I was excited this week when we are asked to reflect
on how during the course of negotiations, people often misrepresent information
to gain at least a temporary advantage. More so, as a part of the functions of my job
as a Subcontract Administrator and Buyer for Lockheed Martin Aerospace, I have
the responsibility of negotiating with my suppliers to ensure we leverage the
best prices for our military customers.
My own first lessons in Negotiations occurred while I was in my
undergrad degree program taking a course in Alternate Dispute Resolution and
reading through Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement without Giving In by
Roger Fisher and William Ury. (Fisher,
R.; Ury, W., 2016) What I started to
learn about negotiations, were that the best types of negotiations were when
both team won in the end.
As we evaluate four specifics to the art of
negotiation, we see that there are many avenues that one can take, and that
these only represent the one’s that based on my own frames of reference and my finding
links to our text and readings, are relevant to my own perspectives. Each one of us negotiate every day, and not
always in relationship to our jobs and careers, but also in our personal
relationships, in our parenting with our children, and even during the course
of buying services or objects from Retail establishments.
In evaluation of
information during negotiations I think it helps to know the reputation of
the person with whom you are negotiating. Are they a
liar/manipulator, tough but honest negotiator, nice and reasonable person, an
easy layover or cream puff negotiator, or do they even have an particular
reputation at all (Glick & Croson, 2001). Understanding your opponent is often the
first strategy in understanding and predicting how you attack your negotiation,
and the particular style or methods you must evaluate or use. Being perceptive in your abilities to observe
and denote characteristic traits of another person goes a long way in helping
one understand and anticipate their first hurdle.
When I take the necessary time in getting to know or in
learning to understand the reputation and personality of the negotiator(s), it
will help me develop how I will deal with them in the negotiation
process. When you are dealing with a liar/manipulator, you are
prepared for them, when dealing with a tough negotiator, then you may start in
a more firm position than you may otherwise use. There are different
approaches based on how the other negotiator may be viewed, and adaptation is
the key skill ones needs to be successful (Glick & Croson, 2001).
When getting ready to negotiate, you have to decide what you are willing to risk. This
may determine if you plan to use deception and untruth in your
negotiations. Framing the outcomes based on the intended deception
based on desired outcomes. What is the cost versus benefits of deception?
At the same, when deciding whether or not to use
deception, it is important to prepare
against deception. This is done by getting all of your data
together. Do the research and prepare your questions. Use
the same or similar question several times, but worded differently to see if
the answers are the same or consistent (Glick & Croson,
2001).
It’s also important to understand the motivation of the other negotiator. Know
about them, are they losing money? What are their strengths and
weaknesses? What are their priorities? Understanding
these can help you manage the information to take advantage of their reputation
and use these to gain or protect your positions.
Goal
setting is another tool in your tool kit to manage
information. If you know what you are looking for as an outcome and
with the proper prioritization of your goals you can better protect against
deception and manage the conversation, often dictating the pace and direction
of the discussions. Because you know what you want, you can drive to
that, and it gives you flexibility because you know what you are willing to
give up and what level of risk you are willing to accept in the negotiations.
The most important thing you can do though, includes
each of the above, and that is to carefully prepare
for your negotiations. The old adage, an ounce of prevention is worth
a pound of cure. Preparation is the preventive part, taking place
before the negotiation. It allows you to respond to lies and avoid a
point where questions can become too difficult. It can help you
avoid a deception by being properly prepared (Glick & Croson, 2001).
Recently I approved a master repair agreement package
in support of long term planning for repairs of my system on the F-35 program, and
I did so before it should have been approved. Doing this placed
myself in a position of weakness and one where my trustworthiness to “do the
right thing (LM Motto)” could have been called into question. Today,
I had to brief our executive management team and they reminded me, that I
jumped to far too fast, in fact missing some steps that are critical in the
process. For my excuse, and not that it justified my course of
action, was that the time period for the approval of the monies requested for
this action were expiring. While my
choice incurred a gamble, and I could have been taken advantage of, my
negotiations turned out successful, and we were able to see significant savings
in our final cost pricing points for every level of the repairs effort we
needed agreement.
In terms of deceptive practices that I have had
personal experiences with, or more so being ashamed of, I would reflect on my
own days selling cars as part of my career path. I learned to lie to a customer, as deceit or omission
are just as guilty as telling the bold face lie, and knowing or misrepresenting
a service or product, just to make a profit or paycheck are still bad ways to
earn ones living. I chalk this lapse in
my own judgement to my youth (well 30’s) and a difficult time in my own
life. While I became very good at
suggestive selling and consulting to sell tangible products – I have often
reflected on wondering about if any of my car deals cause harm or financial
strife to the families I sold my cars too.
Living with that guilt is often worse than doing the act that cause it
in the first place. While many of my own
tactics were knowingly selling cars that were outside of what a person could or
should afford, or even knowing that we purposely devalued their trade-ins to
ensure making more profit, or leverage one spouse against the other to make a
sell, these were all deceitful practices – and my own level of the amount or
how far I would or could go was nothing short of one selling one’s soul to the
devil in order to make money.
Now that I am more centered and ethically motivated,
my own sense of playing by the rule and within the boundaries of ethical
fairness have greatly improved, and I like to think I have matured a lot in the
process. LaFollette states in his book The practice of ethics, “…when
we find ourselves having to be deceitful in our dealing or negotiations with
others – we lose a part of our souls in the process, and we enable ourselves to
be more willing to be even more deceitful in our futures” (LaFollette,
2007) I am certainly a better negotiator having understood my own limits and in
being able to see deception better by having learned to recognize it with my
own use. As a parent now, I am also
teaching skills to my two girls and I must do so in ways that keep them on a moral
path in the process, not wanting them to learn daddy’s bad habits or secrets.
As well in the course of our team projects, we must
remain tactful and respectful with our team members and we must not try to
leverage an upper hand or take advantage of our group or team members – and this
means that sometimes we must also loose in our battles in order to have the
whole team win in the process.
Negotiation is really about learning your position and
being able to gain or lose in the process.
References:
Getting to Yes. (2016,
May 17). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 15:41, June 27, 2016, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Getting_to_Yes&oldid=720791946
Glick, S., & Croson, R. (2001). Reputations in
Negotiations. In S. J. Hoch, H. C. Kunreuther, & R. E.
Gunther, Wharton
on Making Decisions (pp. 177-186). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
LaFollette, H. (2007). The practice of ethics. UK:
Blackwell Publishing.
No comments:
Post a Comment