Secretarial knowledge > negotiation skills

20 rules of Harvard classic business negotiation skills (on)

Timely counterattack, attacking fortress, "white face", "black face", "turning" first, file tactics, deadline effect, deadline effect, breaking the deadlock, slamming the West, smashing the shell, swearing, playing the pig and eating the tiger... First, counterattack Whether it is successful or not depends on whether the time for counterattack is accurate. Counterattack can only be used when the opponent threatens you with "terrorist tactics". Therefore, it can also be said to be a defense war with retreat. Tom's successful example is enough to show that the counterattack is the so-called "borrowing force", that is, using the strength of the other side, coupled with their own strength, to play the "multiplication effect" and achieve success in one fell swoop. The second thing to note is that when using the counterattack method, if the other party does not think that you are a "consistent person", the effect will be greatly reduced. Johnson believes that Tom is a "speak to do" person, so before Tom has officially declared war, he made concessions. If the situation happens to be the opposite, the result is naturally very different. Therefore, before using the counterattack method, you must first understand, in the eyes of the negotiating opponent, whether you are a person who is consistent in words and deeds. Second, attack the fortress Negotiations, especially the negotiations on official duties, the participants usually have more than one person. In this kind of "one-to-many" or "many-to-many" negotiation, the most suitable one is "attack fortress." When negotiating more than one opponent, the actual decision-making power is actually one of them. Here, let's call this person the "head of the other party" and call the rest of the negotiators as "the other party members." The "others' heads" are the people we need to pay special attention to during the negotiations, but we cannot ignore the existence of "the other party members." When negotiating, sometimes you can't convince the "head of the other party" no matter how hard you try. In this case, you should shift the target, launch an offensive to the "partners", and let the "partners" know your claim. To influence the "head of the other side." The process may be more difficult than general negotiations, but the most important thing to do is to be able to persevere and make persistent efforts to achieve the final success. When you can't convince the "head of the other party", you have to take a different approach and point the attack at the "other team member." This is just like the attacking of the city in ancient times. As long as you take the fortress outside the city, you can drive straight into it. To capture the city, you must first take the fortress that has a protective effect on the city, so that you can enter the uninhabited situation. In the same way, when you can't convince, you should change your course and try to shake the position of the "head of the other party" through the "team members." When using the "attack fortress" tactic, the key is to "reproduce the change repeatedly." Obviously, the "head of the other party" has heard your claims more than once. Now, if you want to use the same words to lobby the "partners", the "heads of the other side" naturally feels interesting. The same is true for the "team members of the other party". It is impossible for you to listen to them in a way that is consistent with your statement. Therefore, although the purpose is the same, in the process of repetitive explanation, it is necessary to pay special attention to the variability in order to avoid receiving the counter effect. In addition, it should be noted that even though you have seriously persuaded the "partners", this does not guarantee that the "partners" will persuade the "heads of the other side" as you seriously persuaded them. If the "partners" don't want to do this, even if you use up all your strength, the "attack fortress" tactics will not work. Third, "white face" "black face" Once, the legendary figure - billionaire Hughes wants to buy a large number of planes. He plans to buy thirty-four, and eleven of them are not at all. At first, Hughes personally negotiated with the aircraft manufacturer, but he couldn't talk about it. In the end, the rich man was furious and went away. However, Hughes still did not give up, he found an agent to help him to continue negotiations. Hughes told the agent that he would be satisfied if he could buy the eleven of his favorite ones. As a result of the negotiations, the agent actually bought all of the 34 planes. Hughes admired the agent's ability and asked him how he did it. The agent replied: "It is very simple. Every time the negotiation is in a stalemate, I will ask them - do you want to talk to me in the end? Or do you want to invite Hughes himself to come and talk? After I ask, the other party has to marry. Say - forget it, everything will do as you please!" To use the "white face" and "black face" tactics, you need two negotiators, two negotiators can not attend the same A round of negotiations. If the two of them are present together, if one of them leaves a bad impression on the other party, it will inevitably affect their perception of the other person. This is very unfavorable for the negotiation of the second round. The first negotiator sang "black face", his responsibility is to provoke the reaction of the other party "this person is not easy to provoke", "the opponent who encountered this kind of negotiation is really bad for eight generations." The second negotiator sang "white face", which is the role of "peace angel", so that the other party has the feeling of "even