#15 The Good, Bad & Ugly of Negotiating at Work

THAT MOMENT WHEN YOU WONDER

• “How did he get that salary - but I worked more years than him! When are they gonna notice me? What do I have to do to get noticed around here?”

• “I thought by being fully cooperative they would meet me halfway. It really doesn’t pay to be the nice guy sometimes.”

• “I went in there and put my worth on the table and asked for everything that I want. And they turned me down and said I was being totally disrespectful - what’s up with that?!”

…you’re in the Good, Bad & Ugly of Negotiating at work.

THINK // 3 insights from the field

😇 THE GOOD THING about negotiating is whether you’re contending for your everyday, personal, professional or civic interests, we are all already using this skill to get what we want and need.

(How skillfully we are doing so is another matter. More about that in a bit.)

According to the United Nations, negotiating is a way of coping with conflict as it allows you to:

1. settle disputes without fighting,

2. make joint decisions when decision-makers hold different views

3. achieve your own objectives despite other participants having different objectives

4. cope with disagreement, with varying views and with different objectives.

5. realise whatever differences we have between us there are enough common interests to work something out.

An excellent negotiator knows how to work with differences, work through difference, work on differences - and still find some small patch of common ground to move forward on so that we reach a reasonable level of satisfaction.

🤬 THE BAD THING is many of us struggle with being more assertive or being more cooperative - and our stubborn refusal to move from our position can make us ineffective as negotiators.

Cooperativeness can be understood as:
our ability to be be concerned for others’ agenda.

Assertiveness can be understood as:
our ability to be concerned for our own agenda.

It’s vital to have range here: you must be willing and able to dial up or dial down your level of cooperativeness as well as your level of assertiveness so that you can negotiate successfully for what is most important for you in a situation.

When you can go in with low-high levels of cooperativeness and asseriveness, you have more negotiation options available to you.

The Thomas Kilmann Conflict Mode framework is a useful way of understanding what might be our usual approach to resolving conflict and what could be approaches totally missing from our repertoire.

If you can be both highly cooperative and highly assertive,
Collaborating is an option for you. It’s useful in a negotiation where:

• both our own and others’ agendas are too important to be compromised on and

• when the issue we are negotiating on is too long-term, too major and both parties’ equal commitment to solving things together must absolutely be secured.

If you are able to keep cooperativeness high but lower assertiveness,
Accomodating is an option. It’s useful in a negotiation where:

• an issue is much more important to the other than it is for you

• you want to limit damage of continued conflict

• you actually are in the wrong

• you need to buy some favour with the other

If you are able to lower cooperativeness but keep assertiveness high,
Competing is an option. It’s useful in a negotiation where:

• quick, decisive actions are needed

Sometimes it’s necessary to moderate our level of cooperativeness and assertiveness, so that Compromising is an option. It’s useful in a negotiation where:

• two equally strong parties are committed to mutually exclusive goals

• you’ve tried competing and collaborating already and need to back down a little on your own agenda because time and energy is running out

• your goals are actually moderately important to you and thus not worth being so assertive about it that you hurt relationship with the other.

Finally, there are times when it’s necessary to see Avoiding or not negotiating anymore as an option. It’s useful when:

• the issues are really trivial

• there is no chance of getting what you want

• the potential risk of confrontating the other outweighs the benefits of resolving things

😈 THE UGLY THING is there is always a ‘shadow negotiation’ going on: an undercurrent of power inequalities, hidden assumptions, unrealistic expectations, or personal histories that can sabotage a negotiation.

As this HBR article by Deborah Kolb and Judith Willams explains:

Sometimes in negotiating we also see our own (or someone else’s) relationship with using power in an ugly - and not always productive) way

Negotiating in general can be seen as a process where we should be considering how to go up and down a 3-step staircase to get what we want/need:

• Stair 1: Interests (the underlying motivations, needs and wants that drive a person’s behaviour in a negotiation)

• Stair 2: Rights (the legal or moral entitlements that a person has in a negotiation. These are based on laws, rules, and regulations, and are useful to making a more neutral and objective judgement call)

• Stair 3: Power (the ability to influence or control the outcome of a negotiation because of expertise, reputation, and resources.)

The higher we go up that stair (power-based negotiations), the quicker the process but the more relationally destructive the win.

The lower we go down that stair (interest-based negotiations), the slower the process but the more relationally protective the win.

If possible, focus on interests first when negotiating.

• Too often we use litigation (rights) or leverage (power) too early in the game. Seeking each others’ interests first helps us generate and capture the most value.

• Exhaust all avenues of interest-based bargaining before using rights and power. Because once you pull that lever of power, it creates such relational grief between you and the other that it becomes extraordinarily difficult (and sometimes impossible) to try interest-based negotiations again.

If you want to negotiate in a way that minimises any bitter after-taste for people involved, always negotiate with a willingness to be assertive about one’s concerns but also work cooperatively with the other’s concerns - and stay as committed to interest-based solutions first vs. using power first.

FEEL // 2 links to help you feel less alone

READ Deborah Kolb and Judith Williams on “shadow negotiation” - the complex and subtle game people play before they get to the table and continue to play after they arrive - and how to get past it.

READ  Ury, Brett and Goldberg’s essay on the fundamentals of using interests, rules and power to negotiate:

DO // 1 strategy to try this week

NOTICE The next time you have to do a small piece of negotiation or conflict management:

PRACTICE
1. Asserting your concerns and interests

• “I want/need/value….”

• “My main concern/goal is….”

2. Cooperating with their concerns and interests

• “What do you want/need/value here?”

• “Could you share with me what you want/need/value here?”

• “Tell me more about what you want/need from me".”
  

3. Finding common ground of shared interests

• “I can see that while we differ on (X), we share the same desire for (Y)”

• “Despite our differences, you are as keen on (X) as I am.

How do I get better at faciliating conversations that set clearer boundaries that work better for us?

If you want to learn more about how to facilitate conversations so that things can change for you and your organisation, sign yourself and your teams up here:

4