INKOVEMA Podcast „Well through time“
#240 GddZ
Negotiation theory. Part 2 - Preparation for negotiations
Why prepare at all - and above all, how specifically?
In conversation with Dr Jörg Schneider-Brodtmann
Studied law in Tübingen, Geneva/Switzerland, Heidelberg; Master of Laws (Mediation and Conflict Management), European University Viadrina, Frankfurt (Oder). Lawyer of the Year for Technology Law, Handelsblatt / Best Lawyers 2022 and 2024; Recommended for IT and Technology Law, Handelsblatt / Best Lawyers 2022, 2023 and 2024; Recommended for Data / Information Technology, Who's Who Legal Global and Germany 2022 and 2023; One of the most renowned lawyers for IT law, WirtschaftsWoche 34/2019.
Small series: Negotiation theory
Contents
Chapter:
Chapter
0:17 Welcome to the podcast
0:21 Negotiation theory and preparation
4:53 Value of the preparation
7:26 Mediation perspective on negotiations
12:40 Challenges of target definition
15:17 Importance of self-clearance
23:44 Emotions in negotiations
31:40 Alternatives to agreements
35:33 Negotiation tactics and strategies
39:02 Developing solutions
47:03 Review and outlook
detailed summary:
In this episode of "Gut durch die Zeit", we looked at the essential topic of negotiation theory and in particular the Preparation for negotiations in the past. Together with Dr Jörg Schneider-Brodtmann, an expert in negotiation and conflict management, we discussed the crucial importance of thorough preparation. This phase is often underestimated by negotiators, although according to experts and our own experience, it is decisive for the course and success of a negotiation.
We looked at various aspects of negotiation preparation, starting with the The need to take your timeto compile all relevant information. This includes not only the understanding of one's own Goals and needsbut also analysing the Positions and interests of the other side. Dr Schneider-Brodtmann emphasised the importance of putting oneself in the other negotiating partner's shoes in order to make negotiations more effective.
We particularly focussed on various strategies for preparing for negotiations. We talked about how important it is to understand your own position well and at the same time possible Agreement alternatives to recognise. The fact that one's own negotiating power depends heavily on the alternatives one has was also discussed. Dr Schneider-Brodtmann explained that a strong negotiation result often depends on whether you are prepared to break off a negotiation and what alternatives are available to you.
Another key issue was the Differentiated consideration of interests and positions. We have discussed that it is helpful not only to clarify your own interests, but also to focus on those of the other party. This promotes a better understanding and perhaps even a co-operative negotiating atmosphere. Emotional aspects and their role in negotiations were also addressed. We realised that it is important to both allow emotions and keep them in check in order to facilitate a productive negotiation.
Finally, we have discussed some practical tips for organising negotiations. From setting up the team to the logistical aspects such as the negotiation venue and the type of meeting - all these factors play a role and should be taken into account in the preparation. The exchange made it clear that adequate preparation requires not only time, but also strategic thinking. We look forward to diving deeper into specific tactics and strategies in future episodes.
Complete transcription
[0:08]Welcome to the podcast Gut durch die Zeit, the podcast about mediation,
[0:17]
Welcome to the podcast
[0:12]Conflict coaching and organisational consulting, a podcast by Inko Firma. I am Sascha Weigel and welcome you to a new episode.
[0:21]
Negotiation theory and preparation
[0:22]And in this episode, we'll be tackling the topic of negotiation theory and looking at how to prepare for negotiations. And when I say we, I mean my regular guest here when it comes to negotiation or conflict management systems, Dr Jürgen Schneider-Brotmann. Hello Jürgen. Good morning, Sascha. Good morning, that's right. It's another good morning. We've got an early start here with road traffic, technology and everything and are now equipped with coffee and can take our time to prepare for negotiations, for which, in the experience of professional negotiators at least, people generally take too little time, would take too little time if they weren't well accompanied and advised. Is that also your experience, Jörg? Yes, I think it's fair to say that preparation is crucial for the course and possibly also the success of a negotiation.
