• 上一PieceArticle:
  • Win-Win Power Negotiating

    发表评论】【加入收藏】【告诉好友】【打印此文】【关闭窗口】【查看数:

    Let's talk about win-win negotiating. Instead of trying to dominate the other person and trick him into doing things he wouldn't normally do, I believe that you should work with the other person to work out your problems and develop a solution with which both of you can win.

    Your reaction to that may be, "Roger, you obviously don't know much about my industry. I live in a dog-eat-dog world. The people with whom I negotiate don't take any prisoners. They eat their young. There's no such thing as win-win in my industry. When I'm selling I'm obviously trying to get the highest price I possibly can, and the buyer is obviously trying to get the lowest possible price. When I'm buying the reverse is true. How on Earth can we both win?"

    So, let's start out with the most important issue: What do we mean when we say win-win? Does it really mean that both sides win? Or does it mean that both sides lose equally so that it's fair? What if each side thinks that they won and the other side lost-would that be win-win? Before you dismiss that possibility think about it more. What if you're selling something and leave the negotiation thinking, "I won. I would have dropped the price even more if the other person had been a better negotiator"? However the other person is thinking that she won and that she would have paid more if you had been a better negotiator. So both of you think that you won and the other person lost. Is that win-win? Yes, I believe it is, as long as it's a permanent feeling. As long as neither of you wakes up tomorrow morning thinking, "Son of a gun, now I know what he did to me. Wait until I see him again."

    That's why I stress doing the things that service the perception that the other side won, such as:

    Don't jump at the first offer.

    Ask for more than you expect to get.

    Flinch at the other side's proposals.

    Avoid confrontation.

    Play Reluctant Buyer or Reluctant Seller.

    Use the Vise gambit: You'll have to do better than that.

    Use Higher Authority and Good Guy/Bad Guy to make them think you're on their side.

    Never offer to split the difference.

    Set aside impasse issues.

    Always ask for a trade-off and never make a concession without a reciprocal concession.

    Taper down your concessions.

    Position the other side for easy acceptance.

    Besides constantly servicing the perceptions that the other side won, observe these four fundamental rules:

    Rule one of win-win negotiating: Don't narrow it down to just one issue

    The first thing to learn is this: Don't narrow the negotiation down to just one issue. If, for example, you resolve all the other issues and the only thing left to negotiate is price, somebody does have to win and somebody does have to lose. As long as you keep more than one issue on the table, you can always work trade-offs so that the other person doesn't mind conceding on price because you are able to offer something in return.

    Sometimes buyers try to treat your product as a commodity by saying, "We buy this stuff by the ton. As long as it meets our specifications we don't mind who made it or where it comes from." They are trying to treat this as a one issue negotiation to persuade you that the only way you can make a meaningful concession is to lower your price. When that's the case you should do everything possible to put other issues, such as delivery, terms, packaging, and guarantees onto the table so that you can use these items for trade-offs and get away from the perception that this is a one-issue negotiation.

    At a seminar, a commercial real estate sales person came up to me. He was excited because he'd almost completed negotiating a contract for a very large commercial building. "We've been working on it now for over a year," he said. "And we've almost got it resolved. In fact, we've resolved everything except price, and we're only $72,000 apart." I flinched because I knew that now that he'd narrowed it down to one issue, then there had to be a winner and there had to be a loser. However close they may be, they were probably heading for trouble. In a one-issue negotiation, you should add other elements so that

    [1] [2] [3] 下一页



    收藏至: