Getting More: How You Can Negotiate to Succeed in Work and Life

by Stuart Diamond

He asked the customer service representative, “Is your airline’s behavior indicative of the hospitality of the country of Greece?” He got a refund immediately. He used framing and standards.

“I paid $400 for this room,” she told the manager. “I could have stayed elsewhere for $200. But I’ve always gotten such great service at Starwood. It’s always been just great.” No threats were involved.

What you should not do is threaten them with ending the relationship unless they do such and such. It’s like threatening your spouse with divorce every time you have an argument. After a while they don’t believe you.

He also noted that many hotels have “reserve” rooms available for last-minute emergencies. “Could you use one of those reserve rooms for me?” he asked.

I know, you’re going to ask, “What if everybody did this?” Well, everybody doesn’t do this. Second, this is a high-class problem for a hotel. It will increase customer service. Hotels will better be able to match guests with their needs. Not every guest needs a late checkout.

“Don’t laugh at the crocodile until you’ve crossed the river.”

The more you use these tools, the nicer people will be to you and the more you will meet your goals.

“I’ve been coming here for almost two years. I’ve recommended you to friends. What is your policy on customer satisfaction?” Sojung told him it was to try hard for customers to be satisfied.

“Is it the bank’s practice to treat existing clients worse than new clients?” Stephen asked. Clearly, that wasn’t fair. So the bank manager offered him a 0.5 point discount from where he was.

Naming bad behavior and asking standards questions showed the manager that Stephen deserved something.

Even if the restaurant makes a mistake, such as overcharging your credit card, be nice about it and ask what they do for customers when mistakes are made. It’s an open-ended, nonthreatening question that will usually get you more. Sometimes people make innocent mistakes.

the origin of contracts has little to do with holding people to commitments. Contracts were developed because most people couldn’t read and write. The contract was a memory aid to help people remember what they agreed to. If they weren’t sure, they got the scribe to read it to them.

It’s hard to apologize if you’re not wrong, of course. I’m not suggesting that you do that. But too many people don’t even apologize when they should.

Details of your predicament can be persuasive. But (a) you have to mean what you say, (b) it has to be the truth, and (c) they can’t have heard it a million times already. The purpose is not to hoodwink the other person or make an excuse, but to make a connection with them.

If the other side is extreme, quote them verbatim; it will help to build a coalition against them.

There was tough talk about war and sanctions. Why didn’t the parties immediately start talking about this face-to-face? Instead of threats and accusations, the only refrain should have been, “When do we talk?”

the head of Hamas said his group was ready to talk to the United States. We or our allies should take them up on it, even if it means sitting in silence or listening to speeches or accusations. If they say something more collaborative, we can use it in negotiations with them. If they say something extreme, public opinion will eventually turn against them.

Of course, an important element here is part of the communication tool kit: not fighting over yesterday, and not getting involved in the assignment of blame. It takes discipline to do this. And leadership. And a focus on goals.

if you come to a negotiation with a confrontational attitude, you will get less: in fact, 75 percent less over the long-term. So the next questions are: How do the parties treat each other? Do they blame each other? Do they threaten each other? Do they try to hurt each other? Or do they try to work collaboratively toward a solution that meets the needs of all?

It is estimated that sanctions cost the United States up to $20 billion a year in lost exports.

The maxim “Hold your friends close and your enemies closer” is good advice for persuasion. Holding them closer means getting more information and having more influence. It may seem counterintuitive to many people, but it is far more effective in meeting goals.

The questions to ask are: Are the parties fighting over yesterday? Are the parties blaming each other for yesterday? Or are they focused on improving tomorrow?

Ultimately, to be successful at negotiating, you need to meet the needs of the other party. Communicating effectively, understanding their perceptions, having the right attitude, and having the right negotiators just bring you to the place where you are ready to talk effectively. Now you need to determine what needs of each party can be met and how they can be traded. This is the currency of the negotiation.