[1:34]And this is always emphasised by all lecturers and in all seminars, but in practice it is of course different. And I can confirm this myself from my own experience. So often there simply isn't enough time, either you don't realise that preparing for the negotiation is a key factor or there isn't enough time or you realise too late that you have a negotiation and it just goes under or you feel confident anyway and think I know everything and that can then take its toll in the negotiation. Yes.
[2:11]It seems to be the case. I often find that knowledge is really lacking, at least with mediants. What should I actually do in preparation? I know what I want and then I have to see if I can get it that easily.
[2:25]In other words, there is actually a lack of methods and knowledge components on how to prepare for a negotiation. Before we get to the details, it's like driving a car or other complex activities in that it takes less effort. As a professional negotiator and negotiation assistant, can you say, "I can do that in my sleep today, I've done it so many times before, I don't need to prepare myself that much? That's more of a question for beginners. Or is it something where you already put your foot in your mouth, so to speak? What's it like for you? Yes, of course it sometimes happens to me that for whatever reason I go into a negotiation perhaps not fully prepared or really unprepared. And then of course there's the one thing, which is of course the routine in the negotiation, being able to react accordingly and sort yourself out. And if you have a lot of experience in negotiations, then the situation as such is not stressful at first. For many people who don't have that much experience, it is stressful.
[3:42]But still, I just had an appointment last week. I had to have two different conversations in connection with the mediation. And I really only realised five minutes before one of the conversations that the other party was the person I was talking to. And I had prepared myself for one, but not for the other. And that's how it actually turned out.
[4:09]That didn't go optimally. Yes, it didn't go perfectly. Did you get the impression they realised that? No, I can't say that I did. I also hope that nobody here is listening. Yes, exactly. I was just about to say that you did 35 mediations last week. So if anyone recognises themselves somehow, that's pure coincidence. Exactly, that's how it is. Joking aside. No, I don't think so. And that's exactly the point, the issue of routine. How can you still position yourself well? But then I just realised, okay, at that moment, just five minutes before the start of the hearing, my blood pressure went up a bit. And I simply had to rethink things for a moment.
[4:53]
Value of preparation
[4:53]That's when I really realised what the value of negotiation is. Preparation, sorry. Preparation, exactly.
[5:01]And I would also say that this is relatively independent of the topic. So when it comes to salary negotiations, everyone somehow realises that they need to prepare and goes through it again. What are the arguments in favour of this? I'm sure he wants to know why he should pay me more now. And so, I think that's easy to do. But preparations for other negotiation issues and negotiation topics are also, I would say, not standardisable, but the same topics should always be dealt with in some way. We'll come to those in a moment, what you can do in preparation. But I would say that this is really independent of the negotiation topic, that it entails the same necessity. So the whether, so to speak, yes, definitely.
[5:52]After all, most negotiations are about factual issues. And then, of course, the preparation of the facts of the case, obtaining information, etc. is simply a matter of time.
[6:02]That is already a basic requirement. And of course there are differences depending on the complexity of the topics.
[6:08]Yes, that's clear. Salary negotiations are also complex, but the topic is very clearly defined. When it comes to a large contract or in the company, negotiations between the management and the works council are of course much more complex. Yes, but there can also be negotiations where, at the end of the day, it's really only about relationship issues. And here, too, I would say that it's natural, or perhaps even more so, to consider beforehand what I actually want to achieve, what's important to me and how I want to get my message across. Yes, in the case of neighbourhood issues, for example, that you sit down with the neighbours because, for example, the children are either always playing loudly or occasionally quarrelling and fighting with the neighbour's children. And if you sit down together, then it would also make sense to prepare. And how we organise this in concrete terms, that's where we come in now. And that also applies to mediators, and I'd like to make the same point. What's it like for you in mediation, if you know,
[7:26]
Mediation perspective on negotiations
[7:21]the parties will have to negotiate and do they want to? We are now coming to these issues, so to speak, where there will actually be negotiations and haggling or escalation again.
[7:38]How do you prepare for them, i.e. is it a similar preparation for you as a mediator, because you think your way into the negotiation or are you more likely to go into your pain and say, I'll negotiate with them so that they negotiate co-operatively and don't escalate any further?