a sigh of relief." In this way, the two alternated and took turns to go until the negotiations reached their goal. The first negotiator only needs to make the other party’s resentment that “I really don’t want to talk to such people anymore”. However, such tactics can only be used when the other party wants to get an agreement from the negotiations. in. When the other party intends to seek a solution to the problem through negotiation, it will not suspend the negotiation because of the poor impression of the first negotiator. Therefore, before the negotiations, you must first try to control the attitude of the other party to the negotiations. If it is "can talk about it or not," then the "white face" and "black face" tactics will not come in handy. As mentioned above, it is more advantageous to negotiate on your own site. However, when using the "white face" and "black face" tactics, it is better to negotiate in the other's camp. Regardless of the way the first negotiator negotiates to challenge the other party, if the negotiation is conducted in the other's camp, the opponent usually does not have excessive emotionality based on a sense of security that is “this is my place anyway”. Reaction. Therefore, when the second negotiator appeared, their attitude was naturally not too bad. Conversely, if the negotiations are conducted on their own territory and the other party is angered by the first negotiator, it is likely to refuse to come again, or simply ask for a change of venue. Once the negotiating place changes, the convenience may be able to get rid of the displeasure caused by the last round of negotiations, re-energize, and face your challenges again with high morale. If this is the case, then the effects of the "white face" and "black face" tactics will be greatly reduced. The effect of the "white face" and "black face" tactics is derived from the "line work" of the first negotiator and the second negotiator. The second negotiator is to use the bad impression that the other party has made on the first negotiator and continue his work of “taking the past and the future”. If the first "performance" of the negotiations was unsuccessful, the second negotiator would naturally have no choice but to sing. Fourth, "turning" is the first "But..." This "but" is a kind of speaking skill that is often used. A well-known TV presenter skillfully used this technique when visiting a particular guest. "I think you must not like being asked about private life, but...". This "however, it is equal to a warning, warning special guests", "although you don't like it", "but I still want to...". In everyday language, as with "but", there are "but", "however", "although" and so on. Using these turning words as the "leading" when asking questions will make it easier for the other party to answer. And it does not cause it to resent. "But..." has the effect of inducing the other party to answer questions. The host mentioned above then asked: "However, the audience in front of the TV is eager to learn more about your private life, so...". Being asked this way, even if the special guests do not want to answer, it is difficult to refuse. □ Relieve tensions When negotiating, when the problem itself is quite complicated, it is difficult to start, but when it is not a problem, you usually have to use the technique of “slow”. The easing technique of speaking has the effect of preventing the other party from getting angry and making the negotiation work smoothly. During the negotiation process, we sometimes inevitably become emotional. Sometimes we have to ask some questions about personal attacks. Sometimes it is inevitable to meet again with the negotiating opponent who was your defeat. In this case, what should you do?? Here is an example. Suppose your current negotiating opponent did not talk to you about a land sale issue until recently. At that time, the other party felt that the price he proposed was very reasonable, but the more he thought about it later, the more he thought the price was too low. I ate a big loss. Under this circumstance, when the negotiating opponent meets you again and discusses another issue concerning the sale of land, it is bound to be unfair and discordant. Therefore, no matter how reasonable the price you are, the other party will not agree easily. The reason why he refused to agree was not that the price was unreasonable, but that he had made up his mind to sell the land at a higher price to make up for the last loss. Examples like this happen often. Therefore, when you find that the negotiating opponents in front of you are unfair to you, you have to deal with them carefully and be careful. The best way to turn a dry man into a jade is to be sincere and open to the other side to explain to the other party, to eliminate the dissatisfaction and grievances accumulated in the heart, so that everything can start again. Maybe you can say this: "The last time the land was bought and sold has passed. Now I want to come, I am really sorry, but...". Then we must try to let the other party understand that the heart is no longer resentful and the negotiations can proceed smoothly. This is the so-called easing technique. □ Interjection in words “Speaking in words” is a verbal easing technique that has the power to change the entire negotiation situation. If the man has undertaken a lawsuit that has been determined by the court. However, the negotiating parties are still controversial about the validity of the court ruling. After several discussions, there is still no concrete result. However, if the man has seen the other side's confidence has some slight signs of shaking. The validity of the court's decision has a significant impact on the outcome of the negotiations. Therefore, although the