CHAPTER 4
Engaging the Treatment Process
Attitude Is Everything
Back in their seats, Eduardo and Jay had a moment for a short chat. Eduardo was clearly feeling more positive about things. “Jay, it is still too early to tell for certain, but it seems this guy is going to be okay. I am hoping that his easy process is as simple and quick as he says it is. I started out reading a negotiation book one time, and everything seemed so complex. Who can remember twenty-five or thirty things when you are under the gun?” Jay agreed with his friend, adding that if there was a way to reduce the mounting level of stress in all areas of his life, he was all ears. Eduardo teased, “Jay, that is scary, because you have some monster ears.”
After the break, Dr. Pat returned to Step 1 of the EASY negotiaphobia treatment process. Knowing what a negotiation is and recognizing that they were in one, the XL team would now consider the four viable negotiation strategies.
“One thing I have come to recognize in working with negotiators,” Dr. Pat began, “is that they frequently make the mistake of jumping to a tactic without having even thought about what strategy would work best. They kick out a price point or make a demand that often turns the entire process in the wrong direction. They may really want to go to LA, but they just boarded a flight to JFK. Just remember that your strategy is the direction you choose, and your tactics are the moves you will make to get there.”
On the screen, Dr. Pat provided a visual for the group reminding them that they were still in Step 1 of the treatment process, as the top three boxes were now shaded in gray.
Your One Minute Drill: Each time you begin a negotiation situation, take a minute to review the three steps.
STEP 3
Strategize: Select the proper strategy for this particular negotiation.
STEP 2
Assess: Evaluate your tendency to use each of the negotiation strategies, as well as the tendencies of the other side(s).
STEP 1
Engage: Recognize you are in a negotiation and quickly review the viable strategies.
© U.S. Learning
Confusion about Compromise
Before beginning his discussion of the four strategies, Dr. Pat told the group there was one common technique that people frequently use to negotiate and that everyone needed to gain a fresh and more appropriate perspective on. He claimed that compromise causes more confusion about the nature of negotiations than any other issue. He proposed that this is the most used and abused tactic in negotiations. “In most instances, compromise shouldn’t really come under the heading of how to negotiate, but rather how not to negotiate. Let me emphasize that compromise is not a legitimate strategy to use in considering and approaching a negotiation. It is one of those premature tactical plays I mentioned, and I am here and now cautioning you about its use.”
Dr. Pat defined compromise as a mathematical calculation used to split the difference between the differing positions taken by the sides in a negotiation. He revisited the car sale example, stating that if he were asking $7,000 and the buyer offered $5,000, then compromise would have us add the two numbers together and divide by two. This makes the number $6,000.
“The excuse people give for using compromise is a desire to make everyone happy. Well, if the buyer really believed the car was only worth $5,000 and paid $1,000 more than that, she would not be very happy. Likewise, the seller would not be content with $1,000 below what he felt was a justified price.”
Dr. Pat added some clarification before leaving the topic of compromise as a factor in Step 1 of engaging the process. “I don’t want you to leave this topic thinking that compromise is always a bad tactic. It does have its place, and here is what I would like for you to remember to help you use it properly. Compromise should only be used late in the negotiation process, after legitimate negotiation strategies have been selected and fully used, when only a small gap in positions remains for just one issue, and it should always be directly tied to an agreement. If you use it under these circumstances, it can be a valuable tactic for reaching an agreement.” Many of the participants quickly recognized that they had prematurely jumped to this tactic in many of their negotiations.
The 2 × 2 Negotiation Matrix
Dr. Pat’s tone now became much more serious than at any point so far. “I want you to be highly aware that engaging your treatment for negotiaphobia must be grounded in an understanding of the four legitimate negotiation strategies. After working in this skill area for about a decade, on a coast-to-coast flight one night, I pulled out a tablet and pen to see if I could better lay out and demonstrate the relationship between the various ways negotiations unfold. After four bags of pretzels, considerable frustration, and a number of wasted pages, I came to the conclusion that negotiation strategies can best be evaluated and more easily understood by looking at two important dimensions: activation and cooperation.”
He then asked the participants, “As a child, when one of your parents came into a room where you and a sibling were fighting, what was the first question they asked?”
Several of them immediately verbalized their response: “Who started it?!”
“That,” he said, “is the essence of understanding activation.” On a flip chart, he drew a vertical line with the labels reactive at the bottom and proactive at its top. He went on to explain that proactive parties in a negotiation are willing to initiate and advance the process, while reactive parties only respond to what the other side has said or done. Dr. Pat proposed that in a large percentage of situations, it is far better to be proactive when a negotiation is needed to address differences. He indicated that sitting back and waiting for things to take care of themselves seldom works out well, referencing his earlier comments about negotiaphobia and people continuing to live with an inadequate and often deteriorating status quo. Jay found himself reflecting on his relationship with his sister and their exchange surrounding the health of their father. She had been the proactive one, while Jay now realized he had not even been appropriately reactive.
