11 ms·
Hard negotiations: why a softer approach yields better outcomes
- lbj 7y agoThis matches my experience perfectly, both in salary and contract negotiations. You get a long way with smile and a focus on the core: We both want to do something together. > We don't allow you to work on your own projects while working for us "Completely unacceptable. Im a free soul and I demand my freedom!" Compared to > We don't allow you to work on your own projects while working for us "I perfectly understand, no need to invite competition or leak ideas, however in my experience you'll actually benefit from XYZ and I'd be happy to ..." My intuition is, that as long as the talk is progressing in a pleasant manner, you're inching towards your goal.
- Normal_gaussian 7y agoUnless they use your easy going cooperativeness to run you in circles, endlessly delaying something they don't want to happen. Or constantly delivering only a token amount of their side of any compromise deal to cause re-compromises etc. Sometimes soft negotiations have to turn to hard negotiations. In fact, I would argue that the potential to turn into a hard negotiation - but not yet being such - is a key factor in making soft negotiations work.
- Madmallard 7y agoIn my experience if it's not a point they are actually flexible on they will 100% do this no matter how charismatic you try to be.
- jacobush 7y agoSpeak softly and carry a big stick.
- theelous3 7y agoSure, but in employment post salary negotiation your only (or at least biggest) big stick is leaving. For many people that's a... double edged stick, to stretch the analogy. There's not many sticks to emolpy unless you're unionised or otherwise have strong networking in the company.
- ReptileMan 7y agoTiming is critical. If you are crucial to a project and threaten to leave while deadline looms and cost the company couple of million - then they will be flexible.
- ChuckNorris89 7y agoBe careful with that though as it will only work once and you might not last long there after that. While the company might give you what you ask for this one time, they will feel blackmalied and will see you as a flight risk, ready to leave for greener pastures at any moment anyway, so they'll prepare themselves by restricting your access to promotions, trainings and critical work so you don't pull that stunt again and slowly reduce its dependency on you and you could soon find yourself training your future replacements. It's all 101 in the HR handbook. Try it, but only as long as you always have an exit planned.
- plapetomain 7y ago> While the company might give you what you ask for this one time, they will feel blackmalied and will see you as a flight risk, ready to leave for greener pastures at any moment anyway, so they'll prepare themselves by restricting your access to promotions, trainings and critical work so you don't pull that stunt again and slowly reduce its dependency on you This is a pretty reliable trope. I feel like I hear this every time someone mentions putting the screws to their employer. Yet I have yet to see it borne out by evidence. It sounds scary. In practice I have never experienced it. The reality is that institutional memory at most institutions is so fleeting that this above threat has never become an issue in practice. Mind you in all cases I’ve always been prepared to walk, so that’s something to keep in mind, but I’ve never experienced worse treatment for leveraging what scraps I have. It’s pretty much been the opposite. Once I have that promotion by whatever means, magically I’m treated better. It has never failed.
- chasd00 7y agovery true, being nice gets you very far but it can also lead to you turning into a doormat. The trick is seeing it coming and changing the discussion appropriately. I had a boss that was an expert at this, he was all smiles and sunshine with vendors until they started to take advantage. At that point, they found they were negotiating with a calculator on the sum of 2+2.
- watwut 7y ago> My intuition is, that as long as the talk is progressing in a pleasant manner, you're inching towards your goal. Not in my experience. Plenty of people able to progress talk in super pleasant manner without moving from their original position. Or to pleasantly promis and then conveniently forget that. Or most often, to make it sound like they agree, make vague pleasant statements that mean nothing.
- Proziam 7y agoThis sounds like a process issue to me. If you document what was discussed as it happens ("Just to confirm, you're happy with X?) and have a record of that (actually recording a conversation, with everyone's approval of course) is a good way to keep everyone honest. That's not to say you can't have a dishonest counterpart - they certainly do happen. But in my experience when there's an issue like you described above there is fault to be found on both sides of the table. Leaving your notes visible in some form during a chat is another way to solve this. By having it written and in plain view it suddenly becomes much harder for the other party to come back later and say 'well I didn't actually agree to...'
- watwut 7y agoThat requires power I don't have. And I can not reasonably demand to record conversations with local management. And no matter how much notes I write to myself, the management simply does not care, because I don't have power to force them to follow own words. Visible notes do nothing if couterpart does not mind being dishonest or worst treats notes is being rude. (Not working in that worst group anymore, but it played in dishonest way with multiple people.) Dishonest people set up process and culture so that it is easy to be dishonest. They do happen quite often. And it is not fault of people who are being intentionally lied to.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- magicalhippo 7y agoClearly it's rather different to negotiate when you're in a symmetric relationship vs an asymmetric relationship. What Proziam mentioned "[if] they don't take a fair deal when offered, be prepared to walk away" doesn't work if walking away means not eating for the next week, for example.
