Click through to the good bits.

00:00 Introductions.

02:54 Art of Negotiation.

04:42 Why principles? Why not rules?

07:19 Separate the person from the issue.

14:04 Negotiate interest oriented.

15:02 Develop criteria that a solution must fulfill

18:25 Develop several options.

Martin Henley
Hello there, my name is Martin Henley. This is the effective marketing content extravaganza. And if you’re new here, you won’t yet know that I’m on a mission to give you everything you need to be successful in your business. Providing, of course, what you need to be successful in your business is to know more about sales and marketing, and to be implementing that more effectively and more motivatedly if that’s a word. So what goes on here is every two weeks we will bring you the marketing news, myself and Melanie Farmer will speculate wildly about what’s happening in the marketing world and what effect it might have on your life. I will bring you whenever I can. Anyone with experience to share that might be useful for you. If you’re looking to be more successful in your business as part of the talk marketing series, we are bringing you the marketing jargon busting WT what the series, and I am reacting to the very best and the very worst of marketing content from the internet, which is what’s going on today.

Martin Henley
It’s been a while so bear with me, there is a little bit of Jeopardy here. Clay has lined us up with six potential videos that we can react to, I’ve got no idea what those videos are, what we will do is we will yes this is working, we will roll roll the dice, we will get a number between one and six and the number is three, we rolled one dice three. Okay. So far, so good. All you need to know is that this is the fourth attempt I’ve done at trying this, I haven’t got beyond the selection. So then if we go to over here, if we go to ah, if we go to the next thing, the next thing should be asking, here’s where our videos are. So 123 video is number three. So what I’m going to do is I’m going to take this URL, I’m going to take this URL, I’m going to copy it. And then what we’re going to do is we’re going to go to back to the internet, this is good, we’re going to go to you to and we’re going to look for this video, and we’re going to find out very shortly what it is that I’m going to be reacting to.

Martin Henley
What it is I’m going to be reacting to is, the Harvard principles of Negotiation. Let’s just make sure I’ve got that right. It is the Harvard Principles of Negotiation, the art of negotiation. Good choice, Clay. Okay, so I’m just going to change my camera up here. So it looks more like I’m looking at you. There we are. That’s not very good. can bring this down ever so slightly. So there you go. So now I’m looking at you. And we, my friends are going to enjoy the art of negotiation according to the Harvard Principles of Negotiation. So let’s see. So we know what’s going on here. This video has 1.4 4 million views. The channel has 1.5 5 million views. This is by far and away their most effective video, their most popular video here. They’ve got 32,000 subscribers, and they’ve posted 146 videos. This one seems to be okay. So this is the Eric Palmer Institutes it looks like it might be Germanic or Northern European or something like that. Okay, so waffling I’ve got my idea, you know, I get delegates all the time, engaged in tug of war. So I’ve got my idea of what negotiation is. So you know, I spent the first 10 years of my career selling exclusively. I’ve been selling since I graduated from university. So I’ve got 25 years experience of selling. So that’s what I’m bringing to this. Let’s see what the Harvard Principles of Negotiation are.

Martin Henley
Conflict and negotiation. Here’s my first recommendation. You’re going to be negotiating with someone, don’t be in conflict with them. That’s a stupid place to start. Nobody wants to lose 100% Nobody wants to lose. You’re making it worse for yourself if you start if you’re in a conflict with people,

Narrator
As I said before, this Harvard Model of negotiation is, is based on four principles. Before we go into these principles, we might want to reflect for a second. Why principles Why not rules. That’s quite interesting that the Harvard people choose to go for principles and not for rules, because if I’m guessing this guy’s German, have rules like in laws, chances are very high that that is too linear and too strict. And that people simply think if they follow these kind of rules, everything will be fine. Whereas if you have principles, it is much more organic, it’s much more wider.

Martin Henley
Flexible, I think, is the word he’s looking for. So if the rules are fixed, you want flexible kind of principles, like Flexibility is the key to negotiation. For me. I mean, I think understanding what the other person really needs is the key to negotiation. But we’ll see, well, this guy is did they tell us his name, we don’t know his name,

Unknown Speaker
Because you have lots of ways how to fulfil those principles. So it is important to realise that the Harvard people choose principle for cooperation as not rules. So that because cooperation needs the freedom and the creativity. So let’s go for these four principles. The, if you remember, we talked about when we talked about the five ways of how to deal in a negotiation, that we said, Okay, we do have these high interest or low interest in relationship, and we have the high interest or low interest into the issue you want to have. And let’s assume for a second, you’re negotiating with somebody you like, and you find very sympathetic, then it could be that you have a tendency to give in and to accommodate to the other person, so that you are have a tendency to play loose when or, on the other extreme, you do actually don’t like the other person. You might even hate the other person. And then it is possible that you have a tendency to play win, lose, because you don’t like the person, you don’t care for the relationship. So the Harvard people said, okay, in order to avoid these risks, that the quality of relationship interferes with your interest in the issue, you should separate them at all.

