today is Friday, and, incidentally, this week-end I was going to post online the last round of my journey through business Dutch (available here).
moreover: this is a “bibliography” post, i.e. mixing my ruminations with references to make up your own mind (and I use Wikipedia as a “link collector”- follow the links to the sources there).
and you guess the subject of the last two lessons of my Business Dutch course- negotiating.
you can see the Dutch scribbling online, but here is the English translation (I am trying to think using the language I am learning, to get used to its “patterns”, and building Pavlovian linguistic reflexes):
negotiating: “the end of the beginning”
20 weeks- is it enough to learn business Dutch?
when you want to learn a language, you must use that language.
on a daily basis.
negotiating is cultural-sensitive: you must understand what your “counterpart” thinks.
but I think that you must follow an “holistic” perspective.
remark: two “negotiating parties” imply 5 negotiations.
why?
1. and 2. what you and your “counterpart” say
3. and 4. what you think on the negotiating position of your “counterpart” (and vice versa)
5. outcome of 1+2+3+4.(more on my blog: my Dutch is not good enough to philosophize!).
books on negotiating? thousands- but something in Dutch? Free?
don’t forget: a good “negotiator” must learn also other skills.
moreover, you can also read 20 books (from 12 to 36 pages; sorry- only in Dutch!).
why not, a book a week…
more? on “Europa.eu” there are “few things” that you can read for your language learning exercises (ask GoogleTranslate)
the “2 means 5″ is something that I learned through long, long experience.
at least a decade before working on my first business negotiation (as a supporter), and more than a dozen years before I had my first business negotiation where I was the “face”.
I was lucky enough to have some serious negotiations (i.e. aiming to produce something, be it a monetary result or kick-starting a business relationship) quite early, first to sell home computers in the early 1980s and games while in high school, then on political advocacy activities (interfacing with the youth groups of political parties in my birthplace, Turin), and finally selling used books.
you win some, you lose some, as shown by my first negotiation to sell a software that I wrote on commission (while still in high school): there and then, I discovered that I was good at negotiating on somebody else’s behalf, but for myself… well, it was too personal.
a learning experience, that I applied then both while serving in the Army and in my first business activities in consulting and selling software (this time, serious software, not games).
the interesting part, when you mix negotiating with end consumers, business users who are spending their company’s budget (the customers were usually larger than the companies I represented), political discussions, is that you see how much any negotiation is not really about facts, but about perception.
OK, big deal- Edward Bernays wrote it in 1928 (albeit some people should reread it now: in a multi-channel, instant-messaging world, it is getting a new lease of life).
I had negotiations where the parties involved where more than two: an exercise in applied statistics- as, in those cases, it pays to shift from the individual trees you are negotiating on, to the shared forest, but often you have to find individual trees for each party.
as nobody wants to report back that it was a win- showing that all the details are only those presented by the counterpart: yes, both the negotiators and those that they represent should commit to the “shared forest” approach
otherwise… better to create the shared outcome, but add scoring points for each party.
yes, I read and like sometimes applying game theory, but, frankly, I agree with those who says that studying the personality of those who formalized the theory is as important as the theory itself.
as no negotiation happens in a vacuum: just re-read the history of past negotiations (usually the best documented ones are those concerning peace treaties- some 40 or more years down the road).
and, in my experience, the moment when you forget that you too are projecting on your counterparts your own projection of what they really want, is the moment when you risk losing the negotiation (studying intercultural communication and management was a nice complement to the hands-on experience).
I like the Harvard Negotiation Project approach (albeit for year I stayed away from the book “Getting to Yes“- from the title, I assumed that it was the usual “cookbook to success”), but it really works if you build the appropriate negotiating environment: and it takes two to tango.
frankly, more than “negotiating skills” I would rather talk about a “negotiating toolbox”, as each negotiation, also when what you are selling is exactly the same, is unique.
be it to sell a 5 EUR used school book or to sell 20 Commodore 64 or to sell a multi-million EUR ERP or Enterprise Reporting system or negotiating business relationships.
why I mix “negotiating” with “selling”? well, reread Bernays (or, if you prefer a wider perspective, reread those few pages, and then watch the documentary “the century of self“).
in the end, each negotiation has the aim to generate the point 5. in the list above, i.e. a shared “Weltanschauung“.
personally, I proved that you can coach people on negotiating and managing activities: as I see both activities intertwined.
in my view and experience, once you win the negotiation, you have also to keep managing its aftermath- communication is the key in smoothing the transition toward reality.
including, when needed, by finding agreements on how reality should affect both parties.
I saw quite a few agreements so “atomic”, i.e. so inflexible, that generated just Pyrrhic victories- sometimes on the “buying” side, sometimes on the “selling” side.
but I already wrote on this blog about contracts writing and contracts negotiation: use the search facility if you want to read something more.
as this is Friday, few suggested movies on this theme: “thank you for smoking“, “thirteen days“, “the contender“.
enjoy the week-end!