- irateswami 7y agoIf a company ever told me I cannot work on other things in my personal time, I would promptly tell them to suck on a rock and walk out. You can't negotiate with asinine people/corporations with asinine policies. If they feel comfortable telling you what you can and cannot do on your own time, imagine what they feel comfortable telling you to do while you're working.
- astura 7y agoIt's not as "asinine" as it seems at first glance. https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2016/12/09/developers-side-projects/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2016/12/09/developers-side-pr...
- irateswami 7y agoTelling someone they can't do projects on their own time is a different question than the ownership of said projects.
- Proziam 7y agoNegotiating for me is really about creating a genuine win-win scenario for myself and my counterpart. This is impossible to achieve if you are playing (or are even perceived to be playing) 'hardball.' My basic rules for all negotiations: 1. Be useful to your counterparty. (Simply, this means to be well-informed and listen intently. Present any information they need as they need it. Don't be the type to 'bury' the opposition in paperwork when you know they're looking for a few specific details.) 2. Be empathetic to their needs. (Everyone has a reason to show up to the table. If you can identify, with absolute clarity, what they need - you can help them get there. In return, it's often MUCH easier to get what you need. 3. Don't try to win. (The extra 1-5% you might gain in most cases is outweighed by the negativity of the event. If you're negotiating with a future employer, vendor, or potential client, then the value of having them actually want to talk to you is greater than the difference most of the time.) And lastly, #4 - If your counterparty plays hardball with you, give them a truly fair offer that addresses their needs. If they don't take a fair deal when offered, be prepared to walk away.
- duaoebg 7y agoSome cultures are win-lose, so to strike a deal you have to look like you're losing.
- Proziam 7y agoIt's totally possible that I've been lucky in my career so far. Or just that my personality type lends well to this sort of thing. There are exceptions to every rule, but I've negotiated with Russians, Chinese, Americans, British, French, Italians...and just about every other European country and probably a few others I'm forgetting. (Deal sizes have been 1m+, but there's definitely layers above that where I don't have experience.) In all my experience thus far, I can honestly say I've only ever had the displeasure of having to manufacture a 'loss' once. And that was dealing with an American, albeit he was working for a large Chinese company. I'm always eager to hear about other folk's experiences, so if you can give some more insight into what cultures you've seen this with and how you've managed to handle it I'd love to listen! edit - I just realized the tone of this might come off as a tad 'superior' and that's truly not my intent. If you have experiences that can potentially make me better at what I do, I'm genuinely eager to learn.
- dot1x 7y agoMy approach to negotiations is described in the book "Never Split the Difference" by Chris Voss.
- thulecitizen 7y agoIf you want to share: what were some insights you gained from the book? I considered reading it, but then I read a review that says that although it’s useful, it presents a few quite manipulative tactics: “A lot of what affects how much you enjoy these books is, again, how self aware you are or how much consideration you've given to how you talk to people and the best way to get what you want from others. If you already easily have any easy time convincing people, or have thought about it and are self aware of how you behave and talk to others then I don't think any of these things are going to be surprising or helpful but if you haven't ever actually considered the way you interact with people then maybe this will be an eye opening book for you. Personally I think I've always been a little manipulative so I wasn't all that impressed. The writing was average also so the books clear and easy to read but I wasn't impressed by the writing either.” Source: https://www.goodreads.com/review/1841965174/ https://www.goodreads.com/review/1841965174/
- yyx 7y agoAs a man who knew nothing about negotiation, "start with "no"" is a great tactic I never thought about before.
- mtrimpe 7y agoI think the review actually says that for people who are naturally manipulative the book doesn’t necessarily add much; which I can imagine. The book actually explains quite well which negotiation tactics don’t work when faced with life and death situations (hostage negotiation) and goes on to explain which ones do and why they actually work better in everyday negotiations as well.
- dot1x 7y agoI got the highest job-hopping % increase in salary by following the advice of this book. Using tactics such as "Saying no without saying no" and "Start with your number $X+80%, then say no without saying no each time going down by 15-20% in 3 steps. At the last step, give a non-round number that seems to be your lowest threshold". The book has further gems like - Deadlines cut both ways. Never hide your deadline, as it will increase the chance of an impasse: the opponent will hold out for more while you will be pressured by the unspoken deadline. - Never bluff. Be prepared to actually walk away from the table at any given time. - If the other party thinks lowly of you, bring forth their worst fears. This allows them to see them through the glasses of logic instead of emotions. Once you diffuse their feelings in the open, they'll be more receptive to what you have to say. The book is worth a read.
- eb3c90 7y agoFor me trying to negotiate with people playing super hardball (ignoring social norms etc) makes me think they will not honour any agreements made. Because those rely on social norms too. Curse your sudden but inevitable betrayal etc.
