CHAPTER 11
Negotiating Styles, Part 2 MAJOR TEAM STYLES
a conscious effort to maintain a unified front. This can be accomplished through a variety of styles, with specific choices being based on member talent, cultural background, and personality type. A single style can be maintained throughout a single negotiation or turned on and off when required. Though the preservation of unity is the main concern when making a stylistic choice, that unity will flow from member compatibility. When preparing strategy for negotiations, choose the talent first and let those choices dictate the team’s eventual style. Also keep in mind that while unity is paramount, the appearance of disunity can be used to accomplish the team’s goal as well. Much of the effectiveness of any style will be the impression created upon the opposition.
TEAMS MUST MAKE
CONSENSUS
Consensus allows the team to disperse authority and responsibility. The group sets policy and makes decisions. The group is consulted on issues both large and small. While a spokesperson may deliver the results of group decisions, no clear leadership role is taken, and the spokesperson may change, depending on the subject matter being discussed. The Chief Negotiator acts solely as a moderator for internal group discussions and may remain hidden at general discussions. Such group scrutiny is a very time-consuming style, but it has the virtue of being difficult to penetrate. Every decision made by the team requires a form of voting and may result in an inordinate number of session breaks as the team polls itself. Counterparts will find it difficult to pry apart positions that appear seamless. Counterparts may also be worn down by the slowness of the decision-making process and grant concessions simply to keep things moving. The strengths of consensus-style negotiating are also its weaknesses. No matter how well armored an object is, slow movement invites outmaneuvering, and the same is true for lumbering negotiating teams. Nimble opponents can overload the decision-making process and make consensus building untenable. This is especially true when the agenda hasn’t been rigidly set in advance. New issues can be brought to the table until the team requiring consensus gives in to inherent time constraints. Sometimes the opposition doesn’t bother to break the consensus by maneuver but simply calls off negotiations, due to what they see as time wasting by their counterparts. To avoid the problems of the consensus style and maximize its strengths, here are a few tips. ■
Only adopt this style when the team is in a buying/investing mode or in a strong selling position where the product, service, or investment opportunity is too attractive or in demand to warrant dismissal.
79