other party feels that this issue has no need to talk about it again, if the man still uses the easing technique of “interjection”, he tries to pull the topic back to the question of whether the judgment is valid or not. If the man repeatedly told the other party that "although we have fully discussed the issue of the court's decision and then resubmitted it, it is indeed a bit of a sinful landscape. But...", then it explains its opinion on the judgment. In this way, if there is an opportunity, if the man repeats his views on the court's judgment. In the end, the confidence of the other party was finally completely shaken, and in turn accepted the claim of Ruo Nan. V. Archives Tactics A financial company held a board meeting and twelve directors sat around the elliptical conference table to discuss it violently. There are eleven directors in front of paper and pen, and the other one? In addition to paper and pencil, there are piles of archives, each stack is almost ten centimeters thick. The directors have made a bold statement on the central issue of the meeting, the changes in the company's business policy. They have expressed their opinions and debated each other for a time. It is difficult to reach a conclusion. In the midst of chaos, the director who carried a large amount of archives kept silent, and every director who spoke up would invariably pay attention to the pile of archives in awe. After the speakers were present, the chairman asked the director who appeared to be prepared to say a few words. I saw the director stand up, pick up the top stack of information, and briefly said a few words, then sat down again. After a brief discussion, the eleven directors all thought that the director who spoke last was “reasonable” and agreed to his opinion. The chaotic and lengthy debate ended. After the meeting, the chairman rushed to shake hands with the hammered director, thanked him for his valuable advice, and paid tribute to his efforts to collect information. "What? These archives and the ones that are open today are basically two different things! These things are sorted out by the secretary. Let me show them first. If they are not necessary, they will be burned. I am planning to finish the meeting." Going out on vacation, so I brought them to the venue by the way. As for the notes I took when I gave my opinion, it was just a summary that I just remembered as I listened to the speeches. To be honest, for this meeting, I was Nothing is prepared.” The director who was “misunderstood” explained this. Nothing can be seen on the surface. In ordinary board meetings, everyone has nothing but paper and pen. This time, suddenly there was a director who carried a lot of information and attending the meeting. Apart from the surprise of the people present, it would naturally be reminiscent of him - he brought so many references to attend the meeting, presumably beforehand. It has been fully prepared. It is precisely because of this association that no matter what the director said, it will make everyone feel "having a weight" and "justified" and adopt it without any objection. Different from the meeting, if you want to use "archive tactics" during negotiations, then the "tools" you carry, that is, all kinds of archives, must be related to the negotiation itself. If you bring a large number of unrelated materials to negotiate and want to "mix", once found, the negotiating credit will go bankrupt, and it has been repeatedly emphasized that once the negotiation credit is lost, it will be difficult to recover, and it will not be able to recover. Make up. Therefore, when negotiating, you must be careful not to make a mistake of "credit bankruptcy" for the sake of the moment. This is the principle of negotiation. It is very important to participate in any negotiation to see if the tactics or techniques used are applicable to the content of the negotiations. If the tactics or skills used are not high enough and are not suitable for the content of the negotiations, it will make the negotiation difficult to carry out smoothly. The effect of "archive tactics" is mostly at the beginning of the negotiations, that is, when the two sides sit down at the negotiating table. Why? If you wait for the negotiation to have reached a certain stage and suddenly move out a large amount of archives, can the other party not be suspicious? The purpose of carrying a large pile of archives for negotiation is to let the other party know how prepared he is beforehand. Thoughtful, how deep is the understanding of the content of the negotiations. However, if a large number of files are moved out in the middle, the other party will not think so. The second thing to note is that once the "archive tactics" are adopted, there must be a beginning and a end. In every negotiation, don't forget to bring all the files and materials around. Otherwise, it will cause the other party's suspicion and even contempt. If there is a reason why you can no longer carry the file, you should explain it to the other party to let them know. When the negotiations have reached a certain stage, all important issues have been settled, and only two or three minor issues remain, and you can end your "archive tactics." However, before withdrawing all the archives, it is necessary to explain to the other party that "Important issues have been discussed!" These materials are no longer needed, so as not to be suspicious. Also, if the venue is to be changed When you are not convenient to carry a large number of files, you must also give a message to the other party. "Those things are too cumbersome and inconvenient to bring." In short, when you feel that there is no need to use "archive tactics" anymore, no matter what. The reason, the most important thing is