[7:57]So perhaps you are now speaking to these centres, so to speak. We said in our last conversation that every mediation is basically a negotiation. At some point it comes to the oath, the decision, the distributive part, as we say. Exactly, in advanced mediation. So in the last third or so, if we divide it up like that. Exactly, when it comes to distribution. So when you've enlarged the cake nicely, ideally together, and at some point it's about saying, okay, who gets which piece and who gets the strawberry on the cake.
[8:32]And for me, preparation has two aspects. Firstly, the preparation with the parties. In other words, really preparing this negotiation sequence so well that you then really know what the key issues are. Yes, and I also do this now in business mediation, often in one-to-one meetings. You make sure that they are prepared. Exactly, and I might even play with them in advance, I do a kind of comparison of expectations, as a kind of reality check, as far as their positions and ideas are concerned. So that's the preparation with the parties. I also send the parties to prepare, so to speak. I also give them homework, in inverted commas, topics to deal with. And then, of course, I also have to prepare myself as a mediator because of my responsibility for the process. Yes, I have to give the whole thing a structure. I have to think about, yes, how should the negotiation proceed? Yes, in what order, which topics should we perhaps use which tools? Yes, so in any case, as a mediator, preparation is also a crucial issue.
[9:48]Then I would say, let's get started. What is central for you, where you say, well, you have to think about that at least three minutes beforehand, if you still have them... Think about it. Exactly. For one thing, I should know what it's about. To be in the right film, so to speak. Exactly. But make the names clear. Exactly. Not like the judge who sits in court in the morning and calls the case and then the parties are surprised because it somehow sounds completely different. Yes, it all happens. We're sitting in the wrong hearing room or the judge has simply got the wrong file. Exactly. So you should know what it's about. You should know who is involved or should be involved. So what are the relevant issues, who are the people involved, who is affected by the matter. And if I am now a party to the negotiations myself, then of course I need to know what I actually want. So if I stumble into the negotiations, as you did earlier in the example, and don't actually know exactly what I want, then the negotiation will be unstructured and probably won't lead to good results.
[11:03]Then perhaps an additional point, if I may add it. And that is, so to speak, the counterpart to the fact that I know what I want. So what are my goals? Is the issue, yes, what do I do if we don't get anywhere in the negotiation? So if we simply don't come to an agreement or if I don't manage to achieve my goals, what do I do then? That's an important topic, and we'll definitely get round to it. Yes, that's the buzzword, that seems to be the alternative, the best thing to do. What often happens to me in mediations, when I listen carefully to the mediants, is that the parties take a mental shortcut when asked what they want and start talking about what they don't want.
[12:08]Do you know that too? What are they after? What do they want? And then they think about it for a moment and then they're like, I definitely don't want to lose the house. Or I definitely don't want it to be like this or that. And they could go on and on. So there's a whole lot that they don't want, but it's really difficult or somehow the work isn't done, what do I want specifically, formulated positively, so that it's more difficult.
[12:40]
Challenges of target definition
[12:41]So have you also made this observation or do you know it too? Absolutely, yes. It's not just in mediation, but also in coaching, that people often realise that we know very well what we don't want, but what we actually really want is much harder for us to realise. I think that's also a certain way of thinking that we simply have. And yes, that might already be part of the task. Of course, it would be a bit late in the negotiation if you only then start to think positively about what you want. That's why it's the central issue that I would first try to clarify in preliminary discussions with both parties in preparation or in mediation: yes, what is it about, what do they actually want? As long as this self-clarification is not there, there is of course no basis for interest-based negotiation afterwards.
[13:40]So it's similar. It's difficult to determine what I want and when I do, that doesn't always happen, but I'll take two or three cases from my head that typically happen when I do draw attention to it and approach it with various interventions, okay, I know everything they don't want, but it's not exactly what they want. And then two or three times, well, I'd prefer, I'm really relieved, that the sentence continues when this and that happens or I get this and that. But then I can imagine that the other person doesn't want that and then they have conditions or they have something against it.