- microcolonel 7y agoWell, that will depend on your interpretation of their actions, your local or industry-specific norms, and the actual circumstances of the negotiation. I have met tough negotiators who uphold their end of the deal just fine. The people who let me down the most are those who do not even attempt to negotiate on my prices: usually they'll think about it way later, but still won't accept discounts, until they run out of budget. Then you're thinking to yourself “why did they undermine this whole thing by paying me more than they could afford, for something I was willing to negotiate on?”. Then they miss 20k in billing, and you break it off.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- runeb 7y agoWhich is why you'd want to contractualize agreements. Sounds like you're, naturally, wary of entering into a gentleman's agreement with someone you don't feel is a gentleman.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- bernardlunn 7y agoWill somebody tell Donald Trump - Art of the Deal is classic hard win/lose negotiating. Silicon Valley was built on win/win negotiating
- NLMichel 7y agoIronically Donald Trump "studied" at Wharton.
- jfengel 7y agoAnd he won, the whole enchilada, at least in his own terms. While those he was negotiating with have decidedly lost, in both his terms and their own. There is every indication that this will continue. I believe that this will inspire a great many people to this negotiating style for many years to come.
- steveeq1 7y agoRead "Secrets of Power Negotating". It's filled with manipulative tactics designed to mislead the other party into thinking "they won". This book was un-ironically recommended at HN startup school like 10 years ago. I forgot the speakers' name though. This made me question the ethics of venture capitalists.
- bitcoinbutter 7y agoThis is such an important concept for negotiations of all sorts. If you are negotiating the hard way, then people are going to be put off from interacting with you in the future. There is a social element to all relationships, and the Trump-style win or go home strategy only works if you have massive leverage, and even then it will leave a sour taste in the mouth of the other party. You want the other party to feel satisfied with their part of the deal. Not just because it's good for business (which it is), but because we are human beings and we should not be trying to squeeze every last penny out of each other.
- hwestiii 7y agoWow, interesting coming from the alma mater of our estimable, “counter-puncher” POTUS.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- spodek 7y ago> This is potentially less important if you negotiate over the price of a sofa on Craigslist. Perhaps off topic, but speaking of sofas and CraigsList no one should buy a new sofa without checking a few weeks on CraigsList's free section. At least in New York City, every day sees plenty of new ones for free that will otherwise go to landfills even if like new. My two sofas came free from people in my building, both like new.
- tacheiordache 7y agoGetting a sofa from people in the building or friends is less risk than craigslist. I know someone who got bedbugs from a sofa on craigslist. So there’s a slight risk right there
- Pigo 7y agoI'm actually looking to unload a sofa right now. If anyone is interested in the Cincinnati area.
- beckingz 7y agoHuge concern about bedbugs and mold.
- diminish 7y agoIf you want to break a relationship, then an initial hard negotiation followed by softer ones also help a lot.
- gwbas1c 7y agoThe only time I negotiated aggressively was with someone who couldn't "read the air" about their prices. We've had a long relationship since, and still this person can't "read the air" about pricing. Ironically, by the end of the whole process, I realized this person could probably lower their prices by about 5-10% if they just paid closer attention to their bills and operational efficiency.
- Bjartr 7y agoWhat in the world does "read the air" mean? Is it an uncommon way to say something like "read between the lines" or is it something else entirely?
- Cytobit 7y agoFrom a quick search, it appears to be a Japanese idiom that means the same thing as "read the room". To assess a social situation.
- johntiger1 7y agoMaybe something like "read the room"? Native English speaker here and I'm just as baffled
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- gwbas1c 7y agoThere was a hacker news article about it last week. It's similar to "read between the lines." In this case, I was working with a general contractor to build a home, and I kept pointing out that "newish" houses (10-20 years old) in the area were significantly cheaper, and that his stock of new homes was sitting unsold for a very long time. Throughout the process: 1 - He sent me to a plumbing and lighting store where everything affordable was something that would go in a very cheap apartment. Everything else was absurdly expensive. We ordered everything off of Amazon for a reasonable cost. 2 - He tried to pass a very large, and obvious, billing error from the electric company off on me 3 - At times he would hint to me about how much money he was loosing floating interest on his unsold homes. These homes had the high-end fixtures where he could have saved about $10-20,000 just buying "nice" stuff at Amazon. 4 - When the house was done, a family architect looked at my basement and told me just how over-built my structural members are.
- spchampion2 7y ago> Most business books push a singular narrative around negotiations: Go hard or go home. The advice is tied to the idea that the negotiation table is a place of conflict where one party must best the other. Good business texts haven't emphasized this approach for a long time. The prevailing negotiation methodology has been "grow the pie" for a long time. In this approach, you're not trying to claim more of the pie directly, but rather make the pie bigger and then claim a larger overall slice. However, this article is a good reminder that an overly strong negotiating strategy can create friction later in the deal. That's good advice, and it shows the value of good business development.
