- Email: [email protected]
Making the Deal: A Guide to Successful Negotiation
PRACTICE STRATEGIES
What Is Negotiation? In the most general sense, negotiation occurs either when two parties want to join together for a purpose that neither could achieve alone (e.g., creating a partnership) or when parties seek to resolve a conflict between them (e.g., control of resources). In either case, the choice by the parties to engage in negotiation is voluntary and based on interdependence; the parties need each other in order to achieve their individual or joint objectives. As such, each party attempts to influence his or her own and the other party's outcomes, resulting in a phenomenon researchers term "mutual adjustment." To illustrate, think of a long-practicing optometrist seeking to sell a lucrative practice in order to retire. Although the practice is successful, it cannot be sold in a vacuum. The seller is dependent on a buyer who is willing to pay a reasonable price for the practice that he or she has established and nurtured. Similarly, a potential buyer who has made the decision to buy an existing practice, even when the purchase money is "in pocket," is dependent on a seller who is willing to accept a fair price. Furthermore, each has goals regarding transition time, staff retention, and other important practice transfer matters. As the example illustrates, negotiation is about far more than purchase price. Many factors, both tangible and intangible, must be incorporated into the final agreement. By using the strategies detailed below, even novice negotiators can dramatically improve preparation and increase their confidence level. While this information provides a detailed overview, additional, detailed reference sources are mentioned throughout.
Selecting a Bargaining Strategy Before examining the particulars of preparation and negotiation, it is important to begin to understand individual negotiating styles. Literature on the theory and practice of negotiation commonly recognizes two different types of bargaining strategies: distributive and integrative. While each can be described as an insular approach, many negotiators use approaches that incorporate elements of both. Each will be discussed in turn. Distributive Bargaining: Distributive bargaining is characterized by a win-lose philosophy. It is the adversarial type of situation most people envision when contemplating "negotiation." Typically, the objectives of the two parties are seen as being mutually exclusive; the main objective is to maximize one's own outcome, with little or no regard for the outcome of the other party. As a result, any common interests between the parties are generally ignored. To achieve an objecOPTOMETRY
tive, then, a buyer attempts to persuade the other party to accept a deal as near as possible to the bottom line, or lowest possible selling point. In a distributive bargaining situation, information is typically held very close by each party. Each party protects his or her own information, revealing only what is strategically necessary, while attempting to garner as much information from the other side as possible. Neither party willingly shares information regarding objectives. A classic example is that of a used car purchase. While parties will discuss price, neither is likely to reveal the bottom line amount he or she is willing to pay (or accept, in the case of the seller). Often, a distributive approach is adopted when there is little or no chance of a future interaction between the parties. Again, consider the used car purchase or sale. There is little incentive for the purchaser to worry about future relations with the dealership; rather, the purchaser's main objective is to maximize this particular transaction. As such, tactics-some of which are considered "hardball" or aggressive tacticsmight be used by either side to influence the deal that the other is willing to accept. These tactics, and some ways to counter them, are addressed in more detail in the "Managing the Negotiation" section of this article. Distributive tactics may be less appealing when relationship interests or future.dealings are important to the parties. For example, an optometrist negotiating with a frame company representative is likely to be concerned with preserving a relationship with the representative because of the potential for future dealings with the frame company. Similarly, an optometrist seeking to acquire a practice will have future dealings with the seller as the practice changes hands. As such, the use of hardball tactics could damage future interactions. Of course, ethical considerations also influence the degree to which such tactics should be used. Integrative bargaining: Integrative bargaining is characterized by a win-win philosophy; the fundamental idea is that negotiators can best achieve their goals by understanding and aiding the goals of the other party to the extent that the two sides' objectives are not mutually exclusive. This bargaining method was widely popularized in 1981 with the publication of Fisher and Ury's Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In (Houghton-Mifflin, 1981), which provides a thorough treatment of the topic. As with distributive negotiation, the integrative negotiator must thoroughly explore personal objectives and attempt to anticipate those of the other party. A key difference between the two approaches, however, has to do with the sharing of information during the negotiation. VOLUME 75lNUMBER 11JANUARY 2004
