Negotiating Your First Deal

Writen by Lin Stone

In any type of business one must always be ready to deal with other people. It can be as simple as explaining the situation. For example, someone offered a house for sale at $40,000 and the other party explained:

"I'm sorry, the only houses I buy are purchased at wholesale."
"Oh," said the seller almost instantly. "Then you can have it for only $27,900"
That sounds incredible, doesn't it? Yet it frequently happens just that way.

Negotiation is a big part of the business world. Since the negotiation process cannot be avoided, the business professional must equip himself with proper skills and presentation techniques in order to survive in business.

Communication skills are a necessity. As my favorite aunt says: "Suffering in Silence is for fools who can't communicate." The best negotiation tool you can have is enhanced communication skills. When you want to be heard, you have got to speak up. The only way to get a better deal is to ask for it. One gets what one wants based solely on the ability to persuade others, and that takes negotiation, not luck. This is true especially in the worlds of business and finance, which are full of concerns about deals and agreements with prospective customers.

One must be fully aware that all the information involved in the deal must be true, honest and aboveboard. Misleading information must be avoided at all costs; otherwise, any of the parties involved might enter the contract with a different deal in mind. If such is the case, the best you can expect to happen is that it will certainly lead to confusion and the whole negotiation process could crumble before the deal is done.

All statements must be fair and free of errors. Misleading information and ambiguous terms must be avoided. Word meanings, phrases, and sentences, even whole paragraphs, should all be clear and understandable. Mutual understanding can only be attained through effective communication. Lay everything out clearly for the client. Both parties must be able to fully understand what the contract states. You cannot expect any contract to be entered into by a business professional until after they have become convinced that the contract provides a favorable deal for them.

To achieve a successful negotiation, you must possess fairness and honesty. The client believes that all statements coming out of the salesman's mouth are considered as binding. If it becomes obvious that his words are misleading, the salesman will lose his credibility. When this happens then it would almost certainly result in prospect walking out on the deal.

As you begin to negotiate, try to observe the situation from every perspective. You should always strive to anticipate every possible outcome -- whether it is favorable to you or not. This attitude will strengthen your negotiation and help you to come up with an agreement that will satisfy both parties. In every negotiation learn to stand your ground better and show how confident you are in the outcome you are seeking. While it is okay to have emotions, don't let them overcome your ability to think clearly. When that happens you will probably end up accepting a less than fair deal. Learn to listen well because that shows your sincerity. Stay open to every suggestion and recommendation that might lead to your benefit. Being flexible will help you reach a successful agreement.

Don't be afraid to offer innovative solutions during the negotiation if you believe they will pave the way to a common goal. Innovative solutions (sometimes mistakenly called compromises) can be very significant in closing a deal. Offer them firmly in order to meet the needs and wants of both parties. Since this is your first deal let me caution you against a common failing among inexperienced negotiators... There is an all too human urge, when the pressure suddenly ends to gush out further, unnecessary alternatives and concessions. Be ready for that urge to strike; bite your tongue, shut your mouth.

Once your goal is achieved, close the negotiation and make the deal final.

Click HERE for more information that can help you Negotiate like a Champion. Lin Stone has authored seven books and hundreds of articles. Click HERE for Lin's latest stories and articles.

Games Are A Reflection Of Behavior

Writen by Alicia Smith

You are standing on a small stage yelling, "What's the name of the game?!"

"Win as much as you can!!!" comes roaring back.

"Who's responsible for your score?!"

"I am!!"

The audience is composed of ninety men, all prisoners in a federal maximum security prison.

One more thing – you're a woman.

For three years, Alicia volunteered every Thursday at FCI (Federal Correctional Institute) in Bastrop, Texas-

"I used my skills as a corporate trainer to help these men learn to shift their perspective on themselves and the world."

"Along the way the prisoners taught me as much, perhaps more, than I taught them."

"In my training business, I use games as a way to break down barriers and shift perceptions. What I came to realize is that your behavior in a game is an exaggerated reflection of your behavior in real life."

Games are an opening to behave true to our natures, to react immediately rather than with a careful response. Depending on the other players, we may monitor our behavior less in a game than in the real world, but we aren't acting differently. In a game there are no emotional holds barred.

In a game, we are allowed to be more right brained than logical. After all, "It's only a game."

Saying something is only a game tends to trivialize its importance. Precisely because we view it as trivial, and of no importance, we can give ourselves permission to let our true natures out.

When we floated this idea before a number of colleagues, several of them told us stories of self-discovery. One woman, a very sweet and kind person in "real life", was known as "the enforcer" when she played hockey in school. Another shared that, when she plays a game against total strangers she becomes "brutal" and highly competitive.

So if our true nature comes out in a game, what can we do with that information?

Can we transform situations so that we can be true to our nature? Can we make a game out of real world situations to allow our true nature to flourish? The obvious example is to view business as a game to be won. This implies competition and a winner take all attitude.

Yet Covey and others have told us about creating win-win situations. Is there such a thing as a win-win game – a game where everyone wins, where no one loses? Can you devise a game where you can put your competitive streak toward a larger goal? Can the proverbial pie be made larger? As someone said to me, to transform from "me winning" to "we winning".

What's the name of the game? Win as much as you can!

Who's responsible for your score? I am!

The game Alicia played with the inmates was called "the handshake game". She had them pair up by size, height and weight and explained the rules. "We'll play the game for 45 seconds. You get one point when your hand taps his hip; he gets one point when his hand taps your hip."

