During a recent negotiation skills workshop, a participant asked us to help them deal with a colleague who was more assertive than themselves. Here’s a summary of our advice..

Good question. But to answer it, we must go back to a more fundamental question: What’s your negotiation mindset?

In CMA’s negotiation skills workshop, we discuss the importance of meeting your counterpart’s needs. For some participants, this mindset is a revelation. But for those of us in the conflict-avoider camp, the other side of this goal bears re-emphasis: we also need our own interests met.

It’s not that anyone disagrees with this notion. Who doesn’t want their own needs met? It’s just that people sometimes feel uncomfortable doing it in practice – especially when it appears to be at the expense of someone else’s needs.

And herein lies the problem. People who are afraid to advocate for their needs often operate within an old paradigm. It says: every time I meet my needs, it’s a loss for you; and every time you meet your needs, it’s a loss for me. In fact, the most effective negotiators adopt a fundamentally different mind-set: they realise that with a bit of systematic, creative thinking, it’s often possible to meet both parties’ needs.

To put this mindset into practice, be systematic about driving options from both parties’ interests. Draw up a list of your project interests (e.g. usability, efficient use of space, expense, aesthetics, etc) and also consider your colleague’s interests. Then, when you meet with your colleague, have her clarify those interests. Finally, put the two sets of interests in front of both of you, and ask: “How can we meet each of these interests together?” You’ll be surprised at the innovative solutions that emerge!

Have you had a similar issue? Did you resolve it in a way which left all parties feeling satisfied? Let us know..

The team at CMA

One may think that putting the other on mute while responding to e-mails and otherwise saving the world is a great way to maximize efficiency by multitasking, but the reality is that non-face-to-face communication creates a greater risk for miscommunication by allowing greater scope for distraction and misunderstanding. But given that remote communication a reality of this day and age…what can we do about it?

Acknowledge both the aim and the challenge – if opening a multi-party conference call, frame the aim as being able to understand one another accurately and work together effectively. Actively acknowledge the challenges of losing visual cues, not having the same context for the meeting and together adopt some guidelines for how you can communicate effectively, despite the inherent challenge.

Be their eyes in the room – unless and until you are able to recognize individual voices, it is hard to distinguish who has spoken. If you are on a group call, make it easy for others to know who is speaking by identifying yourself before commenting. For better or worse, facial expression and physical behaviours (nods or other things going on in the room) are usually inaudible on the other end of the line. Help them understand what is going on by narrating the actions.

Check what the silences mean – if you hear silence on the other end, don’t assume that you know what it means. Silence could be their be confusion, consent, distraction or something entirely different. Don’t make the costly mistake of assuming that silence is golden; check your understanding rather than assuming it’s fine to move on.

Work from one text – if you are referencing documents in your conversation, make sure all parties are looking at the same document. Send files prior to the meeting and verify that both literally and figuratively, you are on the same page.

Use the tools available to you – technology now affords a variety of mediums that help close the gap created in non-face-to-face communications. Video conference and screen-sharing, among others, provide visual cues and common data that help bridge the gap. Also, arrange to meet in person when possible. Face time, however limited, can help build relationships and provide data points from which communication calibration can better occur.

Train your teams – it can initially seem counterintuitive or annoying to have to identify yourself before you speak or take extra care in communicating. Yet our clients who have adapted these behaviours will tell you that they’ve become second nature over time and are a worthwhile investment in avoiding the costs that result from poor communication.

The CMA team

How have your and your organisation addressed communication issues impacted by indirect interaction?

Start with the heart

The advice is to start with the heart!  What does this mean? Essentially, this is about being clear in your mind as to what you’re trying to achieve and then being able to articulate to others the big picture goal. For example, let’s say you’ve created a business case demonstrating why your organisation should expand your Sydney office.  In response to your proposal, your stakeholders are likely to focus on the details such as: how many resources do we need, how much is it going to cost, what’s the lead time before we expect them to be producing output?  Despite these questions, it’s critical to engage your stakeholders first with the broader aim of what you’re trying to achieve – the big picture goal or vision.  Is it that ultimately this is about trying to expand your business in a way that is going to make the organisation more compelling to your market than anybody else?  Is it about taking your product to the next level so that customers can change the way they do business?  Unless you engage your stakeholders (and their hearts), you risk even greater resistance from the outset.

The second question is, do you really care? This is a threshold question. And if you care, can others tell?  If it’s obvious that you don’t care about your vision, then you’re less likely to influence important stakeholders and get them on board. If people are going to input their energy and time into your proposal or request, they’re much more likely to do so if they feel inspired by your vision and can see how committed you are to achieving it!