[14:24]Then comes the projection onto the other side, so to speak, and then you're actually back in the Stor. That is not mentioned then. So if it's either already been snipped away, so to speak, or it's not held firmly enough mentally, that's what I want. And now it's time for the negotiation. So that's not the result yet, it's only the negotiation. Many people find it very difficult to formulate something that they may not get but actually want. Yes, it's probably a general psychological phenomenon. There are also studies that show that loss aversion, so to speak, is often greater than the will to win something. So to give away something that I already have or not to give it away is actually
[15:17]
The importance of self-clarification
[15:15]bigger and I think it's related to that. And that simply confirms that it makes sense before every negotiation and also everyday negotiations. We talked about everyday negotiations last time in the opening discussion. And even if you're negotiating with children about whether they can go to the football pitch again or whether they can still watch the series, I think it's very helpful and also very obvious that you should prepare well, because otherwise you won't make a dent.
[15:47]You will be affected. described yesterday evening, this morning, in an all-encompassing way, so to speak. And I also have it, so you do get a sting at some point, but it's not this scat sting that you get, but a crumb that you can be satisfied with. But these really are the toughest negotiating opponents. We have to feel our way round them. Maybe we need to make our own programme. Exactly, I think you mentioned this book last time, How to negotiate like a child. You can learn something from them. Yes, I have to say I'm only making slow progress with the book. Bit by bit, because I think I'm afraid that I'll find a truth in there that I want to avoid. Yes, but you're practising all the more. Right, right. I'll make sure that I don't reinforce my prejudices, but I'll dig out this book from time to time in the course of these episodes that we still have planned here, and then we'll see that positive, constructive steps might even be possible against these negotiating opponents. Very important, yes.
[17:03]How do you deal with the fact that when your clients, let's say, prepare for negotiations, you are a negotiation assistant and accompany people, perhaps only on one side and the others do it with other people. And you realise that they find it difficult to formulate the goal positively because it may not be what they get in the end. How do you methodically deal with this by confronting them or do you leave it at that and say it's enough if they know what they don't want? Yes, you should try to turn it into something positive. Of course, you can do it through reflections, you can also basically realise it. So, now we've established, now you've identified what you don't want. That's very important. Yes, and if you now go one step further, so to speak, if you ask yourself, you can of course also work with hypothetical functions or images, so if you ask yourself, if you are now at the end of the negotiation tomorrow and it went really well, what have you achieved then? Yes, that you get people into a positive mindset. But I would definitely try not to leave it at just defensive thoughts. Yes, that's really uncompromising. That's important for the preparation.
[18:29]Okay, what else is possible in the preparation, if we now know that we have our own goals, we have clarified who is sitting in front of us and what it is all about. What would then be the second possible thing, regardless of the topic of the negotiation, that is definitely worth recalling, noting down and deepening beforehand? Exactly, as I mentioned at the beginning, negotiations, or in fact practically every negotiation, is often about a specific topic.
[19:02]And it's all about being as well informed as possible. In other words, getting all the information, the famous figures, data and facts that I need in order to go into the negotiations well. And depending on what the negotiations are, in commercial negotiations, of course, the figures have to be at the start. In technical negotiations, the technical issues simply have to be clarified as far as possible. There may also be legal issues to clarify in advance. If I now think of divorce proceedings, then utility expenses must be equalised and corresponding issues must be clarified. These are simply issues where I need to inform myself as well as possible so that I'm well prepared when it comes to the issues at the hearing. And also to clarify again, what has been done so far? What has already happened? Yes, perhaps also, what has the other side already done? Who are perhaps the people I meet on the other side? Yes, my negotiating partners, what do I know about them? So there is a whole range of topics, factual information that you should then simply obtain. This is simply the basis for being able to start the negotiation in an informed manner.
[20:21]Perhaps the point here is to also address the individual narratives that the parties to the conflict have. So if they want something, they have an authorisation story in their head as to why they are entitled to it. You have just mentioned in a divorce mediation that if it becomes critical for the division of individual assets, then reasons and stories come up as to why one person should be entitled to one thing and the other person can also get the other.
[20:55]In this preparatory phase, should I concern myself with my stories and narratives, but also with those of others, in order to prepare myself argumentatively? Things have often already been exchanged. Is there anything else you can do to have justification reasons, to undermine them? Is that worthwhile preparation or is it something you should react to depending on the situation? Yes, ideally yes, yes. So ideally, and this is also how we learn when we do negotiation training, yes, ideally I try to change my perspective, to put myself in the shoes of the other person, so to speak, and see how they look at the issue or the other person, yes. And what could be important for him or her? Unfortunately, that doesn't happen in practice, especially with emotionally charged topics. I mean, you know that from mediation, of course. This step is incredibly difficult and often only really succeeds in the course of mediation. Or if it does, then you've already achieved an incredible amount.
