplined self-evaluation, which requires identifying deeper goals, distinguishing between ‘negotiables’ and ‘non-negotiables,’ facing up to fears, and identifying alternatives.
For instance, knowing what is non-negotiable gives you a firm place to stand; and knowing what you will negotiate gives you room to manoeuvre.
And, by recognising your fears, you don’t become hostage to looming anxieties, rational or not, the author says. “Too often fear drives people, steering them to be compliant, to pursue misplaced interests, or to remain silent. People who seem willing to push back against conformity pressures and take risks seem to have come to terms with their fears.”
The third strategy, that is, taking stock of others’ interests, provides a window into what the adversaries may value; “and the greater the capacity to satisfy what the other party values, the more influence you have over the problem… It can be useful to think of these interests as ‘currencies’ with which to bargain.”
Using third parties, the fourth strategy, hinges on friends, allies, colleagues, bosses, subordinates, for assistance in a variety of ways, says Meyerson. For example, mediators may help break logjams and put people on their best behaviour; friends can provide emotional support so that you don’t give up in the face of inevitable setbacks and frustrations; and peers can help in uncovering the concerns and interests of the other parties.
Far too often people take things at face value, the author concludes. Problems have multiple faces; so much so, a seemingly personal and local problem may be an issue with broader and more complex implications. “This not only changes how we see the problem, it also can open avenues for acting and effecting change… To approach a difficult situation or conflict as a negotiation is to take the stance of agent rather than victim.”
Essential guidance to help transform festering problems into promising opportunities.
***