Narrator
So the first principle is, and that’s easy, said and hard to achieve. separate the person from the issue in real life, that would mean

Martin Henley
right? So I don’t know, what don’t I know, how can you separate the person from the issue? Like, if it’s, I mean, I’m assuming because I always assume this is like a business negotiation. But what if it’s something that’s more personal? Like if you’re fighting with your neighbours over like, where the boundary is between your two properties? Or if they’re continuously parking their car, I would say that’s not a negotiation. See, rather than Defining Principles, and rules, it’d be better if this guy defined what negotiation is before he started, really, because what are we negotiating? And here’s what I would say, 100%. Get the person to like you. You’re negotiating with, that’s a great place to start. Like, if you’re friends, don’t get into like, don’t be strangers. That’s insane. So at the very beginning of a sales relationship, my recommendation, build rapport, make friends, like 100%, make friends. Because if you’re going into a negotiation, you’ve got no feelings of these people, I’ve got no feelings for you. Why would they care? If you get what you need out from negotiation? Why would you care if they got what they need out in negotiation, all of this win, win, win, lose win rubbish is there is only a winner and there is only a loser. If you’re going to take this combative attitude to negotiation. By actually, my recommendation, when I talk to people about negotiations, get on the same team, you know, work out what you really need, work out what I really need, work out what you can really give up, work out what I can really give up, get to the point where everyone’s getting what they need out the negotiation. And if you can’t get to that point, then it’s perfectly fine for everyone just to walk away so well, that didn’t, you know, we couldn’t quite help each other in the way that we wanted to. So I don’t like this win lose. Like, as soon as it becomes a competition, nobody wants to lose a competition. So as soon as it becomes competitive, it’s over. And there is no win lose win when this doesn’t exist, because somebody’s going to walk away from this. feeling terrible about what’s going on. And now if you’ve won a customer because you’ve beaten them in a negotiation, or you’ve won, or you’ve taken on a new supplier because you’ve beaten them in a negotiation that isn’t sustainable, they are going to bear that growth forever. Maya Angelou is credited with saying, you’ll forget what people say you’ll forget what they do. You’ll never forget the way they make you feel. In negotiation people can get get really upset. And the reason is because they’re actually going out of their way to upset each other. So you’re getting a sense of where I’m coming from. Let’s see how this German fellows doing with this thing. So where are you back to you? Did he, I feel really bad that I don’t know his name. And we haven’t even done any, like rapport building like, did they tell us his name,

Narrator
you can negotiate very hard, but you should never be hard on the person, and friendly, and so on and so forth. Because it is in your own interest to understand the interests of the other people. And therefore, the other partner is not your enemy, it’s actually your partner. Otherwise, you don’t get what you want. And because otherwise, if you could simply order what you want, you wouldn’t negotiate. So the other party is your partner. So the first principle is separate the person from the issue. Don’t agree with a set hard actually to live. The second principle we already heard when we illustrated with the pumpkin example, if you remember, three people had a position, they all wanted the pumpkin. Since there was only one pumpkin, it was not possible to give everybody the pumpkin, there was too limited resources. The solution that was found was not found based on the position and focused on the position, but oriented on the interests of the people. You remember, one wanted the shell for for a Halloween mask, the other one wanted to serve. So we needed to meet and the third person, simply the seats. So the interest on the on the level of interest, it was possible to find a solution that everybody made happy. So a win win solution. So the second,

Martin Henley
good, okay, good. What are fantastic analogies, so bear with me. So bear with me, bear with me. Yes. So this is what you need to do. This is 100%, what you need to do is work out what everyone needs from the deal. And if I mean, that’s a fantastic analogy. If somebody only needs seed, somebody only needs the shell, somebody only needs the meat, then that’s ideal. But this is for me, it’s the point of negotiation to get to the point where you know this. So you don’t negotiate hard, you don’t ask anyone to give up something that they can’t really give up. And also, I think this guy is operating in a second language, and I can’t operate in a second language. So all kudos to him. But the issue is, was the issue was it’s not what they want out of the deal. Because what they want is what what is what they want, what they want, like. So the the question is, what do they need out of the deal? What do they need out of this arrangement to make it a good arrangement for them? And I think want is a dangerous word. Because you might want to beat me, like people do want to beat people in negotiations. That’s what they want to do. Some people just get off on winning, you know, they do. I don’t think that’s a great strategy. Because what happens is somewhere down the track, they’re going to remember how you made them feel. And they’re not going to want to do business with you for any longer than they possibly have to. So that’s not a sustainable position. So the question is, what do they need, and certainly, I’m not going to give up something I need for something that you just want to you know what I mean? So what needs to happen, what needs to happen is you get to a point in negotiation where everyone’s friends, everyone is genuinely interested in seeing a good outcome. And they are happy to discuss what they really need to take away from the thing. Because if you bring want into it, then one is just so subjective. And so selfish. Need is real. That’s what I think. I’m glad I’ve seen this video, this is like he’s burping, burping a little bit, I’m pologize for both of us. But this is a fantastic analogy, the pumpkin, the pumpkin, I’m going to remember that and I’m going to use it. Second principle,