PRACTICE STRATEGIES
The integrative approach focuses on both parties understanding each other's positions and interests. Positions are the goals the negotiator wants to achieve. Interests, on the other hand, are the underlying needs and concerns that shape the negotiator's position. By understanding one's own interests and those of the other party, it becomes possible to reach a mutually satisfactory, or "win-win" result. The following simple example, from the second edition of Getting to Yes, illustrates the point. "Two men are quarreling in a library. One wants the window open and the other wants it closed. They bicker back and forth about how much to leave it open: a crack, halfway, three quarters of the way. No solution satisfied them both. Enter the librarian. She asks one why he wants the window open. 'To get some fresh air.' She asks the other why he wants it closed. 'To avoid the draft.' After thinking a minute, she opens wide a window in the next room, bringing in fresh air without a draft." As the example suggests, had either party adhered firmly to his or her position (either open or closed), one, or potentially both, would have been dissatisfied with the result. By exploring the underlying interests of the two parties, a mutually agreeable solution was possible. While integrative negotiation has strong potential to maximize the outcomes of both parties, there are some serious issues to consider when adopting this approach. First, a free flow of information is required for success. As such, this approach can be difficult to undertake when there is distrust between the parties. Additionally, integrative bargaining does not come naturally to most people. Many--even those who dread adversarial confrontation-believe that all negotiation is, by definition, "win-lose." A confident integrative bargainer can overcome such a belief by educating the other party. Proponents of this approach have written extensively on how to successfully deal with difficult negotiators and overcome objections. Again, a thorough treatment can be found in Getting to Yes.
Planning and Preparation Regardless of the approach adopted, thorough preparation is the single most essential element of the negotiation process. In fact, research suggests that most unsuccessful negotiators fail to pay adequate attention to the planning phase. Planning should be comprehensive; information must be gathered, goals set, and alternatives considered. The following factors should be considered as part of the preparation phase: Determine issues: The first step in the planning process is to determine what, exactly, the issues are. When negotiating the purchase of an optometric practice, for example, the first major issue VOLUME 75lNUMBER IIJANUARY 2004
is price. As with almost any negotiation, however, a number of issues, both big and small, will factor into the final agreement. How will the purchase be structured? How long will the selling party remain with the practice? Will all equipment remain? Beyond these issues, still others will come to light once accounting and legal experts are consulted. When undertaking a major negotiation, consult with others who have had a similar experience to determine what hidden issues might arise. *:* Research, research, research: The importance of research cannot be overstated. Certainly, it factors into issue determination, but it is crucial in other ways as well. In the purchase of an optometric practice, the due diligence process goes a long way toward amassing the necessary purchase information. Complete and accurate information can be used to substantiate positions in the bargaining process. Furthermore, a thorough understanding of underlying information can help a well-prepared negotiator to overcome the other party's arguments. Attempt also to gather information about the seller. What is the seller's investment in the community? What factors are likely to shape the seller's perspective? Q Identify interests: As noted earlier, interests are the underlying needs and concerns that shape a party's position. Identifying one's own interests and attempting to anticipate those of the other party will help facilitate compromise at the bargaining table. Are there issues that can be traded at the bargaining table? Consider possible tradeoffs in advance, but remain open to additional possibilities that might arise during discussions. *:* Define the bargaining mix: Defining the bargaining mix is the phase of preparation in which the negotiator identifies all issues, both tangible and intangible, that will factor into the negotiation. As noted in this series last month, negotiations regarding the sale of a practice often center primarily on purchase price. Failure to address all the important factors-from financing to equipment ownership to transition period-will result in a less than optimal deal for the purchaser. Thorough preparation can help ensure that nothing is left on the table. 6 Be aware of alternatives: To best determine goals and limits before a negotiation begins, it is essential to identify the alternatives that are available should the negotiation fail. If no deal can be reached with regard to this particular practice, is another available in the area? Is a new start-up a potentially viable alternative? The best alternaOPTOMETRY
