Never accept each other's first round of quotation!Three major negotiating skills of the world's top negotiating masters

Life is everywhere.

Whether it is business cooperation, work interviews, family members, colleagues communicate ... Almost every time we interact with others, we can see the shadow of negotiations. As the most basic form of human activities, negotiations are hidden in every fine branch of our lives. It is art and technology, and it is a learning that is worth learning by everyone.

How to better learn to negotiate? Today, I will share with you the world -class negotiating master Gynwin Kennedy in the business classic "Negotiation: How to get more in the game" in the three "do not" principles in the negotiations, hoping to inspire you.

Author | Gynwin Kennedy

Source | "Negotiation: How to get more in the game"

This article is excerpted from CITIC Publishing Group "Negotiation: How to get more in the game", and the Changjiang Business School was authorized by CITIC Publishing Group. The article is the author's point of view and does not represent the view of the Yangtze River Business School.

When negotiating, the other party quoted for the first time, and you agreed.

This may be the worst thing.

From the perspective of the author of the "Negotiation" and the world -renowned master of negotiating masters, the negotiations are the process of what we want from those who want us things.

"Only when both parties work hard to reach a transaction, they will be happy in the end."

But negotiations are not to win or lose.

Unlike the competition, the purpose of negotiation is to negotiate with partners and seek the possibility of consistent opinions between the two parties. In the negotiations, if the two parties reached an agreement on a solution, it means that both parties have "won".

In order to better learn to negotiate, we dismantled the book "Negotiation" and refined the three "don't" in the negotiation:

1. Do not accept the first round of the opponent's quotation.

2. Don't complain, but make a solution.

3. Don't "concession in good faith."

01 Do not accept the first round of the opponent's offer

In the face of negotiating opponents, the worst thing is: the first quotation of the other party, you agreed.

However, the situation of accepting the first round of quotation is common among the negotiators.

In fact, the negotiators want to talk about it. Because only both parties work hard to reach a transaction, will they all rejoice in the end.

Without negotiations, directly accepting the first round of quotation will make the negotiators feel guilty of the transaction, and at the same time it will hurt their confidence in the negotiations.

If the first round of quotation is sold, the negotiator will always miss: if the lower quotation is given, will the other party accept it?

Kennedy gave an example.

If you plan to sell your yacht. According to the market, this yacht can sell at least 300,000 pounds. When you consider whether to log in to a selling advertisement, a yacht enthusiast learns the news and is willing to bid for £ 330,000 to buy this yacht and pay with cash. What will you do at this time?

If you do n’t say anything, it ’s not a good practice to ask him directly; or ask him to wait for the advertisement to be published again.

The correct approach is to bargain with him. The way of bargaining is not important. It is important to have a process of bargaining.

Reserve some bargaining chips to make your offer look more reasonable. These chips can be the equipment on the boat, the sails, or the one -quarter of the paid fees that have been paid.

For example, if the other party said, "We plan to participate in the Mald Island competition next month, and I hope that I can drive the Izbel to the sea at that time," you can use this as a bargaining chip to talk about the price. Let him know that you are not so easy to accept his low price.

Againing with the other party is not to say that you have to come to a tug -of -war. You can try to test the other party to see if you can raise the price a little bit. Compared with the final transaction results, the efforts paid for the exchanges are more important.

02 Don't complain, but propose a solution

It is impossible to let everyone not complain in life.

However, "complaining" in proper way is good: when you complain about others, you can make suggestions to the other party, instead of just venting your dissatisfaction, which can make your complaint more effective.

Imagine that if you go to the restaurant for dinner, the originally scheduled seat is over. What will you do at this time?

Some people will leave this restaurant with friends. And Kennedy did this.

He said to the restaurant waiter: "If this is the case, we will sit at the bar to drink some free drinks and wait for a while."

The waiter replied: "Okay, no problem." And called a waiter, and at the same time told the waiter. Mr. Kennedy at this table, they provided them for free everything they wanted.

Don't just complain, make a solution. Because you need to pay attention to not only the fault of the other party, but also your own interests.

Not all negotiations are friendly negotiation. Some negotiations will show a tension atmosphere.

