Voss uses an analogy from domestic tiffs in which your partner accuses you of ignoring them or being unjust and you automatically reply “No, I’m not.” This merely exacerbates the situation rather than calming it, whereas a response like “I realise it must appear that I’m not being fair ...” should help remove some of the tension.
The important point here is to give the other side the impression they are dictating events. You can create conditions for better communication by feigning ignorance and asking various “how” and “what” questions. Allowing the other side to speak makes them feel like they are in charge.
Once you have listened, summarise the other side’s arguments in such a way as to elicit from them the words “That’s right.” You are not agreeing with them but the fact you show you understand them is crucial as it brings the two parties that little bit closer in the negotiations.
There is always room for manoeuvre even in the tightest of situations – even though sometimes it might not be immediately apparent. So be patient, keep asking questions and listen very carefully to the responses. A breakthrough may occur when the other side mentions a seemingly insignificant detail.
This is one of those “how” questions referred to above. Pretend to be naive, try to get the other side to see things from your own perspective and elicit possible solutions from them. You can even politely reject some of their suggestions, explaining why they wouldn’t work, and gradually work closer towards where you really want to be.
Essentially it is almost always about emotions: successful outcomes depend on there being at least some rapport between the negotiators, so it never pays to adopt an antagonistic posture. As Voss states in his book: “He who learns to disagree without being disagreeable has discovered the most valuable secret of negotiation.”
-at-
Article source Business Insider - American business and technology news