[22:20]Yes, I think this is where I have differences - or I would want to make differences, I'm not quite sure yet - between negotiation and mediation, conflict resolution. And I come up with the idea, I don't even know what it's called, some negotiation expert, he said, don't deal with the other side's reasons. That's not their work, it's the other side's work and they get caught up in it because they want to build a fair narrative and want to distribute things. And the main reason for this was, above all, to avoid emotionalisation. So it should be a sober distribution negotiation. I think that was this...
[23:11]I think Matthias Schranner, who also has a sales negotiation background, is talking about this. But the point is that he wants to keep the emotionalisation out of it, which is often the issue in conflict resolution. In other words, the parties are already emotionally charged with each other and need to clarify to some extent how they see and understand things, how they remember things, misunderstandings about the shared history,
[23:44]
Emotions in negotiations
[23:41]to clarify the shared history of the conflict. And it seems to me that there really is a different setting when it comes to conflicting parties who have a history of conflict and need to clarify that this could also become necessary again in the negotiation phase, because you realise that you have completely different memories of what happened and a negotiation situation where it's already about distribution, who gets which strawberry.
[24:14]Would you say that can be separated? So what is your experience of what is practicable? Yes, I think you also have to differentiate according to the type of negotiation. So if it's a purely economic issue between two companies, it's about who some project has failed and now it's about how the euros are distributed afterwards, who still has to pay what, does one party get damages etc.? We don't have this relationship level and this memory level that you're talking about now. Of course, it's different when we have a family, children perhaps in an inheritance dispute. It's about somehow distributing the parents' inheritance. Yes, then of course this other level, the emotional level, plays a completely different role. And yet I would say that when preparing for negotiations, which is where we are right now, it is very important to consider the position of the other side in advance. So what do they want? So we've been talking about it for a long time, what do I want? How do I get there? What do I want? But also to deal with what do they want? Because that, of course, already marks out the field on which we play, the playing field.
[25:44]And then in the second step, and here we are perhaps already at the central topic of negotiation preparation, not to stop at this position level, but to really look at what the underlying interests are, namely as in mediation. And that applies to both me and my negotiating partner. So why is what I'm asking for important to me? And vice versa, yes, why try? Of course, this is a hypothetical exercise as far as my negotiating partner is concerned. But what could be important for him and why? So that would also be the transition in the preparation from the figures, data, facts and positions to the interests. So do I have an understanding of why the other person is making the claims they are making? Do I still have questions? Are there any unanswered questions? Can I understand it? And if not, then it's really important to write down questions that you can then ask again, i.e. if you can't categorise something. Exactly, and now you can of course ask yourself the question, why should I go to all this trouble? If there are positions, clear demands, then I know what it's all about. But then they clash uninhibitedly in the negotiation, so to speak.
[27:09]And if I manage to think in advance, so to speak, or if both parties do this, ideally in mediation, about what the underlying interests are, what could be important for one side or the other, then we can of course get over the hurdle to the solution level more easily than if we remain stuck in our positions.
[27:33]That is also a central element. It really seems to me to be a different approach. From the development of mediation, I am of course very familiar with this search for interests and also the sometimes one-sided processing of interests in the preparation towards a joint solution with the question of whether it is also feasible for the other party, whether it is acceptable and whether it is a very cooperative event. And if you don't do that, it quickly leads to emotional escalation, outrage that the other person can even think and demand such a thing. And with the approach I mentioned earlier, the aim was always to be cool, so to speak, to always be friendly and not to engage in this emotionality in order to strengthen your own position. That's a completely different approach. So that becomes particularly clear to me at the point where the approach also leads to really different detailed work and looking at what I have to pay attention to.