Passion is infectious. To quote Gandhi, “You must be the change you want to see in the world before you expect anybody else to change.” If you haven’t sold yourself on the idea, then why on earth would others believe you?  When you appear to be sold yourself, you instantly become a much more powerful influencer.

Good luck!

The CMA team

CMA runs regular programs on influencing skills and stakeholder management throughout Australia.

After discussing the powerful work the clinical students are participating in, Simon asks Bob to share his thinking and extensive understanding of two key questions: what and who makes for a great negotiator? Does instinct trump instruction?

They talk about the need to understand negotiation skill beyond the superficial understanding of zero-sum thinking (what one side wins, the other loses), and Bob shares the frequent challenges he faces in teaching and coaching.

Bob concludes with some key strategies to instigate when faced with a counterpart who uses power as their negotiating style – essential listening for anyone who negotiates regularly with positional communicators.

Show links:

The Harvard Negotiation and Mediation Clinical Program (HNMCP): http://hvrd.me/A1v3VQ

3D Negotiation (Lax & Sebenius): http://amzn.to/xaWXkV

When we talk about principled negotiation with our clients, we’re talking about the principled negotiation method, described in Getting to Yes[1] as being based on four propositions:

• Separating people from the problem
• Focus on interests, not positions
• Seek options which create mutual gain
• Use objective standards

In responding to this question, I explained that the short answer is “yes” – you can still be highly effective as a principled negotiator even if the other party doesn’t adopt a similar approach. Why? Because being principled allows you to manage the process in a collaborative and therefore more persuasive way. Which means you’re more likely to achieve the outcome you’re looking for.

Here’s a summary of the advice I offered (and what we worked through as a group in detail):

Being principled allows you to respond effectively to negotiation challenges in the moment

Even if the other party uses dirty tactics such as emotional blackmail, demands or threats to try to persuade you, responding in a principled way will help you deal more effectively with any challenges if they arise.

For example, if someone is being positional and digs their heels in on a solution (e.g. “My final offer is $100,000. Take it or leave it!”), rather than react through instinct and throw a position right back (e.g. “Well, my best offer is $50,000!”), you can choose to separate the issue from the behaviour, and move the conversation towards standards.

You could draw on objective standards and ask them to explain the reasoning underpinning their offer (e.g. “On what basis have you calculated the offer of $100,000?”). In doing so, your purpose is to encourage them to reflect on whether their offer really is fair and reasonable in the circumstances. Ultimately, as a principled negotiator that’s what you want to achieve – a solution that is fair and reasonable in the circumstances and which doesn’t ‘screw’ the other party over. Why? Because you know that you may have to negotiate in the future either directly with this party, or with another party who may have heard about your approach to doing business and negotiating.

Reputations spread fast and if you take an unprincipled approach now and try to walk all over the other party, chances are you’ll find your future negotiations with this party – and possibly many others ­– will be a lot harder and more stressful than you would like!

Being principled during preparation can help improve your outcome, and encourages working toward mutual gains

By doing your preparation and considering both parties’ perspectives, you’ll enhance your ability to persuade the other party to agree to an outcome that works for both of you, rather than them focusing on a solution that only works for them.

Spending time thinking about the other party’s perspective before the negotiation and then conveying that understanding during the negotiation is a very powerful persuasive tool. When people feel listened to and understood, they are more likely to be open to hearing another’s perspective. This means you’re much more likely to be able to persuade them – which is the aim of a negotiation.

Remember: knowledge is power. So even if you’re counterpart doesn’t take a collaborative approach and consider what’s important to both of you, you can still prepare and negotiate in a principled way – and in doing so, increase your persuasive power!

Being principled allows you to lead by example

There’s no denying that our negotiations would be a whole lot easier and more efficient if everybody adopted a principled approach. The reality is though that many people still adopt the adversarial approach to negotiation and doing business (i.e. the tug-of-war model) which is premised on the understanding that for me to get more of something, you need to get less.

However, by being a principled negotiator even if the other party isn’t, you’ll be able to more effectively and efficiently manage the negotiation process, which will help you to achieve a better outcome – and you might even teach your counterpart how to be principled in the process!

All the best with your further negotiations.

Warm regards
Tyla Locke
Senior Consultant

They examine the key question: if cultures are about differences, and identification because of these differences, then how do we understand people in the face of difference, and consequently, manage others’ understanding of us?

Elaine outlines the need to be aware of the relevance of stereotypes, which are (after all) drawn from real data, and also the ability to separate the embedded assumptions this can create.

Their discussion unpacks assumptions around what cultural biases can form when interpreting other people’s behaviour, in relation to ethnicity, gender, profession, industry and age. They touch on a current conflict within workplaces with generational cultures, and the perception that Generation Y “doesn’t understand the value of hard work”.