PRACTICE STRATEGIES
tive to a negotiated agreement (or the "BATNA," another concept introduced in Getting to Yes) can be a powerful tool for several reasons. First, identification of the BATNA provides perspective. Often, a negotiator becomes so focused on achieving an overarching goal (e.g., purchasing a car) that the individual loses sight of the limits that he or she set before the negotiation began. As such, targets that are not firm (e.g., "to buy for the lowest possible price") are often ignored causing the negotiator to achieve a less than optimal result. Identifying and researching alternatives can prevent this breakdown and can help the negotiator to set firm limits. As a simple illustration, consider the purchase of a used car. A college student's car breaks down, and the student decides to purchase a reliable used car for transportation to and from campus. Quick research reveals that a 1993 Honda Civic is in the proper price range and has been recommended by experts as a reliable model. Needing transportation quickly, the student sees an advertisement for a 1993 Civic, and calls immediately. The student's alternatives at this point are to purchase the car or to have no transportation to campus. By identifying other alternatives prior to the negotiation (e.g., three similar cars advertised in the paper for similar prices), the student will understand the available alternatives and will be in a better position to walk away from a disadvantageous deal. .t Setting target numbers: As noted last month, to be successful, a well-prepared negotiator must set opening, target, and walk-away points. The opening point is the initial dollar figure the potential purchaser plans to present to the seller (or that the seller plans to present to the buyer). This number should be carefully considered. Too low an offer is likely to insult the seller and strain relations between the parties. The target price is the amount the potential purchaser wishes to pay for a practice. The dollar value at which the potential purchaser will terminate the negotiation is called the walk-away point. Thoughtful attention to these values will help the potential purchaser ensure that the final purchase price is fair and equitable.
Managing the Negotiation How and what people communicate is critical to the negotiation process. Research suggests that information communicated during the first ten minutes of a negotiation sets the tone for the entire interaction, and
mistakes made during that period are very difficult, if not impossible, to overcome. Furthermore, negotiators are likely to behave in a reciprocal fashion; a party who is approached in a confrontational manner is likely to respond defensively. For that reason, it is important to pay close attention not only to verbal language, but also to body language, and to take care to set the desired tone. Some suggestions for communicating effectively include the following: .:* Choose language carefully: Use non-inflammatory language. Make statements that are positive or neutral rather than accusatory. For example, instead of "my position is right and yours is wrong" or "your idea will never work," state the alternative position and explain its benefits. 9 Be conscious of body language: Eye contact, posture, and gestures communicate volumes. It is essential to both manage one's own body language and to carefully observe that of the other party. 9 Engage in active listening: A good way to communicate interest to the other party is to engage in active listening. Listen to what the other side has to say, and restate. Demonstrate understanding and acknowledgment while searching for common ground. Remember, whether using active listening or simply listening passively to the other party, be sure to pay attention. Often negotiators are so anxious or eager to state their own concerns, they fail to hear what the other party is saying. O Use silence: Silence can be an effective tool when seeking information on the other party's position. Many people are uncomfortable with silences and seek to fill them. Valuable information can be gathered using this technique, but beware of the reverse situation; avoid being the party that divulges too much. *:* Give the otherparty u second chance: Often, a negotiator meets another party who unknowingly adopts an adversarial approach. Use active listening to attempt to turn around a difficult situation. Ask questions to generate ideas and to clarify positions. This technique can help to diffuse a tension-filled negotiation. It is important to remember that parties are likely to have an expectation of give-and-take when they enter a negotiation. Consider an experience purchasing a used car; no purchaser expects to pay the full asking price. As such, be prepared t o make compromises, but remember that concessions need not be monetary. Thorough preparation should yield a list of tangible and intangible factors that may lend themselves to compromise. For example, when negotiating a used
