Home  Clients  How We Work  Services  Case Studies   About Us


Negotiating and Solving Problems by Seeking Common Ground
Monday, November 20th, 2006

Many times, one encounters issues where people are angry and walk away.  If the situation is not resolved, it can be “papered over,” assuming the peole need to work together at some point in the future.  

Often, people choose to avoid the issue.  When this occurs, minor differences of opinion become massive “elephants in the closet.”  Worse still, one’s imagination can allow the item to be distorted out of proportion. 

Conventional wisdom says that one should walk away, rather than dealing with major issues while tempers are heated.  Often, it is too easy to walk away so that is what people do.  In doing so, they miss the opportunity to grow a better relationship.   

A brief cooling off period may be required.  If the cooling off period is too extended, however, the parties can emotionally disengage.  In such situations, if the issue arises again, the elephant is even larger.  It often does arise again.  The other risk is that the parties may walk away and not speak again.

Approaching the Issue

From a business perspective, it is critical to deal with the elephants, preferrably when they are very, very small.  Kerry Patterson, Joseph Grenny, and others suggested that we prepare for potential high stakes discussions by asking ourselves four questions in their book, Crucial Conversations.  The question might be paraphrased:

  1. What am I hoping for out of the relationship for myself
  2. What am I hoping for out of the relationship for others
  3. What am I hoping for for our relationship
  4. What would I say and do if all of these things are true

Framework for Planning

Having used this approach in the past, I also learned to take a few other steps as well.  The first step is to plan my interaction so that I say what I mean and avoid issues.  Here is a checklist that I have found very helpful in dealing with the interaction:

  1. Take the dialogue offline.  In general, avoid discussing the issue in public, in the meeting, or even via e-mail where others are present.  Keep the discussion on a “need to know” basis.
  2. Discuss the issue in private.  The discussion may become heated. Remember the goals and the reason that the exercise is being undertaken.  Avoid creating a situation where either party fears reprisals.
  3. Start from the vision.  What is to be accomplished from the other side’s perspective?  What is to be accomplished from your perspective?  How can those visions be reconciled?  What conditions will exist when the visions are reconciled?  Stay on the vision until the participants agree on on the vision and why achieving the vision is important to them.  For best results, develop a vision that incorporates the visions of all participants and define project success as achieving that vision.
  4. Consider how the issue is preventing the participants from realizing the vision from the perspective of each participant.  How is the issue hurting each participant?  What are the benefits of resolving the issue from the perspective of each participant?
  5. Identify options for resolving the issue.  If possible, ask the other participants for their perspectives about how the issue might be resolved.  Also, talk about why it is important that the issue be resolved.  Consider what conditions will exist when the issue is resolved, how the participants will know that the issue has been resolved, and what conditions will not exist when the issue is resolved.
  6. Work with participants to select an approach for resolving the issue that meets their collective needs, constraints, parameters, timelines, and concerns.

Within this framework, there are a  lot of more tactical steps that may be useful to others.  Here are ten lessons that I learned, sometimes from experience.  Perhaps they will be helpful to you:  

  1. Ask open ended questions.  Try to understand the other people’s perspectives.  Most of the time, they have a reason to believe as they do.  By understanding why they feel as they do, it is often possible to work through the issues.  If we are unable to listen to what the other side has to say, we should ask someone else to step in and facilitate the discussion.  In many cases, this occurs because we have allowed the issue to escalate, rather than dealing with it when the problem was minor.
  2. Keep the discussion on the relevant business issues and business impact.  At the end of the discussion, the participants need to be able to work together.  How they feel about each other is only relevant if it impacts their ability to work together.
  3. Find areas of common interest.  Much of the time, we share common interests, our interests and vision may be expressed in different ways.  Build from the areas of common interest.
  4. Deal with the issues when the stakes are low, rather than letting them get to the point of exploding.
  5. Remember, this is a collaborative problem solving endeavor, rather than a competition.  If it becomes a competition between the individuals, they are “fighting over the crumbs.”  A better approach is to find ways to “grow the pie.”  Find ways to grow the pie so people are not left fighting over the crumbs. 
  6. The other people feel justified in their statements.  Accept that they feel just as strongly about their position, as we do about ours.
  7. Focus always on the desired outcome.  The issue is not that one participant or side is correct.  If someone is right, someone else must also be wrong.  This puts us back in the mode of competing, rather than finding common interests and common ground.
  8. Sometimes, we encounter areas where we are unable to resolve an issue.  When this occurs, go back to the vision and ask how setting that element aside and agreeing to disagree on that point will help and hurt attainment of the vision.
  9. Check for understanding.  Often, we may be using the same words, but have different expectations and assumptions underneath those words.  Hypotheticals and what if questions are great tools to help us make sure that we are on the same page.
  10. Walk through the solution.  See how the solution would be played out if the issue arises in the future.  Make sure that all participants are satisfied with the approach that would be used to resolve the issue.

