Negotiation is often romantic, presenting it as an innate art reserved for few chosen. However, sources deny this vision: negotiation is definitely not an art, but a skill, a skill that can be acquired, improve and update constantly. It is intrinsically linked to our life in all fields and dimensions, since we have use of reason. We negotiate with parents and children, brothers, friends, bosses, employees, and even with ourselves. It is a constant need to achieve what we are looking for and, in a broader dimension, to survive.
In the business world, this skill is fundamental. Profiles are required to negotiate contracts, with suppliers, in work agreements, in conflicts, and even in complex situations such as negotiations with communities. It is not an always common ability, but it is crucial. Many people know what they want and how they want it, but they lack personal elements to carry out the necessary negotiations, requiring the intervention of those who do have this skill. Those who have inflexible mandates, lacking the ability, are usually the “parents” of failure and the insured conflict.
To aspire to reasonable success in a negotiation, meticulous preparation is required. The basic elements include having a clear diagnosis of our own needs (what we want/we seek), understand the context in which negotiation will be developed, and define in advance what aspects we are willing to yield. But preparation goes further: it demands a deep knowledge of our counterpart, its needs and limitations. It is vital to clearly communicate what we are looking for, explain our understanding of the context and our perception of the needs of the other. Active listening is a necessary condition to create trust and negotiate in good faith. We must ask the other party if you understood what we want and validate if our understanding of your need is correct. Finally, establishing a process of common agreement defines the path of negotiation. It is very important to identify and leave in the “parking lot” those pending themes between the parties that are not part of the current negotiation and that could “dirty” the dialogue. Only if we work highlights these points, there is a solid “floor” to start.
The importance of deeply understanding the needs of the other part is vividly illustrated in the history of the two sisters and the orange. They fought for the only orange, and the father, to set the dispute, simply left for half. What he discovered later was a crucial teaching: one just wanted the segments for the juice, discarding the peel, while the other wanted the peel for an infusion, discarding the segments. The moral is clear: not having a healthy negotiation, expressing what each one wanted and what he was looking for, added to the lack of active listening and validation, both were deprived of obtaining 100% of what they wanted. This case is a pristine example of how a negotiation can be win/win. If they had heard each other and investigated in the needs of the other, one would have yielded the segments and the other the peel, allowing each one to obtain the total objective. Knowing how to listen and know how to investigate are fundamental to negotiate, avoiding the high probability of a negotiation losing/losing with the costs that this implies.
In the corporate field, negotiation, especially on transcendent issues, implies rigorous internal preparation. Equipment, support areas and external advisors are involved. Figures are analyzed, perform simulations and hypotheses, always aligned with what is sought and the superior strategy. Actions are planned and the conversations are “scripted”, trying to “think about this close negotiation as if we were our own counterpart.”
All this work is presented to the higher instance or to the client in your case; And three things can happen here: a strategy is approved or, none convinces and must be reassess, or, the most dangerous, negotiators receive a rigid mandate. This mandate, where what we are looking for/want is the only possibility of success, puts us in the face of an inevitable failure and/or conflict. These rigid mandates, parents of the conflict, usually come from a higher instance that does not understand the context, or of issues such as ego and pride. They are the brand of “The Heroes of the 15 minutes”, who, with these decisions, make a possible negotiation into a safe conflict.
Crises, driven by technological evolution, productive reconversion, postpandymia life, strategic habits and failures, force organizations to challenge conceptual budgets, traditions and comfort spaces. They require leadership changes and negotiations “in all directions.” The first and crucial negotiation is internal. Maintaining results while redefining strategies, structures, costs, investments and profiles is a huge effort that must be accompanied by solid, transparent and effective communication at all levels. It is necessary to show the context of the crisis, but also “the promised land” and the way to achieve it. Without adequate communication and understanding, all action will be perceived as inconsistency, generating uncertainty and loss of confidence, preventing the commitment and contribution of the teams. In addition to internal negotiation, the need to explain the changes and needs with the external environment (shareholders, suppliers, unions, authorities, community) and negotiate in each area arises.
The old history of the remote kingdom exemplifies the consequences of poor communication in crisis. Before a treasury exhausted by years of wars, the advisors ruled out taxes (because they were already high) and advised the king not to recognize the crisis publicly. A “15 -minute hero” proposed to hide the crisis, announce a great victory and ask each citizen 10 liters of the best wine to pay for a party, depositing them in a large common barrel. The initiative was applauded and executed. However, in the end, the king tested the content of the barrel and discovered that it was a mixture of poor quality with water. The reason? Citizens, overwhelmed by taxes and without knowing the real situation or future dangers, only received the news of an additional effort for the King’s party. Before a little transparent communication and a confusing strategy in the face of the crisis, each one thought individually that their water would go unnoticed in such a parade. Everyone thought the same. Finance collapsed, the king lost credibility, and the kingdom disappeared, not due to external enemies, but because of non -forced internal errors. This story emphasizes how organizations, making bad communication decisions, not assuming their crises in time and not acting with agility and transparency, are exposed to collapse or disappear.
In conclusion, negotiation is a learned and fundamental ability. It requires preparation, a deep understanding of the counterpart, active listening, and great flexibility to avoid rigid mandates that guarantee failure. In times of crisis, negotiation becomes multidirectional, being internal negotiation and solid and transparent communication indispensable pillars to maintain commitment and draw the path to survival and success. The survival of organizations (and kingdoms) depends on the mastery of this ability and the courage to communicate the truth, avoiding the illusory shortcuts of the “15 -minute heroes.”
By Marcelo Villegas