The vast majority of the pairs had a combined score of 0 points. A few pairs scored in the 10 – 20 point range.

But one pair scored 260 points.

The high scorers had realized that the name of the game and scoring responsibility did not define a win-lose (or "zero-sum") game. That is, one person did not win at the expense of the other.

Of course, the entire thing was a set-up. Alicia paired them up by size, height and weight to set the expectation that it was an evenly matched contest. She got them chanting to get their excitement up.

And she neglected to tell them that the pair was a team and the team members' scores would be combined.

"Deliberately I didn't tell them they were supposed to cooperate with their partner. I also never told them who the competitors were."

We all know that a "formal" team must cooperate to win. The revelation here was that by cooperating they could maximize their individual scores.

What's the name of the game? Win as much as you can!

Who's responsible for your score? I am!

The rules say nothing about preventing the other person from getting a high score. The pair who "got it" quickly settled into a rhythm of "one for you and one for me". And they could have kept that up for as long as the game ran. Meanwhile, the other teams were struggling and would have exhausted themselves long before the winners did. And, when the few teams who did spot the pair who "got it" there were charges of "cheating" leveled at them. "We saw what they were doing but thought they were cheating or didn't understand the rules."

The cooperation – competition confusion is nicely summed up in the concept called "the prisoners' dilemma". Two people are arrested for a crime and there is enough evidence to put them both in jail for 1 year.

The police keep them isolated from each other and offer each the same deal: "If one of you talks and the other does not, the snitch goes free and the other one gets 3 years. If you both talk, you both get 2 years."

The partners can work together (by staying silent) and both get only a year in jail. By both defecting from the partnership to work with the police they will both get 2 years.

A single defector will go free while the one who cooperated gets 3 years.

The dilemma is formed by pitting trust against greed. The temptation of greed combined with a habit of competition blinds us to a different perspective.

But don't think that only prisoners are subject to this. When Alicia has had groups of corporate executives play this game, they fall into the same behavior pattern as the prisoners. In fact, in some corporate sessions nobody "gets it".

There seems to be a dichotomy between competing and winning. The idea of cooperating to win seems odd. In fact, we see other players complain that the ones who "get it" are cheating!

What you do depends on your view of the game. If the game is seen as a one-time event, why not be brutal – there will be no consequences. But if this event is one in a series, then cooperation is clearly the better long-term strategy, if only because there will be a chance for the other to get even.

In studies of prisoners' dilemma style games (played for points and not reduced jail time) the players eventually settle into a strategy dubbed "tit for tat". Their actions are saying, "If you cooperate last time, I'll cooperate next time. If you defected last time, I'll defect next time."

Using the word "defect" helps us see the shift – the opposite of cooperating (working on the same side) is defecting to the other side.

The desire to compete and the desire to win are not the same.

Game terminology (strategies, tactics, moves, etc.) is often applied to "serious" parts of life. Because the word game has a connotation of triviality, we sometimes bristle at its use to describe the things that mean the most to us.

What if we kept in mind that 'it's all a game' – would we behave differently?

Philosopher James P. Carse writes in the first chapter of Finite and Infinite Games, "There are at least two kinds of games. One could be called finite, the other infinite. A finite game is played for the purpose of winning, and infinite game for the purpose of continuing the play."

The book's subtitle is "A Vision of Life as Play and Possibility." His premise is that a game is about the relationship between the player.

In the book he characterizes two types of players. Finite players play within the rules, infinite players play with the rules. Finite players play to end the game (with their victory), infinite players play to continue the game (by whatever means they see fit). Finite players play to win, infinite players play to keep playing.

The players who "get it" are playing with the rules looking to transform a finite game into an infinite one.

If this article has intrigued you we encourage you to look at the various "games" that you are "playing" and with whom. Who are your "teammates" and what kind of game are you playing? With increased awareness of our behavior, and the behavior of others, we are able to create a "win as much as WE can" mentality.

© Copyright 2004 Alicia Smith Consulting & Training. All Rights Reserved.

This article was written by Alicia Smith as told to John Satta

Alicia Smith is a Coach and Trainer whose specialty is helping business people to Make Money Now. She has taught over 10,000 people how to improve their business bottom lines. To learn more about her courses, products and services, please visit http://www.AliciaSmith.com

State Department And Negotiation Ramifications

Writen by Lance Winslow

It seems the United States State Department has their work cut out for them as they deal with dictators and foreign leaders who are problematic for peace in the world. Worse off much of the world runs on guns, drugs, arms, gems, worthless currency and human trafficking. It makes it rather tough to deal with some of these leaders of these Third World countries as they try to dictate policy and kill anyone in their way.

But sometimes in life you have to do business with questionable people, look at what our Department of State has to go thru with China, Syria, Lebanon, Nigeria, Venezuela, and about 35 others? You have to hand it to the State Department, as they deal with these scoundrels around the world. Also it seems that although the United Nations is sometimes called corrupt, you have to understand who they have to deal with on a daily basis.

Humankind is problematic and the primate politics of the world are even worse, but what can you expect from a bunch of sub humans? If the State Department does not negotiate and keep such people close to the vest then they can never keep America safe or keep our early warning detection systems operational to prevent us from being attacked or blindsided or cold-cocked by one of these ruthless scoundrels. Please consider this in 2006.

"Lance Winslow" - Online Think Tank forum board. If you have innovative thoughts and unique perspectives, come think with Lance; http://www.WorldThinkTank.net/wttbbs/