Build the Conversation

The tips listed above are intended as starting points, rather than to articulate the precise conversation.  It is important to buid a conversation around the checklists, rather than to replace the conversation with the checklist and bullet points.  

Conclusion

With careful planning and execution, we can avoid and minimize the impact of disputes, build better business relationships, and allow our teams to work together more effectively.  Resolving the issues in the manner suggested above sure beats the alternatives!

Even though three people might have the same issues and use the same checklist, there could be three very different conversations.  Each of us is different and we have our own perspectives, habits, and method of presenting our views.

Posted in Planning Tips, Solving Problems | No Comments »



Negotiating by keeping the discussion going
Wednesday, November 8th, 2006

If you are negotiating to resolve an issue with Joe and Joe tells you “no,” how do you respond?

In negotiations, this issue comes up quite often.  When presented with a “no,” we can interpret that as meaning a variety of things.  Maybe, we think it is a final answer.  Perhaps, we see it as an indication the other party does not understand. 

In this article, we will talk about some of the different meanings of “no,” and how we may want to proceed in light of those different meanings.

“No” as a final answer

Suppose that we see ”no” as a final answer and decide to make a decision based on that final answer from Joe. If this occurs, we may be walking away from a good relationship, or setting for a compromise, rather than actually resolving the issue.  As soon as we walk away, or investment of time and energy is likely to have been for nothing. 

“No” as an indication of lack of understanding

When we don’t understand the question or have all the information, we may say “no” meaning “I don’t have enough information to evaluate this issue at the moment” or “I haven’t got time to consider the options at this time.”  As in the case of “no” being a final answer, in this situation, we should be careful about walking away.  

The other person may come back to us at a later point to ask questions and to follow up on the ideas.  We may also go back to the other person at a later time.

Next Step

When we hear the “no” from our “Joes,” it can be helpful to ask for additional information so that we can decide how to proceed. 

Many walk away when they are told “no.”  A better option is to ask questions or to follow up with replies like…

  • Please help me understand…
  • Can you tell me a little more about…
  • I hear you saying “no,” and I respect your right to say “no.”  Can you think of a situation that would cause you to reconsider the decision?
  • Please tell me more…

    • Based on what the person tells us, we need to decide how to proceed.  If the question arises in the sales context, it can take many follow ups before the person adopts a different perspective.  I have heard people say that it can take as many as 15 ”nos” from a person, before they expect to hear “yes.” 

    When we hear “no” and understand what the person is telling us, we then have the information we need to decide how to proceed.  Time is limited and, as a result, sometimes, we choose to walk away.  The key is to realize that “no” is not necessarily a final answer.  It may be the final answer for today.

    Posted in Business Tips, Negotiations | No Comments »



    Meeting configurations impacts business results
    Friday, November 3rd, 2006

    When planning a meeting, some take the meeting configuration for granted and allow the space to limit their creativity.  A better approach is to configure the meeting space to achieve the desired business results. Let’s think about meeting space configuration in the context of four questions which are:

    If Joe is planning a meeting for a group of people that are afraid to talk with each other, how might he use the meeting space configuration to “break the ice”?

    If Sally’s team meetings typically last too long, how can she use meeting space configuration to shorten the meetings?

    What is the difference between a round and a square table in a meeting?

    When handling a major contract, what meeting space configuration might we wish to think about?

    Please note that some of the information may be dependent on cultural norms.  In the US, all of these formats are sometimes used. 

    As a starting point, please try any new approach to meetings on less important meetings and work out any challenges then, rather than trying a new meeting format for an important meeting first

    If Joe is planning a meeting for a group of people that are afraid to talk with each other, how might he use the meeting space configuration to “break the ice”?

    In this situation, the meeting configuration can help the people relax and be more comfortable.  There are a few ways that this could be accomplished.  A key factor to think about is how formal the attendees are likely to be. 

    If the attendees will be wearing slacks or casual attire, having them sit on the grass in a circle is going to create the most relaxed environment.  Other options could be sitting at benches or chairs arranged in circles on a lawn. 

    Sometimes, a meeting outside is not a good idea.  Perhaps, the temperature or weather is a problem.  In this situation, consider having the meeting inside with everyone sitting on the floor in a circle, or several circles.

    At a minimum, Joe is likely to find the people talking about the unconventional meeting.  Once they start talking about something, it is easier for them to keep talking.

    If Sally’s team meetings typically last too long, how can she use meeting space configuration to shorten the meetings?

    Poor Sally.  Who wants to attend a meeting which drags on and on?  Stand-up meetings can be used to shorten the meeting to just a high level overview.  As the name implies, people stand up for the entire meeting.  In many cases, a stand-up meeting can shorten an hour long meeting to 15 or 20 minutes. 

    What is the difference between a round and square table?