[28:45]Yes, I find that interesting in that respect and can really make it clear once again that the negotiation within a mediation has this conflict as a context that is already there, that was already there and that led to this negotiation situation in the mediation. And the pure negotiation situations, there is not yet this conflict context, but it should not even come about through the negotiation. Exactly, that's what I just wanted to say. The conflict often arises during the negotiation, so to speak. So if the positions, the demands clash without protection and there is no filter in between, then a conflict, a dispute often arises, which then actually overshadows the actual subject of the negotiation. And that's why I believe that you can and should not ignore this preoccupation with what could play a role for the other side, so to speak. Yes, I can understand that.
[29:52]And that one of the aims of the other negotiating approach is not to get outraged or otherwise emotionally inflamed under any circumstances, so that sometimes you really have to ask yourself how the other person can remain so calm. It's just now, everything is going wrong and everything is clashing. But professionalism is then attributed to who is prepared and calm and that is a completely different approach. Whereas mediation tends to be more emotional. Sometimes it's even aimed at in the hope of using the true emotions, the actual emotions, to create connections. Yes, although I don't see that much of a difference, because even in negotiation, if the emotions are there, they will find their way. You know that too. And even if you try to keep them under a cool surface, somewhere in a small remark or somewhere else, they come out and for me they also belong in the negotiation room.
[31:03]But of course it's more difficult or the parties are in the negotiation room and they have to get along with each other themselves. There's no Sascha Weigel there to moderate things and then take them up accordingly. With me, it's just moderated. Moderated through, exactly. Moderated through. Yes, exactly.
[31:27]Make us objective when it's also personal. Yes, but that the emotions are there and emerge and that's the same in one case as in the other, yes.
[31:40]
Alternatives to agreements
[31:40]Well, yes, then let's tackle another point that we have already hinted at, which then also emerges quite logically here, when you look at the interests, clarify what you actually want, what is it all about for me and have to come to terms with the situation, it may be that this is not fulfilled. And how much am I prepared not to achieve? And then you automatically come to the question of when the negotiation is over for me, partly because there is no agreement and I have better things to do. Then I have something better to do if that is not possible. This alternative outside of the agreement, which has been given the colourful term BATNA, is the best alternative to a negotiated result.
[32:33]How important is it to you that the parties think about this beforehand and see it as a preparatory aspect? Yes, for me it's the complementary piece to what I want, what I want to achieve in the negotiation, so to speak. Because my motivation, how strong my motivation is to achieve it, to want to achieve it or to have to achieve it, depends on how strong the alternatives are and what alternative options I have if I don't achieve it. And that makes it a very central element for negotiating power. Yes, the stronger my alternative is, so if I can simply say, for example, nice English word, walk away, alternative, yes, so I can simply walk away, I can simply leave the negotiation, I can simply not negotiate and that doesn't make it any worse for me, yes. A strong position. A strong position, yes. It might even mean that the negotiation doesn't take place at all. But there are of course many other alternatives when two companies negotiate with each other. I think we've already had this example in another discussion.
[33:43]Supplier relationship with the manufacturer. And if the manufacturer has different suppliers, then he naturally has a different position in the negotiations. If he can say, yes, if it doesn't work out with you A, then I'll just go to B tomorrow. Yes, that is, if he is actually dependent on concluding a contract with this one supplier. So I think it's quite obvious that this, nice German word, non-agreement alternative is a central issue and that people are dealing with it. And, I would also say here, also reflected, yes, both with my own alternatives and with the alternatives of my negotiating partner. So let's take another closer look at that. The Basner and the SOPA there, the zone of agreement possibilities. So that's another point in the preparations that we'll be looking at in more detail. I would like to ask another question here, because we have made it clear what this agreement alternative is all about and being able to say that I can also leave from a strong position automatically leads to the question, really? Or are you just pretending? So the issue of bluffing.
[35:04]What strategy or experience do you have with the topic, in this case with bluffing? On the one hand, I only have to act as if I have a strong alternative agreement. But that also applies to the other side, that if the other party makes it clear that they are not dependent on this negotiation result, then I also accuse them of bluffing. So there are risk areas for both. What is your recommendation?
[35:33]
Negotiation tactics and strategies
[35:34]Yes, that brings us to the subject of negotiating tactics. Yes, we will certainly come back to that when we look at the negotiations, not just the preparation, but also the process. Yes, but perhaps it also fits in here, because of course I have to and should think in advance about how I want to achieve my goals in the negotiation. In other words, what strategies and tactics will I use? And that's part of it.
