Small Steps and Quantum Leaps in Negotiation

Introduction
A couple of weeks ago an item of news received little attention, being eclipsed by the release of the Mueller Report. Although perhaps not very significant in its own right, it provides an important opportunity for negotiation scholars and practitioners to analyze and learn from.

On March 22nd, 2019, President Trump reversed a decision by his Treasury Department to impose additional large-scale sanctions on North Korea. “I have today ordered the withdrawal of those additional sanctions!” tweeted the president without much further explanation.

A New York Times article on March 22nd stated: “[This Decision] created confusion at the highest levels of the federal government, just as the president’s aides were seeking to pressure North Korea into returning to negotiations over dismantling its nuclear weapons program”.

Cogent arguments were contended against the president’s decision. Some argued that the reversal of the Treasury Department’s decision conveyed a state of disarray in U.S policy – not an image that we wish to project to friends or foes. Others were concerned about not exerting a policy of maximum pressure on the North Korean regime, without which they are unlikely to unwind their nuclear weapon program. Another reservation expressed was that the reversal would tarnish and undermine the world’s opinion about American resolve.

Can an argument be made in favor of the president’s reversal of the Treasury Department’s “large-scale sanctions” decision?

Be Consistent in a Dispute Resolution Process
When embroiled in a dispute of any kind, careful and deliberate consideration needs to be given as to the appropriate process best suited to resolve that dispute. Is it to be negotiation or mediation? Or is it perhaps litigation or war? Is diplomacy more appropriate or would a campaign of threats, pressure and intimidation be more effective? (See also: Choosing the Appropriate Dispute Resolution Process).

Once an appropriate process has been decided upon, it is important to implement that particular process exclusively, without contaminating it with elements of other processes.

Read more —>

The Kim-Trump Summit 2.0 Could the Negotiations Have Been Salvaged?

Introduction
With all eyes on the second summit between President Trump and Kim Jong Un last week (other than those riveted to the Michael Cohen testimony), surprise and disappointment supplanted hope and optimism as the talks ended abruptly with the President walking out.

The hope was for significant movement beyond that which was accomplished at the Kim-Trump Summit 1.0 in Singapore in 2018. In that first summit, the parties appeared to have agreed to “work towards the complete denuclearization” of the Korean Peninsula, which was vague, ambiguous and interpreted very differently by the two leaders. Nevertheless, those talks were important in that they started a process of mending fences and opening up dialogue.

The hopes for the Kim-Trump Summit 2.0 were dashed when North Korea insisted on lifting of sanctions in their entirety in exchange for merely dismantling the Yongbyon nuclear complex – unacceptable to the President. Interestingly, the two sides could not even agree on the reason for the breakdown, as the North Koreans argued that they were only talking about partial lifting of sanctions and never insisted on lifting of all sanctions at this time.

Could these negotiations have been salvaged?

A Different Approach
Any successful negotiation requires positive, constructive and productive dialogue and exchange before any proposals can be discussed. This dialogue and exchange should not only be about the overt presenting issues but also carefully navigated around the more sensitive covert personal issues that could potentially obstruct a deal. Any accord that addresses only the overt issues, but violates the covert personal ones is doomed to failure!

Read more —>

Negotiating Price From a Seller's Perspective

Introduction
In the sale of non-commoditized products and services, price negotiations can be a conversation fraught with tension. Buyers want the best deal possible and fear exploitation while sellers fear objections, push-back and potential loss of sales. In this equation, the buyer is usually in a stronger position due to his ubiquitous supply of alternative providers.

A frequent mistake that sellers make is allowing the price conversation to occur too early in the process. There are tactics that purchasers will typically deploy in the hope of engaging in the price talks prematurely.

A common tactic for example is to pressure the seller for a “ballpark” price too early in the process. The danger is that out of eagerness to get the work, the seller risks under-quoting, and having to come back later with a significant price increase is much harder.

Another potential pitfall is feeling anchored to your “ballpark” figure despite scope creep beyond what you accounted for in your initial “ballpark” calculation. A further risk is that the buyer makes a snap decision based solely on price before having had a chance to really understand and evaluate the value of the product or service that you are offering.

It is vitally important for sellers to be skilled at navigating the price talks effectively!

Sales Versus Negotiation
From the moment that a potential buyer has acknowledged a need and is talking to the seller, the process has transformed from lead generation and sales to one of negotiation. The skills that need to be deployed at this time are no longer sales skills but negotiation skills.

Read more —>

Resolving the Government Shutdown Dispute

As the government shutdown enters it's second month, a negotiated resolution does not yet appear to be on the radar.

Here is my January 22nd opinion piece published in USA Today about how to negotiate the government shutdown dispute and move beyond impasse. It provides important "how to" techniques for effective negotiation in tight corners that can be applied to all our difficult negotiations.

Read the article in

Advancing Negotiations that Appear to be Stalled

Introduction
The British diplomat, Harold Nicolson (1886-1968) begins his diary of the 1919 Paris Conference which ended World War I with the following words: “Of all branches of human endeavor, diplomacy is the most protean”. This protean quality is true of negotiation also, which lies at the core of effective diplomacy.

Although negotiation can be simply defined as the process of seeking joint solutions to conflicting needs, the path to get there is often circuitous, bumpy and even treacherous with many twists and turns along the way. An inexperienced negotiator will often lose heart at these challenging moments and give up. The experienced and skilled negotiator will recognize these bumps in the road as part of the protean nature of negotiation and will persevere until a successful outcome has been reached. (For a paradigm example of this sort of tenacity, read “To End a War” by Richard Holbrooke – an account of the 21 day negotiations that eventually lead to the Dayton Agreement and the end of the Balkans war).

In this column I share a story where we successfully broke through what appeared to be a stalled negotiation and how we did it. I hope this inspires other negotiators not to be discouraged by apparent obstacles, but rather to persevere with patience and persistence.

The Stalled Negotiation
I was contacted by a potential buyer who asked me to assist him in negotiating the purchase of a ranch. It was a beautiful piece of land with an enchanting creek running through it. This creek was, in the words of my client, described as “a child’s water wonderland!” It was owned by an older woman who had put it on the market for sale and the potential buyer wanted it badly.

He had put in several offers, progressively increasing the purchase price with each. The seller was resisting any offer the buyer was proposing despite displaying a clear intent to sell. The buyer was left confused and concluded that the seller was greedy, unreasonable and unrealistic. He assumed her motivations to be entirely money driven. The negotiations were at an impasse and appeared to be catastrophically stalled. The buyer faced with this, was at his wits end and about to walk away from this deal, feeling very disappointed not to be able to own the land of his dreams.

Read more -->