When negotiating intuitively in any everyday situation, people often tend to take positions. Each party seeks to defend what benefits them, with a great risk of the argument slipping into intransigence. Once a site is established, it is unlikely that anyone will change his mind. Often the process turns into an irrational defense of one’s point of view or a competition for the best argument. This style of trading can result in damage to the relationship between the parties, as the simple signaling of a problem can be seen as a personal attack. In the war of positions, there are winners and losers.
If instead of negotiating face to face, in an attempt to overcome the other interlocutor, it was possible to be side by side, looking for a joint solution to the problem? This is not a childish perspective of someone who does not know the devices of the business world. On the contrary, the proposal for turning the key is made by the co-founders of the Harvard trading Project in the bestseller How to reach the yes: how to trade agreements without making concessions, with more than 15 million copies sold.
Roger Fisher, William Ury, and Bruce Patton teach in practice the most famous trading method in the world. Learn to replace intuitive action with a rational step-by-step that can transform your interpersonal relationships and boost your professional career.
According to the authors, negotiators, in general, try to resolve conflicts based on their own will, that is, “talking about what they are or are not willing to accept”. When negotiating positions, the negotiator can adopt two styles: be firm or gentle. In the first, bet on the scare tactic.
In the second, he seeks to persuade by complacency. Negotiating does not have to be an act at the discretion of the impulses and whims of the parties in conflict. The revolutionary proposal of trading method is to replace the trading of positions with one based on principles or merits, defined by the authors as one that “focuses on basic interests, seeks satisfactory options for all parties and adopts fair criteria”.
How to get to yes?
Making deals means being able to influence others. To develop this skill and master the technique accurately, the authors suggest a method with only four steps:
1) separate people from the problem;
2) focus on interests, not positions;
3) create options with possibilities of mutual gains, and
4) insist on using objective criteria.
To reach yes, remember that it is necessary to transform the mindset. Rebuild your mental programming: instead of being face to face with the other party, be side by side. Transcend this metaphor to the denotative plan and sit at the negotiating table close to the interlocutor, discussing a project with potential gains for all involved.
“When they start to see each other as people committed to solving a mutual problem, they will be better able to reconcile conflicting interests and promote their common interests”, explain the authors.
- Separate people from the problem
Satisfying your essential interests is the main motivation for negotiating, but as important as the result of the agreement is the preservation of the relationship with the other party. The authors argue that “dealing with a problem and maintaining a good relationship need not be conflicting goals if the parties are committed and psychologically prepared to treat each aspect separately, according to their own merits”. This is the first rule of thumb: separate essential problems from personal problems.
In addition to cultivating a good relationship, do not turn the other side into an abstract being. You do not trade with a company, but with a representative for it. At the negotiating table, we are always faced with people “with their cognitive bias, partial perceptions, blind spots, and illogical leaps”, warn the authors.
A practical tip for dealing with human unpredictability is that the negotiator always asks himself if he is paying enough attention to the personal level problem, as it is better to deal with it before it can gain strength to potentiate the escalation of the conflict. This can be done by paying attention to the way reality is perceived, felt, and transmitted by the other party.
Often knowing the objective reality, based on facts, does not help in solving the problem, but rather being able to explore the way each side perceives it. The key to understanding the other’s perception is empathy. “Understanding someone else’s point of view is not a cost, but a benefit, as it allows you to reduce the area of conflict and helps you to defend your interests more safely”, point out the authors.
Another factor that can hinder a trading is emotions, which can lead to an endless stalemate. It is necessary to speak clearly about feelings and allow the other to expose them without criticism or judgment. Maintaining self-control and not reacting to personal attacks are ways for the negotiator to maintain his prestige.
To trade is to establish an efficient communication flow in a stressful situation. Be sure of what you want to communicate and, above all, be able to identify the purpose for which the information will be used. During tradings, clear messages and limited information on private channels, accessible to few people, avoid misunderstandings. Also, talk about yourself and not the other. If you want to be heard, it is essential that you also practice active listening.
- Focus on interests, not positions
Before moving on, you need to understand the difference between position and interest. The first is decision-making itself, the last is what implicitly underlies it and gives it cause, which leads to the endpoint.
If the negotiator focuses on attacking the other’s position as a strategy to reach an agreement, his chances are diminished, because the interlocutor will not yield power so easy as to appear weak at the negotiating table. On the other hand, if you focus on interests, you may find more points in common than divergent.
It is false to assume that opposite positions lead to conflicting interests in the same way. The mission of the good negotiator, therefore, becomes to identify the factors that motivate the decisions. A surefire strategy is to always ask why. “You must make others understand exactly the importance and legitimacy of their interests”, advise the authors.
- Create options with possibilities of mutual gains
Usually, analysis and diagnosis of the impasse prevent the emergence of creative solutions to its solution. The parties are confused by their selfishness and prejudice and cannot see beyond the dichotomy created by the obstacle itself. To get out of this crossroads, the authors recommend expanding the range of options and separating the act of creating solutions from the act of judging them.
The recommendation is simple and powerful: “Invent first, decide later”. Techniques that encourage the free enjoyment of thought, such as brainstorming, or that can structure it by weighing the pros and cons, such as the circular diagram, are welcome. The negotiator’s objective should be to identify common interests or interests that are different but reconcilable to the point of generating mutual gains.
“The ability to create options is one of the most useful assets that a trader can have”
- Insist on using objective criteria
Do not allow the trading to be doomed to failure due to the will of your interlocutor. Focus on common sense and don’t give in to pressure. The astute negotiator establishes the terms under discussion based on independent and objective criteria, which can be found in precedents, community praxis, and past experiences. Be an archaeologist in search of traces that can structure or recompose these parameters. The procedure is what guarantees credibility and smoothness to the final solution. “The more criteria of impartiality, efficiency or scientific merit you apply to the problem, the greater the likelihood of producing a sensible and fair solution”.