Some self-reflection for the weekend
So my first simulated negotiations are complete – and they were just as exciting and educational as I had hoped (and less scary). This entry could go on at nauseum as I sift through all the emotions and reflections that these simulations provoked. But I’ll just pick a few.
One thing that struck me related to preparing for the negotiation. I knew that prep was important; in fact, I probably went a little overboard. The night before, I pored over my instruction sheets, trying to identify all interests on both sides and looking for common goals and listing all possible arguments for and against each option. I also wrote everything down in (what I thought was) an organized fashion. Well, this process probably helped me, but really what I was left with at the end of my individual prep was a big jumbled mess. I might have had the right information, but it just wasn’t organized well.
The prep-by-side session in Gillien Todd’s working group was a complete paradigm shift. Using the “Seven Elements” worksheet, we separated the facts of the case into alternatives, options, and interests, and considered how they affected each party’s legitimacy, communication, relationship, and ability to commit. I was astounded by how many creative ideas we came up with as a group – there was no way I could have thought of everything on my own. I really did feel much more confident after this session, and I feel sure that it was because of the collaborative and “brainstorm”-style way that our group prepared.
Another realization (which was almost a total revelation to me) had to do with my own personal style of negotiating. My approach to most things in general is very listening-based; I like to hear the other point of view, and respond accordingly. In that order. This approach worked for me in formal mediation, and it works for me in lots of other everyday situations, so I definitely assumed that it would also get me a good outcome in a negotiation scenario. But after having acted this way in at least two negotiations over the past few days, I’m unsure. I was never the one to start the negotiation; this would have felt very unnatural to me, and overly assertive – bossy, even. But a couple of my partners surprised me in the way they started their negotiations in an assertive but open way. I realized: it is possible! I think it will be a big challenge for me to get comfortable with being assertive and firm without feeling like I’m alienating the opposing party. I guess this is what I meant in my last entry when I predicted that being in a third party facilitating role feels different than negotiating on behalf of interests.
For similar reasons, the value-creation exercise that we did in working groups after negotiating was intriguing. I found that it was quite easy for me to identify shared interests and develop creative options that created value. In fact, I had done some of this in my negotiation on Thursday, when I represented an opera singer interested in a leading role. But this also made me worry a bit – is there some sort of tension between creating value and protecting your own interests? During the negotiations, sometimes it felt as though I was creating options that were good for my client, but perhaps I could have found better options. I was so eager to identify common goals that once we found them in the negotiation, I stopped pushing to see if I could get even more. It seemed like a combination of the winner’s curse and simply forgetting about my own interests that the other party might not share. Is it possible to be too agreement-happy as a negotiator?
These tough questions – and startling realizations about myself! – will probably come up again and again as I continue to negotiate in my daily life. But now that I’ve been exposed to my own challenges, it would be great fill in again at the Workshop and participate in more simulations. In the nicest way possible, I’m hoping for some more absences!