58 OPTOMETRY
V O L U M E 75lNUMBER 11JANUARY 2004
PRACTICE STRATEGIES
car purchase, it may be possible for a purchaser to compromise on who will make a necessary repair rather than offering an economic concession. Finally, a word of warning on distributive negotiation tactics. As mentioned earlier, some negotiators by nature have styles that lend themselves to aggressive strategies. While not all distributive tactics are unethical, some (including lying) are ethically dubious. A thorough treatment of such hardball tactics is beyond the scope of this article, but, in their comprehensive negotiation text Essentials of Negotiation, Roy J . Lewicki et al. (McGraw-Hill, 2001) summarize some examples of tactics to watch for, including: +:+ "Highball/lowball" oflers: Often, a negotiator will open with an extreme offer, hoping to either confuse or disarm the other party. In other instances, a wildly unreasonable offer may be a result of poor preparation. An effective way to deal with this technique (or error, as the case may be) is to ask the other party to explain the basis for the offer. To the extent that you have developed principled arguments to support your own offer, you will be able to debunk the position of the other party. +:+ "Chicken': Negotiators who use the "chicken" tactic combine an unreasonable offer with a threat ("take this offer or I walk!"). The intended effect is to force the opposing party to accede to the unreasonable demand. Again, thorough preparation can be the most helpful tool. The BATNA can be used as an anchor to prevent "caving in" to the unreasonable demand. +:* "Snowjob":The "snow job" is used in an attempt to confuse the other party. A deluge of data is used to overwhelm the person, making it difficult for that person to determine which informa-
VOLUME 75lNUMBER 11JANUARY 2004
tion is relevant or even truthful. While listening for inconsistent or untruthful information can be an effective way to counter this tactic, the barrage of information may make these determinations difficult. For that reason, it is often best to ask questions until the meaning and relevance of the information becomes clear. This approach can be difficult; frequently, the negotiators who use the snow job are successfill in making other parties feel stupid. By watching out for such a maneuver, a well-prepared negotiator can overcome this feeling and circumvent the tactic's intended effect. +:* Nibble: The "nibble" is used to gain a final concession from a party who believes the deal to be closed. The intention is to ask for a seeillingly small item just before the deal closes in the hopes the other party will concede simply because the item is too inconsequential to be a deal breaker. One effective way t o combat the nibble is to prepare a nibble to use as a counter if the situation arises. Lewicki et al, suggest another possible counter-simply ask the nibbler if the newly introduced item is a final demand, thus making sure everything is on the table before addressing the request. Although the mere thought of negotiating can be intimidating to many, putting time and effort into preparation will make the entire process more manageable. Careful consideration of personal negotiating will go a long way toward increasing an individual's comfort level and helping that individual find his or her negotiating niche. While this information is meant to serve as a basic introduction to negotiating principles and strategies, the sources referenced throughout should be consulted for more complete guidance.
OPTOMETRY
What Is Negotiation? In the most general sense, negotiation occurs either when two parties want to join together for a purpose that neither could achieve alone (e.g., creating a partnership) or when parties seek to resolve a conflict between them (e.g., control of resources). In either case, the choice by the parties to engage in negotiation is voluntary and based on interdependence; the parties need each other in order to achieve their individual or joint objectives. As such, each party attempts to influence his or her own and the other party's outcomes, resulting in a phenomenon researchers term "mutual adjustment." To illustrate, think of a long-practicing optometrist seeking to sell a lucrative practice in order to retire. Although the practice is successful, it cannot be sold in a vacuum. The seller is dependent on a buyer who is willing to pay a reasonable price for the practice that he or she has established and nurtured. Similarly, a potential buyer who has made the decision to buy an existing practice, even when the purchase money is "in pocket," is dependent on a seller who is willing to accept a fair price. Furthermore, each has goals regarding transition time, staff retention, and other important practice transfer matters. As the example illustrates, negotiation is about far more than purchase price. Many factors, both tangible and intangible, must be incorporated into the final agreement. By using the strategies detailed below, even novice negotiators can dramatically improve preparation and increase their confidence level. While this information provides a detailed overview, additional, detailed reference sources are mentioned throughout.