not to make the other party suspicious. Negotiations are naturally beneficial to hold on their own “land”. However, sometimes, they have to go deep into the tiger’s den and negotiate in the other’s camp. If you are negotiating in the camp of the other party, you will have to consider the carrying problem of the archives. If you take the bus without a large amount of archives and take a taxi, you will lose it. When the other party sees you, you will have to work hard." When I moved to pile up a file like a hill, the first thing I thought was that it must be "file tactics." Come to deal with me. So, when negotiating in the other's camp, in addition to the necessary and the archives that will be used in the negotiations, it is best not to carry anything. In addition to being happy and not letting the other party doubt Credit improvement is the key to the success of negotiations. Sixth, the effect of the term From the statistics, we found that there are many negotiations, especially the more complicated negotiations, are in negotiation. The agreement will be reached before the deadline. However, there are many negotiations without a deadline. If the deadline is set, then the negotiator will not feel any pressure unless the deadline has expired; This is the reason why people don’t see tears in their coffins. For example, people are usually not afraid of death. Although they know that everyone will eventually die, they always feel that they are “unexpected.” However, if one day, the doctor suddenly Announce that you only have one month to live. Who can bear this kind of blow? It can be seen that when the negotiation period The closer they are, the more uneasiness and anxiety of both sides will grow, and this uneasiness and anxiety will culminate on the day when the negotiations are terminated – this is the best time to use negotiation skills. Remember the 12-day meeting of US President Carter at Camp David with former Egyptian President Shadat and Israel’s former head of gold? The purpose of this summit is to resolve the confrontation between Israel and Egypt. All the unresolved issues of the year. These problems are very complicated, so the negotiations have been very slow from the beginning, often interrupted, and no one has the confidence to talk about what results. So the principal has to set a deadline for the negotiations - - Just next Sunday. Sure enough, as the deadline is getting closer, there are some problems that have been solved. And just one or two days before the Sunday, the atmosphere of the negotiations suddenly became more smooth than ever. More problems were solved, and the two sides reached a final agreement. In the course of such a major negotiation, the “deadline” of the negotiations can still produce amazing results, so if you can apply this psychology to various negotiations, you can naturally achieve the desired results. A cowboy in the western United States broke into the hotel to drink, and after a few cups of yellow soup, he began to mess around and messed up the hotel. This is not to be counted. Later, he actually took out his pistol and shot at the ceiling, even to the guests in the hotel. Just as everyone was at a loss, the hotel owner, a small and gentle good man, suddenly walked over to the cowboy and ordered him: "I will give you five minutes, and you will be allowed to leave the area within five minutes." Unexpectedly, the cowboy really took up the pistol, held the bottle, drove away from the hotel, and went away. The shock was undecided. Someone asked the boss, "If the hooligan refuses to go, what should you do?" The boss replied: "It's very simple, and then extend the time limit. It is better to give him some time." The above story can only prove that it is sprinkled. The store owner's "good luck", but in the negotiations, the boss's behavior has great reference value. In order to make the "limited deadline" of the negotiations play its due role, negotiators must take responsibility for everything that may happen before the deadline for negotiations. This is the precondition for "limitation". The term can only be extended if there is a new situation or a sufficient reason. If the other party thinks that you are a person who does not comply with the established deadline, or if you have a "pre-existing" who has arbitrarily extended the time limit, then the so-called "limitation" will not play a role in negotiating the opponent. Even if the deadline has arrived, no one will feel uneasiness and anxiety, because they have already calculated that you "do not treat the deadline as one thing." Your negotiating opponent may intentionally or unintentionally disclose a deadline for “going to negotiations”, such as “I have to arrive at the airport within an hour”, “One hour later, I have to go to an important meeting” The "self-limitation" does not give you the opportunity to take advantage of it? In this case, you just have to wait slowly, waiting for the "last minute" to come. When the time of the plane taking off or meeting is getting closer and closer, the other party's nervousness will become more and more serious, and even the two sides will agree to reach an agreement within one second. At this moment, you can make all sorts of demands slowly. "How? I think my proposal is quite fair, just wait for you to nod. As long as you promise, you can safely do the next thing!" Due to the urgency of time, the other party is likely to agree to your proposal and dare not have any objections. What is said above is that the negotiating opponent has set an example for himself to set a time limit that is not conducive to himself. This is also to remind you at the same time, never make the same mistake. This kind of mistake will never happen to a negotiating master. At the time of