“Body language and tone of voice – not words – are our most powerful assessment tools”
Chris Voss
Defusing Negotiation Negativities
Although our Slightly Skew methodology aims to equip business owners with deep knowledge and clarity about the intricacies of their “business machine” it does not eliminate the actual work of still talking to clients and potential clients. Engaging people, whether they are staff, partners or clients necessitate the ability to negotiate. This week we take a closer look at the art and science of negotiation.
The idea that everything in life is a negotiation stems from the fact that human interactions often involve some form of give-and-take, compromise, or exchange of value. Negotiation is not confined to formal business deals; it’s a fundamental aspect of daily life where individuals seek to achieve their goals while navigating the needs and interests of others. Someone said that even getting your 3-year-old to bed by eight or your teenage son to put down his cell phone and start studying is a negotiation. Even consider a scenario where a group of friends is deciding on where to go for dinner. Each friend has different preferences, dietary restrictions, and budgetary considerations. The decision-making process involves negotiation as they seek to find a restaurant that satisfies everyone’s needs and preferences. Friend A prefers Italian cuisine but is mindful of their budget. Friend B is a vegetarian and prefers a restaurant with ample vegetarian options. Friend C has a food allergy and requires a restaurant with allergen-friendly options.
Through negotiation and discussion, the friends can evaluate different options, consider each other’s preferences and constraints, and ultimately reach a decision that satisfies everyone. This example illustrates how negotiation permeates even the simplest aspects of daily life, where individuals seek to balance their own desires with the needs of others to achieve mutually acceptable outcomes.
Chris Voss, a former FBI hostage negotiator and author of “Never Split the Difference,” popularised the term “accusation audit” as a negotiation strategy. The accusation audit involves proactively addressing potential objections, concerns, or negative influences that could arise during a negotiation. By acknowledging these issues upfront, negotiators can defuse tension, build trust, and ultimately steer the negotiation towards a favourable outcome.
Here’s how the accusation audit works, along with a practical example:
- Identify Potential Objections: Before the negotiation begins, the negotiator should anticipate possible objections, concerns, or negative perceptions that the other party might have. These could be related to price, terms, deadlines, or any other aspect of the negotiation.
- Acknowledge and Articulate: During the negotiation, the negotiator openly addresses these potential objections. They articulate the concerns as if they were being voiced by the other party. This demonstrates empathy and understanding of the other party’s perspective.
- Validate Emotions: The negotiator acknowledges the emotions behind these objections. They might say something like, “It seems like you’re concerned about the timeline because you’re worried about meeting your project deadlines. Is that correct?”
- Offer Solutions or Mitigations: After acknowledging the concerns, the negotiator can then offer solutions or mitigations to address them. This could involve adjustments to the terms, additional assurances, or compromises that help alleviate the other party’s worries.
- Reiterate Understanding: Throughout the negotiation, the negotiator continues to reaffirm their understanding of the other party’s concerns. This helps maintain rapport and trust, even as the negotiation progresses.
Imagine you’re negotiating a contract with a client for a software development project. Before the negotiation, you anticipate that the client might have concerns about the project’s timeline and whether your team can deliver on time. You might consider that your client is worried about whether your team can meet their tight deadline because they have had issues with vendors before. This is how the negotiation could play out:
You would open the discussion with something like: “I might be wrong, but you are surely worried about us being able to stick to your tight timelines for this project?”
Client: “Yes, exactly. We can’t afford any delays this time.”
You: “I completely understand the importance of meeting deadlines, especially given your previous experiences. To address this concern, we’re willing to allocate additional resources to ensure we stay on track. We’ll also provide regular progress updates and involve you closely in the process, so you’re always aware of our progress. How does that sound?”
Client: “That sounds reassuring. Thank you for addressing our concerns.”
In this example, the negotiation starts with you addressing a negativity that might be on the client’s mind about project timelines. By using the accusation audit, the negotiator acknowledges these concerns, validates the client’s emotions, and offers solutions to mitigate the risk of delays. This approach helps build trust and moves the negotiation forward in a positive direction.