[36:07]And yes, bluffing and corresponding things, games in inverted commas, are of course popular. The classic is that you almost always encounter this, especially in a corporate context. Yes, when you go into a negotiation, the managing director says, well, I'm the good guy and you as the lawyer are the bad guy. Yes, and that's where I'm naturally strong and say, that's exactly how we do it. Yes, those are the classics exactly. When preparing for negotiations, I would perhaps take a slightly more differentiated approach in normal cases. Yes, but it's actually not just knowing what I want and what I don't want. Yes, my goal, my non-agreement alternative, but also how do I want to achieve my goal? Yes, what steps, what means do I want to use to achieve it? And, of course, the question of who will take on which role if I have a negotiating team? Yes, who takes on which role? Apart from good cop, bad cop. That is a central part of the preparation. We also need to take a closer look at this. So what strategies are there? Which ones can be used and how? And also expect the other person to understand that? Or what attributions do they have? That really seems to me to be a topic in its own right.
[37:25]Absolutely. And then, of course, there's the whole issue of what style do I actually use in the negotiation? We already discussed this in our preparatory meeting. Is it more co-operative, integrative or are we going to be very competitive? Or do we divide up the roles in the team? Key questions for the preparation.
[37:50]Okay, if I take the overview now, we have clarified which topic is actually on the agenda. We've looked at our goals or, together with the clients, what they want to achieve. We looked at possible goals of the other side. We made sure that we at least had all the parties and issues on the list. We also noted down the key points, what has already happened and what the figures and facts and figures are. And it's clear that this isn't something you just do a quarter of an hour beforehand. Even if the appointment only lasts an hour, I may have to make time for it the day before. In terms of the ratio, too. And then really make my interests clear again. Why do we actually want this? And what would we do if we didn't get it here? How can we do it differently? What else would you say before we really get started and consider the preparations to be complete? We still have to finish this, otherwise we would really have an open point that could fall on our feet.
[39:02]
Developing solutions
[39:02]Exactly, so ideally I already develop ideas for solutions, especially for distribution conflicts, but also for other topics or distribution negotiations. There doesn't always have to be a conflict. But I do develop initial ideas about how the whole thing could turn out. Can I already think about whether I want to make a concrete offer or not?
[39:29]And this is based on these interest profiles that I have created. So if I have considered in advance what my interests are, what the interests of the other parties are, then of course it is easier for me to develop certain approaches to solutions. That would be another key point for me, because of course a negotiation can already do that, and you notice that, so you also notice it strongly, does my negotiating partner perhaps already have a few ideas in their quiver or not? Yes, that becomes noticeable, perceptible in the negotiation and that can of course speed up a negotiation considerably. So and perhaps also, what arguments do I have and what criteria are there to make my proposed solutions palatable to the other party. That would be another key element.
[40:18]And finally, of course, all these practical questions, the external framework. Yes, how should the negotiation take place? Where do you meet? Who will be there? That is of course the agenda, who makes a proposal for the agenda etc.? That's the external framework. Do we negotiate in person or online? These are all topics that are part of the negotiation. But that's more the practical level. Yes, we'll have to deal with that later in a separate programme, i.e. what you can consider for negotiations or where you can think about how to do it. So, then Jörg, for the moment, I think I have the impression that there is a framework and not necessarily a checklist, but a list of topics where you can say that you can at least go through this in your head before every negotiation. And afterwards, I already realise that when we've talked about it, it gives me a different impression and a different feeling about what's coming up. So I feel prepared in the best sense of the word.
[41:23]Yes, that's how it is. If you do that, I did my example at the very beginning, where I had prepared myself but for the wrong party, I just didn't feel prepared at that moment and then had to make up for it depending on the situation. And that was of course much more difficult than if I had taken half an hour in advance to prepare for the right party. I'll make a note of the topic of improvisation in negotiations.
[41:54]Improvisation is a very important topic. A topic of its own. You have to improvise. You always have to improvise. That's part of it, of course. But actually, the more you have prepared, the better you can improvise. That's how I would put it. Okay.