negotiation, no matter which party is required to make a “deadline”, once the time limit is determined, it cannot be easily changed. So, in any case, you have to do your best to complete all the preparations within the deadline to avoid the pressure of deadlines. If the other party raises an unreasonable time limit, the time limit can be extended as long as you protest. However, if the other party refuses your offer to extend the limit, or if you think that the set deadline is quite reasonable, then it is troublesome. In this case, the only thing you can do is to redouble your efforts, collect information, formulate strategies, and if you are angry with each other’s “unreasonable”, you will waste the original limited time, which will fall into the other’s The trap is gone. No matter how much time you have, calmly formulating coping measures and carefully checking countermeasures is the smartest way. For example, if you want to buy a batch of real estate, and the other party only gives you ten days, you have to decide within ten days whether to buy the real estate at the price it has issued. At this point, you should first check the other party's proposal from a variety of different perspectives. If you feel that the price is not reasonable, it is best to explain your opinion to the other party as soon as possible before the deadline. If possible, you can re-establish a deadline according to your own wishes. By doing so, you will be saved from being a victim of the set deadline. 7. Adjusting the issue Once, I took a truck through a winding road. There were a lot of steep slopes on the road, up and down, down and up, so that I was sitting in the assistant seat and I was shocked and sweaty. However, the truck driver's shifting technology is really ingenious. He seems to be shifting intuitively. The speed does not slow down when going uphill, and he doesn't rush to the front when going downhill. In short, the people sitting in the car are always stable and stable. There is no feeling of uncomfortable feeling. What is the so-called “shift” in the negotiation? The so-called “shift” in the negotiation is when the negotiation is going on. Try to change the central issue. If the "shift" technology is as skillful as the truck driver, then, regardless of any negotiations, the dominance will be in your hands. The negotiating experts of the Soviet Union are the masters of "shifting". In the negotiations on the restriction of weapons, they repeatedly used the "shift" technology to change and transfer arguments. In terms of restricting arms negotiations, both the United States and the Soviet Union are anxious to reach an agreement on arms limitation. That is to say, no matter what difficulties the negotiation encounters, it is necessary to sit at the negotiating table and continue discussions until there is a result. In fact, many negotiations, such as negotiations between companies, governments, self-governing bodies, and various trade unions. Even if the negotiations fail to obtain a consensus agreement, and thus evolve to the worst conditions, such as absenteeism and strikes, the two sides must continue to work hard to find a reasonable solution. In short, even if the negotiations were suspended, the two sides had to sit on the negotiating table. Suppose you represent the employer. Then, for the labor issue, the wage problem, the medical problem, and even the vacation problem—this is a kind of “shifting” and changing the technology of the topic at any time—may be dissatisfied and poorly coped. However, in order to take care of the overall situation, in any case, you must do the basic requirements of "let the negotiations continue." Sometimes, negotiating parties or unilateral parties will be anxious to obtain a certain degree of agreement. For example, if you want to buy some kind of influential assets held by the other party, then in order to make the "shift" technology work in the negotiations, the most important thing is to prevent the other party from perceiving your intention. You can care about him, you can pretend to be indifferent, or you can hit the West. In short, if the other party perceives your intention to "purchase a strong desire," he will certainly try his best to deal with you, making it difficult for you. If the other party intends to suspend the negotiations, it will be impossible to let you take the “shift” technique of changing the topic at will, unless he is interested in this topic or is very important to the negotiation itself. Of course, if your negotiating opponent is an inexperienced or lacking motivation, then it is another matter. In non-essential negotiations, when you want to change the topic, you should explain to the other party the reasons for changing the topic in advance to obtain their understanding, and then accept your proposal without objection. I have participated in a negotiation involving extremely complicated and difficult matters, most of which are related to securities and real estate, and some of them involve the interpretation of trust property. In order to grasp the dominance of the negotiations, from the beginning of the negotiations, I have fully applied the technology of “shifting”, from price appraisal to text interpretation, and then from text interpretation to credit, so over and over again. Conversion issues. However, before each conversion issue, I will always explain the reasons for the conversion in advance to obtain the understanding of the other party. In this way, the other party finally dragged into the lost way of "shifting" technology, and retreated to the defense line. In the negotiation, once the other party retreats to the defense line, you will take a big step forward and gain an advantage.

recommended article

popular articles