For example, signing a transaction contract is only one aspect of commercial exchanges, while execution contracts are even more important.

Facing the complex production process, there are various reasons that one party cannot execute the contract. Therefore, there must be some plans to ensure that after the contract is signed, the dispute can be resolved when there is a conflict of interest.

Active remedial programs for negotiations are more important than complaints. In the business field, if you did not propose any remedy, it is equivalent to giving the initiative of this issue to others.

When preparing to negotiate the remedy plan, Gynwin Kennedy believes that these four points should be paid to:

1. You have to take the initiative to make up for the rescue plan. 2. The negotiations should be focused on your remedy plan, and do not vent their dissatisfaction.

3. Proposal remedy expresses your attitude of actively solving the problem. Others don't have to worry about whether you can continue to do business with you.

4. Hearing specific solutions, the other party may be happy to accept (of course, it depends on whether your requirements are reasonable).

On the contrary, if you just blame the other party, the other party may no longer be limited to defending yourself, but to silently bear your accusations and make you think you are "win". After that, they may send some "troubled walling". Dustly in the future cooperation business.

03 Don't "concessions"

For negotiators, the proportion of concessions is still a major problem in negotiations.

Let me tell a story of "goodwill" first.

On the Nordic Icefield, a group of foreign salespersons came here to sell beer and need to pass the sled beer. One day, on the way to pull beer with a sled, he found a wolf behind him. He quickly thought about how to get rid of this dilemma.

He suddenly remembered that he had just shot a elk. So he thought, maybe the wolf was hungry, giving him a piece of eliges, and he would not follow me when he was full.

So he cut off a piece of elk meat and threw it to the wolf. Before walking, he found that there were a few more wolves and followed him. So he continued to cut the meat and feed the wolf ... until the wolf cluster grew, he chased him more and more crazy. When he arrived in the village safely, there was no piece of meat left.

After returning, he also showed off with the locals, thinking that his way was good, because in short, he was not eaten by the wolf.

But the locals were very angrily driven him away. The reason is that his "goodwill concession" made the wolf think that as long as he chased the sled, there would be meat to eat.

This breaks the original living habits of the locals -locals often meet wolves, but they don't give him anything, and sometimes even throw empty beer cans. The wolf feels that there is no benefit of chasing a sled, so I won't chase it.

This story is actually the process of the two sides during the negotiation process. Kennedy believes that if you feel that you can exchange for each other with your concessions, then you are very wrong. The goodwill of one party will not "soften" the other party, but will make the other party tougher.

In the negotiation, the person who advocated the "goodwill" gave the following two reasons:

The first reason: I made concessions in some trivial matters, but I just wanted to influence each other.

Kennedy believes that this idea ignores a possibility -the other party will have different interpretations of your "goodwill".

They may think that your behavior may be one of the two reasons: either you are expressing "goodwill". Either you are showing weakness.

Even if the other party thinks you are expressing "goodwill", he does not need to return to generosity. He can still choose not to compromise. If he thinks you are showing weakness, you may maintain a tougher position.

Unless you are familiar with the relative advantages of each other, both sides are very willing to negotiate in a generous manner, and the other party is more likely to perform tough rather than a "goodwill" response.

If both parties are willing to "concession", then I wish you a time when negotiating in the future, you can always meet each other.

The second reason is that someone must take the initiative to promote the negotiations, otherwise the negotiations will never advance.

In Kennedy's view, the tone of the goodwill is helpless. From a tactical point of view, this is as weak as the first reason, and the other party is more likely to adhere to a tough position, not a good response. This is because you show an urgent need to promote negotiation.

For example: you are anxious to go elsewhere; you urgently need each other's products; you have excellent conditions, so you lack patience, and so on.

Your pressure may not be the pressure of others. If the other party is not as trouble as you, what signal your anxiety will give them?

When you consider making concessions, please slow down the rhythm of the negotiation and pressure to the other party.

Kennedy believes that generous concessions are tantamount to giving up something alone, and these things may value the other party than you. It is definitely not a good way to give up in the "intense" negotiation.

The picture in the article comes from Tuwu's creativity, and the reprint needs to be authorized.

- END -