[42:13]Good. That brings us to the end of today's programme. And thus the first part of this series, after the opening series of course, the second part to be precise. We will then proceed in further steps in the near future. I would almost recommend that we take a look, I don't know about you, at what would be the next step if we want to maintain good order. But the topic BATNA and ZOPA I think it's also important to understand what constitutes a negotiation, i.e. why you negotiate there and don't go somewhere else, but also to clarify whether there is a zone of agreement at all. I once made a programme about this in another podcast here in the mediation episodes, a series, because the parties wanted to reach an agreement and knew that they had to. It was about the amount of maintenance that two parents had to pay. But it was unclear whether their ideas had any scope at all. And that we could be quite helpful as mediators. We may take that up again, but there are of course other issues and cases where these two things are relevant.
[43:30]Exactly, I had it Yes also earlier said, also for me the central Element in the Preparation. On the one hand these Elaboration the Interest profiles, what are mine Interests, what could Interests the other Party be and even quasi as Counterweight or as Foundation for the Interests, perhaps can one so formulate, the Alternatives. And I believe, the is what, what perhaps on least intuitive is for someone, the itself with Negotiations still not so busy has. That I me Thoughts make about it, what because happens, when I in the Negotiation not Successful am. The wants one Yes actually first not know. Yes, because frequently overestimated one Yes perhaps also so the own Position, this Overoptimism. The know we yes, this Phenomenon. And the must the other but also understand, because I have but simple right. I white but, like it goes. And itself so that to employ, what happens because, when me the simple times not succeeds, the is perhaps the most difficult Part and therefore determined meaningful, when we us there deepened with deal with. Jörg, many Thanks to for the Prelude here and wish you one good Time and then until everything soon Yes, many Thanks to Sascha for the like always stimulating Conversation and I happy me on the Continued, Ciao Bye bye.
[44:53]Part 2 our Negotiation theory before all Things also with View on Negotiations in the Context from Mediation with Dr. Jörg, Dr. Jörg Schneider-Brodtmann and not Dr. Juergen Schneider, there have we as Leipzig one other History in addition. We have about Preparations spoken, Preparations for negotiations and that them Important is with all underestimated Existence, the them is still alive. But one can not enough Time in the Preparation stuck. Man can a Ratio Perhaps specify, for the Duration the Negotiation at least, absolute Minimum dimension, just as much Preparation time. The Recommendations Go until to the Twentyfold on Preparation time in the Ratio to the, like then the Negotiation time presumably be becomes or set is. So the shows already clearly, that itself for the Preparation more Time taken become must as General towards thought and done.
[46:01]And in the Doubts then simple still more Time in favour take and we have today before all Things about the Points spoken, the there also processed become want and on those is already clear become, the lasts a little Time. So not only the Figures, Data, Facts together, lasts his Time. The can one itself fast clear make, when one Themes takes, like to the Example Decision mediation, what the Participants on Knowledge, on Data, on Facts collate must, so that them the good decide can.
[46:36]The is simple not on one Afternoon simple so times done. We have about the Themes the Alternative cleaning spoken, so what are the Alternatives to one Agreement. We have here also addressed Negotiation strategies, the clarified become want, Negotiation tactics. The have we but only touched on, because we the simple deepen become in coming Episodes, because the is not everything here to accommodate.
[47:03]
Review and outlook
[47:03]For the Moment thank you I me with you and yourselves, that her here again with thereby maintained at the Podcast Good through the Time, the Podcast round at Mediation, Conflict coaching and Organisational consulting. When you the Programme please has, the Podcast generally appeals, then leave behind but a Like and one Star rating, with pleasure also one Comment, like it you pleases or what you still please could, whom we here still also to the Topic negotiate, ins Studio invite should, so that the also for you one perfect round Matter becomes. Say the Colleagues Notification, that here podcasted becomes. The helps, that this Podcast more widespread becomes and the Topic much Encouragement receives.
[47:51]Come good through the Time. I am Sascha Weigel, yours Host from INKOVEMA, the Institute for Conflict and Negotiation management of the Leipzig and Partner for professional Mediation and Coaching training.
Leave A Comment