Elaine and Simon offer some key advice around navigating cross-cultural communication, particularly around setting process and intention, and ways to manage messages or behaviour that may confusing, uncomfortable or even confronting to experience.

Join the discussion on facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CMALearning

Email us: podcast@cmalearning.com.au

Or leave a comment below!

As an American living and working in Australia, the question of cross-cultural communication has been unavoidable. And this day was no different.

It was the end of our morning tea break, and I noticed that one of the participants in the negotiation workshop I was facilitating was still missing. In an effort to discover his whereabouts, I asked unsuspectingly, “Where’s John?” Trying to be helpful, his colleague replied, “Oh, he’s just coming back from having a fag.”

Now, that response may not shock you, but I… I was stunned silent. Speechless. All of the lectures about political correctness and white papers on tactful inclusiveness flashed through my mind. The champion of professional propriety in me got ready for battle. And for goodness sake, it was only 10:30am!

Mustering as much composure as I could, I stammered, “Mmm… what does that word me to you?” Very matter of factly, almost as if to say, “C’mon stupid”, another responded, “A ciggie.” Still seeing the shock and puzzlement on my face, someone took pity on me and said, “A cigarette. He’s coming back from having a smoke.”

I’ll tell you, the relief that washed over me was indescribable. To me, fag was such a derogatory word, so inappropriate, so offensive that I couldn’t even bring myself to repeat it on the day.

Which raises the question – what can we do to deal with those moments of shock or frustration that inevitably arise from communicating across cultures?

1)   Anticipate differences

We’re all different. Whether based on borders, organizations, functions, families, gender, age or any other metric, we have different expectations about the way things should be done and understandings of what words and actions mean. Adopt a frame of mind where you expect that there will be differences (even if you are yet to figure out the specifics of what they are) such that there’s less surprise when they arise, which they inevitably will.

In the above instance, I started the day by revealing my revelation that Americans and Australians don’t actually speak the same language, asking people to bear with me, and translate if they saw my face go blank. Setting the stage to anticipate the differences allowed us to all have a good laugh as we unpacked the differences in assumed meaning.

2)   Be clear about your intentions

One great challenge to communication is not understanding the other party as they intend to be understood. This challenge is ever intensified when words, actions or approaches hold different meaning to each of the parties. Be clear about what you mean, what your motivations are. Understanding where you are coming from and what you mean (or don’t mean) will help the other party hear your message.

For me, despite my shock in the moment, I suspected that these participants weren’t trying to offend so much as help me. That knowledge helped me to move beyond an initial reaction and unpack their meaning rather than demonize them for being inappropriate.

3)   Verify your assumptions

Don’t assume you know what they mean, particularly if you’ve found it offensive. Your understanding of their words or actions may not be accurate – not because either of you is stupid, wrong or any of the other excuses that often come to mind – but because we have different understandings or expectations of what things mean. Share your understanding of the message they’ve sent. Check with them to clarify what they actually meant. When all else fails, ask the question, “what does that mean to you?”

How else have you dealt with the challenges of communicating across cultures? We’d love to hear your experiences.

Elaine Lin
Senior Consultant

Listen to our podcast with Elaine Lin and Simon Dowling on cross-cultural communication here.

John is an internationally recognized expert in field of conflict resolution and negotiation, has co-authored Getting it Done and Negotiation Analysis, and is currently with Triad Consultants.

John talks to Simon about the different branches of hostage negotiation, and break down the process within these negotiations for:

• economic kidnapping
• expressive kidnapping
• unplanned kidnapping

John explains the importance of making a scenario ‘yessable’, the process behind getting to yes in high stakes negotiations, and runs through various scenarios in the hostage landscape. We also hear about the different players involved in FBI negotiations, and the internal tensions between negotiation commanders and tactical commanders, as they work through the processes of recovering kidnap victims safely.

Finally, Simon asks John to share his thoughts on what lessons can be shared from his experience for corporate negotiators. John offers fantastic, concrete advice to improve all negotiation processes, whether the stakes are closing a deal, or recovering a kidnap victim. Listen and enjoy (and tell us what you think!)

Links:

Triad Consulting www.triadconsulting.com
Getting it Done: http://amzn.to/ot6mnW
Negotiation Analysis: http://amzn.to/oBNcc2

When time is a stressor, miscommunications are rampant. We’re quick to assume, and slow to question. We assume that if something affects us adversely that the person’s intentions must also have been adverse. That, or they’re just crazy. It’s much more efficient to just blame and demonize them than it is to try and unpack the complexities that might inform the situation. Our wants and needs are our sole focus. When we don’t achieve them, we become frustrated and even more fixated on everything that’s wrong with everyone else. We’re less likely to be looking for creative options that might address both parties’ concerns. We’re more likely to be positional – they throw up a roadblock, we want to throw up a bigger one. Frustrations boil. There’s no time to try and understand one another – and in fact, I’m so frustrated by them that I don’t even want to try.

