The Kung Fu Negotiator

You hear a lot these days about a person’s negotiating style. Some people are referred to as “hard” negotiators, others as “soft” negotiators.

 Soft negotiators use tools such as persuasion, influence, logic, charm, teamwork, and creativity. It’s a pleasant approach. They are friendlier and less coercive than their more hard-nosed counterparts. We might think of soft negotiators as using levers. A hard negotiator, on the other hand, prefers to use a hammer: coercion, intimidation, put-downs, and even threats.

Our current political climate brings to mind a couple of ready examples: Obama as a soft negotiator, and Trump as a hard negotiator. The objective here is not to make any value judgments about either man’s character, competence, or track record. As a matter of fact, when a company brings me to coach a team in a negotiation, I try to have both styles on the team.  The objective here is for us to learn to be better negotiators.

 Trump’s style is in-your-face, aggressive, and often personal. Obama’s style is softer, more designed to build consensus and maintain a relationship. And if we can put aside our political leanings for a moment, we must acknowledge that both men’s styles have led to successful outcomes, and both have led to less-than-favorable outcomes. Again, our objective here is not to advocate or cast judgment, but to learn.

The hard style can, at times, be very effective. When the negotiation is a “one-shot deal” and there will be no ongoing dealings, and the relationship doesn’t matter, the hard style can produce good results. Examples of a conducive setting for the hard style might include buying a house or a car.

Most of our negotiations, however, especially the smaller, day-to-day dealings, do not fall into this category. Most of our negotiations are with people we’ll be dealing with again at some point: coworkers, prospects, customers, vendors, executives, even family members. (Yes, we do indeed negotiate with our spouses and children, all the time.)

But on closer examination, we find that these observations about soft versus hard negotiators have more to do with style than with results. When a negotiator uses hardball tactics, she is regarded as a hard negotiator. If she uses less aggressive tactics, she is considered a soft negotiator. But really what we’re observing in those situations are styles, which often have little relationship to the actual results.

Trump is regarded as a tough negotiator, and many times this style has served him well. But not always—sometimes, he doesn’t come away from the negotiating table with much to show for it. Obama uses a softer touch, and he often comes away from the table with a pretty good deal and with a relationship that remains intact. But there are times when, as with Trump, his style doesn’t get him the result he wanted.

But a hard style and a soft style aren’t the only choices. There is also what I’ll call the “kung fu negotiator.” Like a martial-arts master, he has the look and feel of softness and pleasantness on the outside, but on the inside, he carries the will and the skills to overcome the opposition. We might think of a kung fu negotiator as Attila the Hun dressed to look like Mother Teresa. They are charming and pleasant, but very tough when it comes to giving something away. And that is a dangerous negotiator! When you’re dealing with an obvious hard negotiator, you know what to expect. But when you’re dealing with someone who has all the qualities of a soft negotiator, you tend to let your guard down, to relax a bit.

When my grandmother said someone was a “wolf in sheep’s clothing,” she might well have been talking about a kung fu negotiator.

So look past the negotiating style, past the bluster or the charm. Instead, look at the results. How willing is this person to actually work with you, to meet you halfway?

If you are looking to coach your team or train your staff to be Kung Fu Negotiators and don’t want to miss out on any negotiations, I can help you do so.
Let’s get to work! For more information contact us!