Unknown Speaker
Second principles of the Harvard people for cooperation is you should not negotiate position focused but interest oriented. And later, when we come to the EU model, I will show you what kind of questions you have to ask in order to examine the interests of people who are negotiating. The third principle now is that and that is if you’re actually looking for a trick for Win win, you might find it here. The Harvard people found out that sometimes cooperation is not possible because people who are negotiating are going too fast too quick into solutions. You hear a problem and you immediately suggest a solution. And if all parties are doing this chances are very high that you then only negotiate these kinds of positions and you We end up with a compromise in the best of all worlds.

Narrator
In order to get to the Win win, they suggest now a different approach, they said, based on the interest, you should first develop criteria that must be fulfilled by a solution that you could say yes to. Or in other word, what conditions must be a good solution that you could say yes to fulfil. Just to illustrate this principle a little bit, just assume you want to invite somebody out for dinner for restaurant, and you want to make sure actually, that the person you invite to actually likes the restaurant? So you could ask this other person? How would you realise that the restaurant is a good restaurant for you, and then immediately, the person would tell you some conditions that must be fulfilled by a good restaurant, for example, a small menu, because a small menu for this person suggest that it is actually fresh cooked, or it might say, a certain quality of light. So and then you could elaborate a little bit more what kind of light the person means, like candle lights, or whatever. Or that a, there’s a certain quality of hygiene, or, and so on, and so forth, music and so on. So you would get a whole set of criteria that must be fulfilled. And the interesting thing about the criteria is, there are much more restaurants than only one restaurant that would fulfil the criteria. So working with criteria is kind opens a world of have lots of options. And whereas positions is only it must be we go to Chez Felix, for example. Yeah. So the third principle is, before creating a solution, agree on certain principles that must be fulfilled by a solution that you could say yes to. And so at that stage of the negotiation, we would have a set of criterias for party a, and we would have a set of criterias for party B. And you will find a win win solution in that moment where you find one option that fulfils all criterias of party a and all criterias of party B, win win. So this is how we get a win win solution. And the first principle is, and this is based on the research that people like to choose. So the Harvard people suggest,

Martin Henley
right, okay, good. So I really liked this now, I thought it was going bad, I actually really liked it, because, because what, because work on the criteria, this is exactly what I’m saying, like actually work on the criteria. So we are up to number four. Number two, what was number two? Number two was I can’t remember what number two was. But the basically saying the same thing, I just don’t like this, I’m going to look up a definition of win in a minute, because I think for you to win, somebody has to lose this idea of a win win situation. Like it, it doesn’t need to be competitive when is too competitive for me. So it’s interesting, we’re up to number four

Narrator
have different options to choose from. So they suggest don’t develop only one option, that then is the best solution, but maybe two, three or four options, and then take the criterias and evaluate your options by the criterias to find the best option. So that and by doing so, the solution that was found by the parties will be much more sustainable, because they also had the sense that actually had a choice. So, just to repeat these four principles of the Harvard Model of negotiation, it is separate the person from the issue negotiate not position focused, but interest oriented. Developed first criteria is that a good solution must fulfil and develop develop several options to choose from. So, if you follow these four principles, chances are very high that that you actually go for cooperation and that you avoid competition. And in the next chapter, I will then guide you through a pathway through conflict how actually to do this and how to apply these kinds of principles.