Dr. Pat next turned his attention to the second dimension of the matrix: cooperation. He stated, “In considering negotiation strategies, to varying degrees, people are either low or high on this dimension.” This time he drew a horizontal line on the flip chart that cut the activation line in half. “Low Cooperation negotiators (on the left side) are only out for themselves and focused on their own agenda, while High Cooperation negotiators (on the right side) demonstrate an interest in understanding and attempting to address not only their own issues and needs, but those of the other side or sides as well.”
The Negotiation Strategy Matrix
As the participants were finishing their own drawing, he said, “You probably want to know what words go in the four boxes we just created by intersecting the two lines. Well, we now have a simple means to position the four legitimate negotiation strategies in a way that should clarify the nature of the strategy or strategies that can be used in any negotiation situation.”
Heads in the Sand
“The first strategy we will consider is Avoidance. I would like to put it off for later, but I can’t.” After a short pause for effect, Dr. Pat got a nice laugh out of the one-liner. “This is a reactive and low-cooperation approach (lower left), and this box in the matrix was given the color gray on the projected graphic because it is a negotiation strategy that’s in the gray area of not overtly negotiating at all. This is the strategy uncontrolled negotiaphobes will default to a high percentage of the time.
“An animal for you to visualize when it comes to avoidance is an ostrich,” Dr. Pat said. “The darn thing puts its head in the sand when facing a threat. No wonder it is one of the few birds that can’t fly. Usually, this strategy does not fly well either. People often use the alibi that they don’t have the time right now to deal with this issue. Let me share a secret with you: you don’t have the time notto deal with and resolve important issues. There are instances where avoidance is a fit, but we will discuss those circumstances a bit later.”
Wanting to even the score, Jay passed Eduardo a short note: “Is that sand I see behind your right ear, big guy?”
Controlling the Bleeding
Next, Dr. Pat pointed toward Accommodation in the lower-right box on his matrix, indicating that this is a reactive strategy accompanied by a high level of cooperation. He explained that it was assigned the color yellow because, like the midpoint on a stoplight, accommodation is a strategy that should only be used with great caution. Dr. Pat described accommodation as basically giving in and providing, or allowing the other side to take, what they are asking for.
“After you run out of gas in the middle of west Texas and a tow truck with a full ten-gallon gas can drives up, you’ll most definitely be accommodating on price and pretty much anything else, and properly so,” he said. “It happened to me once, and the driver didn’t accept credit cards. I was out of cash. I think he is still wearin’ my first Rolex.” The group roared with laughter.
“When you’re accommodating, you are bleeding from the wrist.” He asked if there were any former Boy Scouts or Girl Scouts in the group. Jay raised his hand, and before he realized it blurted out, “I was an Eagle Scout.” Dr. Pat asked him what he would place above his elbow, if he were cut and bleeding from the wrist. Reflecting back several decades, Jay answered, “A tour-niquet to control the blood flow.” Years ago he had actually used a large handkerchief for a tourniquet as he tied it around a friend’s arm near the elbow when the fellow scout had accidentally sliced his forearm on sharp rock. Dr. Pat clarified for the group that in negotiations, understanding that we are in fact accommodating is our “tourniquet” that will restrict the flow of money or other resources we have to give to the other side to get or retain a deal.
“Armed with this knowledge, we must recognize the need to only accommodate with great care to ensure we don’t find ourselves in the same position with the same party in the future. In order to work toward a more favorable situation, you need to either strengthen your position with this party, or find another option before negotiating with ’em again,” he advised.
“A very common mistake people make in negotiations is to think they can build relationships via accommodation,” Dr. Pat explained. “That’s like putting a saucer of cream outside your back door to drive a stray cat away. Tomorrow, that critter will be back, with lots of friends.” He indicated that as a strategy, accommodation only allows you to test relationships. If the other side takes advantage of you when you’re accommodating, you learn that you didn’t have a relationship in the first place.
At this point, Jay realized that he had accommodated quite frequently with several of his customers, and most of the time he had not even recognized what he was actually doing or the long-term consequences. He had convinced himself that it would save him time to simply agree and move on. Just two weeks ago, he had agreed to provide a system upgrade for free to a large Cleveland law firm. He now recognized that this “saucer of cream” would be shared with their friends at other firms that used XL, and it would be more difficult to charge for similar upgrades in the future. This was another epiphany for Jay!
The Zero-Sum Game
Next, Dr. Pat shifted the group’s attention upward to the top half of the four-quadrant grid and its two proactive strategies. “One sign you are managing your negotiaphobia is a shift in focus from the bottom half of the matrix to the top half. This is due to the general ability of the top two strategies to more frequently reduce your stress and generate superior results.”