And yet we know that all of these tendencies only compound the problem. How then, in all of this, can we still manage to communicate effectively?

Press pause – The instinct is to react. The client needs an answer, your colleague has just told you they won’t help, management is breathing down your neck. Fighting words are at your fingertips. Take that extra breath. Before firing off a response, think about the bigger picture. What is it you really want to achieve? How does this one interaction fit into the bigger picture? Do you really know what their intention was? Might there be a way that works for you both? Ask yourself these questions and then choose a purposeful response.

Make the investment – Negotiate how you’re going to communicate. One conversation about expectations and preferences (yours and theirs) can help avoid a whole host of miscommunication. If effective communication is about getting your message across, then knowing your audience and how they receive messages is key. What irks them? What do they think you mean? Take the time to clarify the intention behind your actions – making clear what you do and do not mean. You’ll reap the benefits of greater understanding and fewer messes to clean up on the back end.

Remember to appreciate – Each of us is only human. A bit of empathy for the situation or appreciation for someone’s effort can go a long way.  A timely ’I know this isn’t the situation we hoped to be in. Thanks for hanging in there’ may be just the comment your team needs to power through and deliver. It’s low cost for you to make the comment and potentially high value for everyone involved. Hours of research and analysis may boil down to the two-line conclusion that pops up in your inbox. It may not be the answer you wanted to hear, but it was still someone else’s blood, sweat and tears (or it sure felt like it to them!) Recognizing the effort and expressing genuine appreciation will keep others motivated to continue to help you.

What else has worked for you? How do you manage the challenge of communicating in this fast-paced, high-stress world? We’d love to hear your thoughts.

Elaine Lin
Senior Consultant

1. Be clear on your purpose. Work out what’s important. Why do you want to have a conversation. Not a reaction to something, but a clear objective. Why is it important? What do you want to achieve?
2. Take off the demonising goggles. We all wear them from time to time. When someone does something we don’t like, we make all kinds of ungenerous assumptions about them – and usually blame their nature or disposition (“They’re selfish” or, “They don’t respect me”). But if it were us doing the same thing, we tend to look at the circumstances (“I didn’t get around to that because other stuff got in the way”).
3. Make a great opening. Frame the conversation in a way that makes it safe for them, as well as for you. Safe means they feel respected (their view will be heard, their perspective will be taken into account). “Chris, I wanted to talk with you about the invoice you sent through this morning. I’d like to share my own thoughts on the invoice, hear your perspective and then see what flows from there. Have you got a few minutes to do that now?” And if you need to, reframe the conversation again and again. If they ‘arc up’, reframe. If things get confused, reframe.
4. Share your story, but explore theirs. And be the first to notice the differences. Don’t confuse your story for the truth. The way you share your story is so important. In our workshops, we show people how to structure a story that fosters understanding and reduces the risk of conflict. If I say “I hate the way you undermine me in front of clients”, I may think I’m sharing my story, but I’m really just throwing accusations at you. But if I try, “Chris, at this morning’s meeting with the bank, each time they asked me a question, you stepped in to answer. I don’t know what’s going through your mind, but when you do that, it leaves me feeling as though you don’t trust what I’m going to say. Can we talk about how to avoid that happening again…?”
5. Emotions aren’t a pair of muddy boots. In other words, they shouldn’t be left at the door! But while you shouldn’t ignore emotion, avoid being emotional. Talk about emotions; they form a key part of your story (and theirs). Trying to tell your story without talking about the emotions is like watching a movie like Avatar in black and white. If you don’t, they’re likely to play out in less constructive ways.
6. Shift to a problem-solving stance. While the sharing of stories and perspectives is critical, it’s also important to avoid getting bogged down in endless story-telling. Recap what seems to be important to each person going forward, then ask – how do we address this in a way that works for both of us?
7. Prepare! Perhaps this could have been the first tip, but it’s worth remembering that all of these tips are easier to follow if you’ve done some careful planning on each of the above points.

CMA’s Difficult Conversations workshop presents an excellent opportunity for you to learn and practice skills and techniques for handling tricky conversations confidently and effectively. Read more about upcoming workshops.

Good luck!

Simon Dowling

Small Business Big Marketing Podcast Episode 54 – Difficult Conversations