Selecting a Bargaining Strategy Before examining the particulars of preparation and negotiation, it is important to begin to understand individual negotiating styles. Literature on the theory and practice of negotiation commonly recognizes two different types of bargaining strategies: distributive and integrative. While each can be described as an insular approach, many negotiators use approaches that incorporate elements of both. Each will be discussed in turn. Distributive Bargaining: Distributive bargaining is characterized by a win-lose philosophy. It is the adversarial type of situation most people envision when contemplating "negotiation." Typically, the objectives of the two parties are seen as being mutually exclusive; the main objective is to maximize one's own outcome, with little or no regard for the outcome of the other party. As a result, any common interests between the parties are generally ignored. To achieve an objecOPTOMETRY
tive, then, a buyer attempts to persuade the other party to accept a deal as near as possible to the bottom line, or lowest possible selling point. In a distributive bargaining situation, information is typically held very close by each party. Each party protects his or her own information, revealing only what is strategically necessary, while attempting to garner as much information from the other side as possible. Neither party willingly shares information regarding objectives. A classic example is that of a used car purchase. While parties will discuss price, neither is likely to reveal the bottom line amount he or she is willing to pay (or accept, in the case of the seller). Often, a distributive approach is adopted when there is little or no chance of a future interaction between the parties. Again, consider the used car purchase or sale. There is little incentive for the purchaser to worry about future relations with the dealership; rather, the purchaser's main objective is to maximize this particular transaction. As such, tactics-some of which are considered "hardball" or aggressive tacticsmight be used by either side to influence the deal that the other is willing to accept. These tactics, and some ways to counter them, are addressed in more detail in the "Managing the Negotiation" section of this article. Distributive tactics may be less appealing when relationship interests or future.dealings are important to the parties. For example, an optometrist negotiating with a frame company representative is likely to be concerned with preserving a relationship with the representative because of the potential for future dealings with the frame company. Similarly, an optometrist seeking to acquire a practice will have future dealings with the seller as the practice changes hands. As such, the use of hardball tactics could damage future interactions. Of course, ethical considerations also influence the degree to which such tactics should be used. Integrative bargaining: Integrative bargaining is characterized by a win-win philosophy; the fundamental idea is that negotiators can best achieve their goals by understanding and aiding the goals of the other party to the extent that the two sides' objectives are not mutually exclusive. This bargaining method was widely popularized in 1981 with the publication of Fisher and Ury's Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In (Houghton-Mifflin, 1981), which provides a thorough treatment of the topic. As with distributive negotiation, the integrative negotiator must thoroughly explore personal objectives and attempt to anticipate those of the other party. A key difference between the two approaches, however, has to do with the sharing of information during the negotiation. VOLUME 75lNUMBER 11JANUARY 2004
PRACTICE STRATEGIES
The integrative approach focuses on both parties understanding each other's positions and interests. Positions are the goals the negotiator wants to achieve. Interests, on the other hand, are the underlying needs and concerns that shape the negotiator's position. By understanding one's own interests and those of the other party, it becomes possible to reach a mutually satisfactory, or "win-win" result. The following simple example, from the second edition of Getting to Yes, illustrates the point. "Two men are quarreling in a library. One wants the window open and the other wants it closed. They bicker back and forth about how much to leave it open: a crack, halfway, three quarters of the way. No solution satisfied them both. Enter the librarian. She asks one why he wants the window open. 'To get some fresh air.' She asks the other why he wants it closed. 'To avoid the draft.' After thinking a minute, she opens wide a window in the next room, bringing in fresh air without a draft." As the example suggests, had either party adhered firmly to his or her position (either open or closed), one, or potentially both, would have been dissatisfied with the result. By exploring the underlying interests of the two parties, a mutually agreeable solution was possible. While integrative negotiation has strong potential to maximize the outcomes of both parties, there are some serious issues to consider when adopting this approach. First, a free flow of information is required for success. As such, this approach can be difficult to undertake when there is distrust between the parties. Additionally, integrative bargaining does not come naturally to most people. Many--even those who dread adversarial confrontation-believe that all negotiation is, by definition, "win-lose." A confident integrative bargainer can overcome such a belief by educating the other party. Proponents of this approach have written extensively on how to successfully deal with difficult negotiators and overcome objections. Again, a thorough treatment can be found in Getting to Yes.