If you feel intimidated by the other person or party, imagine them in the most embarrassing position you can think of. Let your imagination run wild.

A big confidence builder in doing a negotiation is preparation. The more prepared you are, the less nervous and more effective you will be.

Find common enemies: complain about the weather or the traffic. Compliment the other person on a suit, dress, or watch. The only thing is, you have to mean it. Again, people can spot phonies a mile away.

Small talk is big talk in a negotiation. It helps to make a human connection. And humans are social beings, with few exceptions. People like to make connections with each other. Even discussing differences is a connection. It’s an act of interacting. Studies have shown that humor (if they recognize it as such), small gifts (“Want a mint?”), or a comment about something interesting that happened today are all key in setting a more collaborative tone.

Even in a short negotiation, you should know specifically what you are going to talk about.

It’s often best to break a negotiation incrementally into smaller pieces. Every time you get new information that can affect the negotiation, consider taking a break to think about it, and then resume.

If something surprises you, take a break immediately. My team once took five breaks in the first hour of a merger negotiation where we were presented with a bunch of surprises.

Decades of studies have shown that time pressure at the end of a negotiation produces: (a) worse deals, (b) less ability to process information, (c) less value added, (d) neglect of important information, (e) bad judgments, (f) more emotion, (g) fewer options, (h) more raw use of power, (i) more stereotyping of the other side, and (j) more stress.

If you realize you don’t have enough time to cover everything, don’t. Get a couple of things done very well, rather than a lot of things done poorly. Use all the time you have.

“If we don’t reach an agreement, it will hurt your reputation.” This will often get them emotional and less willing to do a deal. Or you could say instead, “How can we help you use this deal to enhance your reputation?”

There are many ways to do that. Instead of saying “We don’t trust you,” why not try “How do we start to trust one another?”

Be incremental if you’re not sure about how much good faith the other side is exhibiting. You should say, “I’m interested in this painting,” as opposed to “I absolutely adore this painting.”

If you don’t feel comfortable answering, you can say, “I don’t feel comfortable answering that question.”

The point: don’t make the first offer if you don’t know the bargaining range. You will negotiate against yourself.

Now that doesn’t mean you can never make the first offer if the bargaining range is wide or uncertain. You can narrow the bargaining range by asking questions.

the rule of thumb is not to make the first offer unless you have a lot of information about them, the bargaining range, and the situation. Always try to find out.

Extreme offers also violate one of the fundamental principles of the book: being incremental. Almost by definition, an extreme offer is the opposite of incremental.

if someone is extreme, you might turn to the other members of that person’s team and say something like, “Do you all agree with each and every word that was just said?” If there is any hesitation, ask for a break.

be careful of overusing power. Just use enough to meet your goals but not more. Lessening the misuse of power by the other side is important only if it enhances your ability to meet your goals.

just because two parties say, “I agree,” or sign a contract, doesn’t mean you have a commitment. You need a commitment from them in the way they make commitments. This should be explicitly discussed as part of the negotiation.

The making of a commitment also needs a deadline and a time frame. This needs to be explicit. If there are any conditions that will cause the other party (or you) to be able to get out of the commitment, spell them out.

Finally, what happens if a party breaks its commitment? Will anything be owed to the other party? Best to get all this settled up front. The other party might say, “We won’t break the commitment! Don’t you trust us?” You should answer, “What if you leave the company?

If they say there is no chance they will break the commitment, ask for strong penalties, since it carries no risk for them, but “It will make me and my team feel a lot better.” Test people. Be careful of taking on more risk.

More effective is a joint effort to reduce perceived risk. Make risk a common problem. That way, you are working on it together. If they don’t want to help you, assume they are trying to manufacture perceived risk in order to charge you more (for example, a bank or credit card agency). Be suspicious.

find the pictures in their heads. Then ask them questions that confirm those pictures. Do you want to reach an agreement? Do you want to have a meeting? Once you get them to confirm it, move one small step at a time toward your goals.