Martin Henley
Okay, good. All right. So interesting. I am just very quickly going to get a definition of Win, win definition. dictionary definition be successful or victorious in a contest or conflict, acquire or secure as a result of a contest conflict. bid or other endeavour, there are hundreds of prizes to be won, when as a noun, so that’s the verb to win the noun, a successful road result in a contest, conflict bet or other endeavour, a victory, like a win against Norway, for example. So when for me has no place really in a conversation about negotiation, because nobody wants to lose, that’s the thing nobody wants to lose. So why are you creating a situation by even using language like that? Where people lose? So I think, I mean, the way I teach negotiation is essentially there’s a buying signal, and then there might be an objection. So the objection might be, it’s too expensive. It’s too expensive might mean 20 things. So if you respond at that point, a little bit like he was alluding to, then you’re guessing and you’re probably going to get it wrong, what they mean by it’s too expensive. The correct response is just to ask, what exactly do you mean by that? And then they might say, one of these 20 things, I don’t think it’s worth 20, or I don’t think it’s worth the money that you’re proposing. I don’t have that much to spend, I have to get authorization, I can’t get authorization for this, or I can’t authorise something that’s that amount of money. We’re using another supplier that we’re charging as much less whatever these 20 things might be. Once you know, then you can address and exactly like he was saying, where you say you don’t go into fast with a solution. The response all the way through the negotiation should be if you’re the seller, what do you mean by that? So they’ll say, Well, I can’t authorise that amount of money. What do you mean by that? It means we’re going to have to get my boss involved. Okay. And what do you mean by that? Well, what I mean by that is that if we get my boss involved in there has to be a whole different level of investigation study, and all of these kinds of things. And it’s going to take this amount of time. Okay, and what do you mean by that? Well, what I mean by that is, we could probably get this done in the next three to six months, if we’re gonna get it done. Or what do you mean by that? What I mean by that is, I’d like to get it done. I need to get my boss involved. But I’d like to get it done. Okay, well, then let’s get it done. You know. So for me, this is much less antagonistic than I thought, but don’t talk about there can’t be a win win. There can’t be a win win win win doesn’t exist because you to win is to be successful or victorious. In a contest. Don’t set your negotiations up like a contest, make friends with the people that you want to do business with. And if they’re having challenges in actually buying the thing that you’re selling, work with them to overcome those challenges. That is the Henley model of negotiation. If you like it, or otherwise, let me know. And I’m not discounting the fact some people just really like to win, you know, some people really just like to win. And so if you’re in that kind of negotiation, ask yourself the question, what kind of customer or kind of supplier? Are these people going to be a little bit way a little way down the track? Is it really what actually worth getting yourself beaten up to get this thing done? Is what I would say, what we will do to end this I mean, that was I don’t know if this is a I don’t know if this is a this is clearly disguised interpretation of the Halfords principles of negotiation. I don’t know how accurate is. Let’s see what they’re saying in the comment. They’re saying, I feel ashamed that I’ll be 30 In two years, and I’ve never known any of these principles of negotiation. I will work relentlessly until I master these concepts. What a wonderful video cheers, G route, wherever you are, man, or, lady, go easy on yourself. It’s okay, if you get to 30. And you don’t know these four specific principles of negotiation. I’m almost 50 And I did not have a clue about it. You must remember the party sitting opposite also might have read the four principles. And let’s hope they have because then you’re going to start actually thinking about each other’s criteria earlier. I am 46 and doing a small business and doing a small business never heard of these business to until okay, it doesn’t really make sense. It’s important that they also know these principles. That is this is not about tricking people or parties to gain an advantage but seeking win wins can’t have a win win. See also Cobis third alternative or various iterations of restorative justice in non judicial systems, by the way, I may have misinterpreted your comment. If so I apologise. Everyone in these comments is absolutely lovely. Super cool explained Yes. Tam gaming. I make my MBA ATM and have to say this is an awesome presentation to understand it well and easy yes. Good. How Sonos do no separate the person from the issue negotiating opposition focus. Okay. Thanks for that. So no, the wrong way. One problem solution read more what I said the right way interests A’s goals plus B’s goals, to diagnosis A’s criteria is plus B’s criterias. Three design solutions and numeration deal as criterias you these criterias don’t know what that means? Okay, good. I mean, it’s, here’s the thing, here’s the thing, this is why I do these videos because I wasn’t thinking about negotiation. And I should be thinking about negotiation. I teach negotiation, we should all be thinking about negotiation. If you’re going into a sales situation, you need to have a plan, you know, you need to have a plan and the plan needs to be essentially, where are you right now? What do you need to get out of this relationship? And how are you going to go about getting it. So you should be thinking all the time about negotiation about sales conversations about what it is that you need to be doing in your life in your work, and that’s why I’m here with these videos as often as I can muster. Hope you found this interesting and useful. If you have found it interesting, useful, you know what you should be doing? You should be liking it should be subscribing should be commenting, you should be sharing, you should be doing all of those good things. You could head across the effective marketing company website and join our mailing list and you will get these little pearls of wisdom in your inbox every day. You lucky lucky sausages. Okay, my name is Martin Henley. This is the effective marketing content extravaganza. Do take the time to like, share, comment, subscribe, do all of those good things. And we will have something again for you very, very shortly.

WHAT DO YOU THINK?