Planning and Preparation Regardless of the approach adopted, thorough preparation is the single most essential element of the negotiation process. In fact, research suggests that most unsuccessful negotiators fail to pay adequate attention to the planning phase. Planning should be comprehensive; information must be gathered, goals set, and alternatives considered. The following factors should be considered as part of the preparation phase: Determine issues: The first step in the planning process is to determine what, exactly, the issues are. When negotiating the purchase of an optometric practice, for example, the first major issue VOLUME 75lNUMBER IIJANUARY 2004
is price. As with almost any negotiation, however, a number of issues, both big and small, will factor into the final agreement. How will the purchase be structured? How long will the selling party remain with the practice? Will all equipment remain? Beyond these issues, still others will come to light once accounting and legal experts are consulted. When undertaking a major negotiation, consult with others who have had a similar experience to determine what hidden issues might arise. *:* Research, research, research: The importance of research cannot be overstated. Certainly, it factors into issue determination, but it is crucial in other ways as well. In the purchase of an optometric practice, the due diligence process goes a long way toward amassing the necessary purchase information. Complete and accurate information can be used to substantiate positions in the bargaining process. Furthermore, a thorough understanding of underlying information can help a well-prepared negotiator to overcome the other party's arguments. Attempt also to gather information about the seller. What is the seller's investment in the community? What factors are likely to shape the seller's perspective? Q Identify interests: As noted earlier, interests are the underlying needs and concerns that shape a party's position. Identifying one's own interests and attempting to anticipate those of the other party will help facilitate compromise at the bargaining table. Are there issues that can be traded at the bargaining table? Consider possible tradeoffs in advance, but remain open to additional possibilities that might arise during discussions. *:* Define the bargaining mix: Defining the bargaining mix is the phase of preparation in which the negotiator identifies all issues, both tangible and intangible, that will factor into the negotiation. As noted in this series last month, negotiations regarding the sale of a practice often center primarily on purchase price. Failure to address all the important factors-from financing to equipment ownership to transition period-will result in a less than optimal deal for the purchaser. Thorough preparation can help ensure that nothing is left on the table. 6 Be aware of alternatives: To best determine goals and limits before a negotiation begins, it is essential to identify the alternatives that are available should the negotiation fail. If no deal can be reached with regard to this particular practice, is another available in the area? Is a new start-up a potentially viable alternative? The best alternaOPTOMETRY
PRACTICE STRATEGIES
tive to a negotiated agreement (or the "BATNA," another concept introduced in Getting to Yes) can be a powerful tool for several reasons. First, identification of the BATNA provides perspective. Often, a negotiator becomes so focused on achieving an overarching goal (e.g., purchasing a car) that the individual loses sight of the limits that he or she set before the negotiation began. As such, targets that are not firm (e.g., "to buy for the lowest possible price") are often ignored causing the negotiator to achieve a less than optimal result. Identifying and researching alternatives can prevent this breakdown and can help the negotiator to set firm limits. As a simple illustration, consider the purchase of a used car. A college student's car breaks down, and the student decides to purchase a reliable used car for transportation to and from campus. Quick research reveals that a 1993 Honda Civic is in the proper price range and has been recommended by experts as a reliable model. Needing transportation quickly, the student sees an advertisement for a 1993 Civic, and calls immediately. The student's alternatives at this point are to purchase the car or to have no transportation to campus. By identifying other alternatives prior to the negotiation (e.g., three similar cars advertised in the paper for similar prices), the student will understand the available alternatives and will be in a better position to walk away from a disadvantageous deal. .t Setting target numbers: As noted last month, to be successful, a well-prepared negotiator must set opening, target, and walk-away points. The opening point is the initial dollar figure the potential purchaser plans to present to the seller (or that the seller plans to present to the buyer). This number should be carefully considered. Too low an offer is likely to insult the seller and strain relations between the parties. The target price is the amount the potential purchaser wishes to pay for a practice. The dollar value at which the potential purchaser will terminate the negotiation is called the walk-away point. Thoughtful attention to these values will help the potential purchaser ensure that the final purchase price is fair and equitable.