- JMTQp8lwXL 7y ago> where one party must best the other ... you're not trying to claim more of the pie directly, but rather make the pie bigger and then claim a larger overall slice. If you're claiming more of the pie, but the pie isn't really bigger, you're just indirectly attempting to best the other. It's the same outcome, but with a different approach couched in friendlier wording.
- jimkleiber 7y agoThere’s a service in Uganda called boda boda. Basically they are guys who ride small motorbikes and offer rides to passengers. When they see me, a white man, they like to charge a very high price. Sometimes I can get very frustrated and want to “win” the negotiation. But then I think about how miserable the next 30 minute ride may be, and I also think about how dangerous it may be. If he feels frustrated or angry with the result of the negotiation, it may affect his driving, and it is already a highly dangerous activity to start. So, I often negotiate softer with them. It’s one of the reasons I like SafeBoda and Uber, because then the price is set by the app and I don’t have to have the potential argument with the driver. So during the ride I have great relaxed conversation with them and then when I arrive, since I know the price is typically too low, I give them a good tip, and everyone seems happy. So two thumbs up for softer negotiations with services.
- Pigo 7y agoI know negotiation is like a sport in some cultures, but I find it needlessly antagonizing. I'd rather pay extra to just not deal with it, and find other means of getting said product/service in the future. Come on people now, smile on your brother, everybody get together, try and love one another, right now...
- heisenbit 7y agoThe way I see it you are paying Uber to do the hardball negotiations for you and then you tip. Uber is certainly not soft and is the bigger part of the equation.
- eldavido 7y agoThis advice applies well to commercial landlord-tenant relationships. As an owner, if I negotiate super hard, the tenants will be resentful, and will damage the space, pay late, and cause no end of trouble.
- 1e-9 7y agoMost negotiation strategies attempt to optimize deal terms. This article makes the point that when post-deal relationships are important, it is better to optimize a combination of deal terms and quality of the post-deal relationship. It concludes that a softer approach better achieves this broader goal by yielding a much better relationship even though it might be at the cost of worse deal terms. I largely agree with this, although the researchers omit the important tactic of developing an acceptable alternative deal with a counter-party's competitor and then focusing negotiation on comparisons to it. Done well, you can still drive a hard bargain in a soft way, while maintaining the relationship by diverting the counter-party's resulting negative feelings away from you and towards the competitor.
- naveen99 7y agoShop around and understand the underlying market. Find the counterparty that undervalues the item under negotation most, you profit.
- dpiers 7y agoWhen I started at Uber back in early 2014, I didn't negotiate the offer at all. It seemed reasonable, so I accepted. Maybe I could have gotten more - but accepting has been, by far, the best decision of my career. A couple of years ago, we purchased a used Tesla (2014 MS P85D+) from someone on Craigslist. The estimated value of the car in a private sale was $48-53K on TrueCar, and the buyer was asking $50K. We paid $50K. We haven't had any problems with the car, and ended up having some roof racks/equipment given to us for free later on by the seller because he didn't need them anymore. We even found out he had prepaid the next 5 years of maintenance with Tesla. We just went under contract on a new house, and we negotiated the deal without a real estate agent representing us. This was the extent of the negotiation: - Us: We'll pay 6% below list, but you can save 3% because we don't have an agent. - Them: We'll accept 5% below list. - Us: Ok. The house had already been reduced 13% from the original list price - it's near train tracks and we think that scared a lot of people away. But we visited open houses and listened to the trains several times and decided we weren't bothered by it - they go slow because of a nearby turn and never blow the horn. We felt the original pricing was in line with the market for something of the same quality fit/finish. So we got a new house for 20% less than we would have paid for a similar one in exchange for something that doesn't really bother us. Also, the builder built his own house 20 feet away. We're going to be neighbors with the person we were negotiating with, and it would be better to be on good terms with them than to simply extract the maximum amount of value from them in the transaction. If anything in the house needs to be fixed in the future that isn't technically covered in the builder's warranty, they're more likely to work with us to fix it or help us get it fixed at a low cost. Plus they're our only neighbor and we're probably going to invite them over for dinner every now and then. However, as much as I'm a fan of win/win dealmaking, I find it only works well when the other party is interested in a win/win. The first thing I do when I approach the negotiating table is assess whether the other party is a smarmy Glengarry Glen Ross/Art of The Deal jerk who is trying to rip me off. My solution to negotiating with one of these people is simple - don't. Just walk away. Leave the wolves to bite at each others' throats and find someone else to work with. You can only get ripped off if you put yourself into a situation where the people you are dealing with are trying to rip you off.
- heisenbit 7y agoOne of the key reason these negotiations are so messed up is that often people negotiate who are not directly part of the post negotiation relationship aka. purchasing and sales vs. business and service delivery.