Pointing to the top-left quadrant, he began the discussion of Competition. He said that the color in this box should be associated with a flashing red light, where we should stop, think, and only proceed with a careful consideration of the situation at hand.
He continued, “Competition is a win-lose strategy driven by knowledge, skills, and nerve. When you employ this strategy, you’re engaged in a zero-sum game. This means the only way you can get a dollar is to take one away from the other side, and likewise, that party is trying to take that very same money away from you. The size of the pie is fixed, so you’re only really fighting over the size of your slice.”
He stated that when someone is using a competitive strategy, they are in essence saying there is no real relationship. He again used the example of the tow truck driver in the desert who knows he has not seen the stranded driver before and likely will never see him again. “So his mind-set is to get the most out of this gas-for-cash transaction that he possibly can,” Dr. Pat explained. “You don’t worry about damaging the relationship. You can’t damage something that does not exist. It would be like me worrying about wrecking my Austin Healey Roadster. That is simply not possible. I might want one, but I ain’t got one. Have you priced those suckers lately?” Eduardo now knew another reason why Bob Blankenship liked Dr. Pat so much. That very car was the XL president’s prized possession. He was not willing to believe this analogy was an accident. This gringo from west Texas had definitely done his homework.
Playing Win-Win
Everyone in the room now knew where Dr. Pat would head next: the top-right quadrant, signifying proactivity combined with a high level of cooperation. He emphasized that this last alternative is the most advanced of the four strategies. “This is because in such instances, the negotiation is based on all parties’ true needs, not simply the positions being stated. It’s a win-win strategy because now the focus lies in the possibility of growing the size of the pie, not just trying to grab a larger slice. The key to getting the needs and capabilities on the table to make this happen is the creation of a problem-solving environment where everyone feels comfortable openly sharing this information, and then jointly developing solutions that have the potential to meet those needs.”
Dr. Pat asked if anyone in the room would take 1 percent of a deal. Most people immediately shook their head. Then he asked, “How about 1 percent of a trillion-dollar deal? Would you take $10 billion?” Now all the participants were smiling and nodding. Jay thought that with even the smallest fraction of that total, he could pay cash for a new house that would exceed even Laura’s expectations.
Dr. Pat continued his discussion of the virtues of collaboration. “Problem solving to create a super option capable of delivering an exceptional outcome has to be the expectation behind collaboration. If this were not a possibility, this strategy would simply not be worth the exposure and investment of time and effort.”
He indicated that from his experience, true collaboration, while generally desirable, is pretty rare. “Based on the people I’ve encountered and the deals I have worked on, only about 20 percent of humans can effectively collaborate. While really not all that complex, it is not a natural skill, but rather a capability that must be learned and developed. Since the time of cavemen, we have been wired to take care of ourselves, and that is not necessarily a bad thing. Proficient negotiators have developed an advanced capability to maximize the benefit of all parties involved. By tomorrow afternoon, you can grab your place in that group of most advanced negotiators, if you wish to do so.”
Exercise Time
With the matrix filled in, Dr. Pat gave the group a twenty-minute break that included an exercise essential in starting Step 2 of their treatment of negotiaphobia. Eduardo and most of the other participants were gone in a flash, but Jay spent at least five of those minutes making additional notes about the nature of the four strategies. On his way out of the room, he asked Dr. Pat why people so easily slide into avoidance.
“Jay, negotiaphobes seem to simply buy into that old adage that time heals all ills. From my experience, time doesn’t heal much of anything that is negatively impacting a relationship. Such problems, personal and business alike, are like bumps on a steer. You just have to step up, acknowledge their existence, and lance the darn things. The process is not all that appealing, but everything is so much better when you’re done.”
Jay walked off with one nagging question: “Where does this guy come up with this stuff?” He vowed to learn and utilize the easy process and no longer settle for a marginal status quo in a high-potential business relationship. He began to think about one particular client in Camden, Ohio, that was at the very top of his collaborative opportunities list. It was not a bad customer, but he was sensing it could be so much better for both sides with a collaborative strategy in place. He would also place a call to his sister as soon as they docked in Miami. There was no other option than to collaborate with her over their dad’s growing loss of memory. He was no longer in avoidance-based denial.
1. Compromise is not a legitimate negotiation strategy. It is a frequently used, often abused tactic that is important to recognize, understand, and use selectively.
2. The four legitimate negotiation strategies of avoidance, accommodation, competition, and collaboration can each be better understood when considering their respective levels of activation and cooperation.
3. Competition is about fighting to get a larger slice of the pie, while collaboration focuses on growing the size of the pie.
4. In most negotiation encounters, the two proactive strategies of competition and collaboration tend to generate superior results when compared with either of the reactive strategies of avoidance and accommodation.