Managing the Negotiation How and what people communicate is critical to the negotiation process. Research suggests that information communicated during the first ten minutes of a negotiation sets the tone for the entire interaction, and
mistakes made during that period are very difficult, if not impossible, to overcome. Furthermore, negotiators are likely to behave in a reciprocal fashion; a party who is approached in a confrontational manner is likely to respond defensively. For that reason, it is important to pay close attention not only to verbal language, but also to body language, and to take care to set the desired tone. Some suggestions for communicating effectively include the following: .:* Choose language carefully: Use non-inflammatory language. Make statements that are positive or neutral rather than accusatory. For example, instead of "my position is right and yours is wrong" or "your idea will never work," state the alternative position and explain its benefits. 9 Be conscious of body language: Eye contact, posture, and gestures communicate volumes. It is essential to both manage one's own body language and to carefully observe that of the other party. 9 Engage in active listening: A good way to communicate interest to the other party is to engage in active listening. Listen to what the other side has to say, and restate. Demonstrate understanding and acknowledgment while searching for common ground. Remember, whether using active listening or simply listening passively to the other party, be sure to pay attention. Often negotiators are so anxious or eager to state their own concerns, they fail to hear what the other party is saying. O Use silence: Silence can be an effective tool when seeking information on the other party's position. Many people are uncomfortable with silences and seek to fill them. Valuable information can be gathered using this technique, but beware of the reverse situation; avoid being the party that divulges too much. *:* Give the otherparty u second chance: Often, a negotiator meets another party who unknowingly adopts an adversarial approach. Use active listening to attempt to turn around a difficult situation. Ask questions to generate ideas and to clarify positions. This technique can help to diffuse a tension-filled negotiation. It is important to remember that parties are likely to have an expectation of give-and-take when they enter a negotiation. Consider an experience purchasing a used car; no purchaser expects to pay the full asking price. As such, be prepared t o make compromises, but remember that concessions need not be monetary. Thorough preparation should yield a list of tangible and intangible factors that may lend themselves to compromise. For example, when negotiating a used
58 OPTOMETRY
V O L U M E 75lNUMBER 11JANUARY 2004
PRACTICE STRATEGIES
car purchase, it may be possible for a purchaser to compromise on who will make a necessary repair rather than offering an economic concession. Finally, a word of warning on distributive negotiation tactics. As mentioned earlier, some negotiators by nature have styles that lend themselves to aggressive strategies. While not all distributive tactics are unethical, some (including lying) are ethically dubious. A thorough treatment of such hardball tactics is beyond the scope of this article, but, in their comprehensive negotiation text Essentials of Negotiation, Roy J . Lewicki et al. (McGraw-Hill, 2001) summarize some examples of tactics to watch for, including: +:+ "Highball/lowball" oflers: Often, a negotiator will open with an extreme offer, hoping to either confuse or disarm the other party. In other instances, a wildly unreasonable offer may be a result of poor preparation. An effective way to deal with this technique (or error, as the case may be) is to ask the other party to explain the basis for the offer. To the extent that you have developed principled arguments to support your own offer, you will be able to debunk the position of the other party. +:+ "Chicken': Negotiators who use the "chicken" tactic combine an unreasonable offer with a threat ("take this offer or I walk!"). The intended effect is to force the opposing party to accede to the unreasonable demand. Again, thorough preparation can be the most helpful tool. The BATNA can be used as an anchor to prevent "caving in" to the unreasonable demand. +:* "Snowjob":The "snow job" is used in an attempt to confuse the other party. A deluge of data is used to overwhelm the person, making it difficult for that person to determine which informa-
VOLUME 75lNUMBER 11JANUARY 2004
tion is relevant or even truthful. While listening for inconsistent or untruthful information can be an effective way to counter this tactic, the barrage of information may make these determinations difficult. For that reason, it is often best to ask questions until the meaning and relevance of the information becomes clear. This approach can be difficult; frequently, the negotiators who use the snow job are successfill in making other parties feel stupid. By watching out for such a maneuver, a well-prepared negotiator can overcome this feeling and circumvent the tactic's intended effect. +:* Nibble: The "nibble" is used to gain a final concession from a party who believes the deal to be closed. The intention is to ask for a seeillingly small item just before the deal closes in the hopes the other party will concede simply because the item is too inconsequential to be a deal breaker. One effective way t o combat the nibble is to prepare a nibble to use as a counter if the situation arises. Lewicki et al, suggest another possible counter-simply ask the nibbler if the newly introduced item is a final demand, thus making sure everything is on the table before addressing the request. Although the mere thought of negotiating can be intimidating to many, putting time and effort into preparation will make the entire process more manageable. Careful consideration of personal negotiating will go a long way toward increasing an individual's comfort level and helping that individual find his or her negotiating niche. While this information is meant to serve as a basic introduction to negotiating principles and strategies, the sources referenced throughout should be consulted for more complete guidance.
OPTOMETRY