    When one uses a round table, it creates a more relaxed and friendly setting.  If a square or rectangular table, it creates more formality. 

    If it is important that the other participants not volunteer information, such as at a deposition, the party seeking to avoid the volunteering might use a square or rectangular table.  Conversely, if the goal is to make the parties comfortable and to create a less formal environment such as where one wants the attendees to participate in an interactive problem solving discussion, a round table can be helpful.

    When handling a major contract, what meeting space configuration might we wish to think about?

    Some will say square table.  Others will say round table. 
    In my experience, a telephone meeting is often the best option.  With instant messaging, I’ve found that having instant access to my clients as I am negotiating a deal (especially when my clients are not on in the discussion) is a great approach to negotiation. 

    If the other party asks a question that I have not considered, I can instantly message my clients and get a “sanity check” on my initial reaction.  That just wouldn’t be an option in a face-to-face meeting or in a meeting where we where my clients were present on the call.

    Conclusion

    The tone of a meeting can play an important role in the outcome from the meeting.  As a result, it makes sense to configure the environment for the meeting so that the environment supports the objectives of the meeting.  In terms of formality, the most formal meetings are sitting down at square or rectangular tables.  The least formal meetings are sitting on the floor or the grass.

    If using a meeting format for the first time, try the format in a less important meeting to be sure that the format is workable for you and is compatible with the culture of the organization.  This is a simple approach that lets you manage your risk.

    The real lesson to be learned from this discussion is to think outside the box and to consider different meeting configurations, rather than sticking with the tried and true approaches - round table, square table, and lecture hall-style configurations. 

    Additional Information

    For more information about meeting space configurations, you may wish to consider Stewart Tubbs, A Systems Approach to Small Group Interaction.

    Posted in Planning Tips | No Comments »



    Negotiation Scenario: Building Relationships Remotely
    Thursday, November 2nd, 2006

    Suppose that you are trying to build a relationship with someone who is located in a different part of the country, or in another country. 

    Consider four questions:

    Why might you want to do so?

    What technology can help you do so?

    What issues may arise?

    How can you deal with these issues, if they arise?

    The answers are situation specific, and specific to each of us.  When I answer these questions, they are only that.  My answers.  Please understand that these answers worked for me and are provided as a starting point for you as you think about your situation. 

    Why?

    A better question might be why anyone would allow physical location to be a barrier to building a relationship.  While it is easier to build and maintain relationships face-to-face or by telephone, they can be created remotely.  Several of my business contacts are people that I have never met face-to-face. 

    Technology?

    Technology now supports remote interactions for small businesses at a comparable level to what one can find within large organizations. For $50 to $100 per month (or less), people can often gain access to a variety of tools that support remote networking.  Yahoo!, Skype, and Google are just three solutions that allow instant messaging and/or email.  As the firms and solutions evolve, they will probably include stronger online collaboration tools as well.

    Issues?

    A variety of issues can arise when a person is trying to build relationships remotely.  Even within the US, different regions have different cultures.  When international relationships are involved the cultural differences can be even more confusing.

    Where people are remote from each other, it can be difficult to make sure that they are receiving the same information.  Communication becomes more important.

    If a person relies solely on internet presence and email/webmail interaction, it is difficult to confirm that the other person is hearing what the person is saying. 

    There have been cases where people misrepresented themselves.  Some argue that this is more common via the Internet.  It is unclear to me if the frequency of misrepresentations is impacted by the Internet.  

    Communication can be confusing, especially if people rely solely on written words. 

    Dealing with issues?

    When building remote relationships, it is important to increase the communication, listen more, ask questions, and provide more information. Remember, the other person may see the world from a very different perspective. (To illustrate this, look at how different newspapers around the world cover a particular story.)

    Explaining the analysis and perspective is especially important is a person is trying to answer a question.

    Due diligence, good judgment, and time are critical in any relationship.

    Regular contact is important if a relationship is going to grow.

    Technorati Tags:          
     
    Posted in Business Tips, Negotiations, Networking, Solving Problems | No Comments »



    Solve business puzzles by starting with the end result
    Wednesday, November 1st, 2006

    When solving business puzzles, one approach that often works well is to start with the goal or vision and work backwards.  The more clearly the goal or vision is defined at the start of the project, the easier it will be for us to:

    1. Achieve the goal or vision
    2. Allocate resources appropriately
    3. Work with others to achieve the goal or vision
    4. Develop a workable plan for proceeding
    5. Explain why the project is important

    Once the goal or vision is defined, ask what it really means.  That is one question that we can ask.  Often, it helps to have several different ways to rephrase questions.  In addition to asking what the goal or vision really means, we can also ask:

  •  What conditions will exist when the goal or vision is achieved? 
  • What conditions will not exist when the goal or vision is achieved? 
  • How will we know that the goal or vision has been achieved?
    • Posted in Solving Problems | 2 Comments »