
How to negotiate effectively. - StavrosK
http://www.korokithakis.net/posts/secrets-power-negotiating/
======
ipince
I'm pretty sure that these strategies work, but I would just feel "wrong"
doing some of them. I can't help thinking of them as trickery and deceit.

Perhaps I'd be a crappy negotiator, but I'd much rather take a more honest
approach.

Maybe I'm being naive, but I would argue that two negotiators behaving
honestly can come up with a better outcome than two negotiators trying to
trick each other. Of course, the world is so full of these deceitful
negotiators that any practical advice must emphasize those techniques. I think
it sucks though..

~~~
microarchitect
I used to be like you. But then I realized that I was getting paid well below
market because I was trying to play fair.

In fact, when I took my current job I was unhappy with the money but happy
with the job description. So I said, listen I'm taking the job, but I'd like
you to increase the offer. They said they can't and give me a bunch of BS
reasons why. Then they went ahead and also hired someone else I knew, who had
similar (IMHO worse) qualifications than me, for the money I'd asked for but
not got.

Funny how the tune changed when I realized what was afoot and hinted at
quitting if it weren't fixed soon. I got a 30% raise and a 15% bonus. No
questions asked.

~~~
T-R
You can do it without hardball tactics, though - if you keep your eye out for
other opportunities (i.e. have a better BATNA), then you can present it
honestly as "the best move for me right now", and if they don't want to give a
raise, you can discuss alternative benefits that would satisfy both parties.

On the other hand, if they're trying to screw you, they're trying to screw
you.

~~~
shawndrost
Is that better for any of the parties involved? It's work for you to find a
BATNA, work for the org that offered you your BATNA, and neutral for your
employer. Seems more straightforward to just negotiate.

~~~
T-R
I'd say it's better - it's not more or less straightforward, both distributive
and integrative approaches are still negotiations. You need to know your BATNA
anyway, whether it's leaving or sucking it up, so doing more research just
puts you in a better position, no matter which route you choose. Bluffing
might get you lucky, but not likely as lucky as if you can back it up, and if
they call your bluff, or it doesn't work out for some other reason, you'll
have less bargaining power in the future.

It's also good to keep in mind that the best deal someone else got doesn't
necessarily relate to the best deal you can get - just because someone
negotiated a higher salary doesn't mean you can; it's not your BATNA unless
someone makes you the offer. Also, if nothing else, distributive approaches
tend to leave one or both parties feeling like they lost, which will likely
sour future negotiations. Taking the integrative route means that the only
losers are the companies that don't get you - assuming that's in their best
interest (which it might not be, if they have a better BATNA than matching
your BATNA).

Also, if the amount of effort and time that the negotiation takes is amongst
your interests, then that's really on the negotiation table too (regardless of
approach), it just means that you'll be negotiating away other things, like
your salary, in order to satisfy that interest.

~~~
microarchitect
I agree with all of what you're saying.

I was just trying to point out to the OP that s/he doesn't need to feel dirty
doing all this. I also don't think you need to be dishonest about any of this.

In my case, instead of letting the cat out of the bag by telling them I wanted
to take the job, I should've said the offer was well below my expectation
(true) and said nothing about whether I wanted to take the job (no lying
involved).

One advantage of doing what I did (i.e. not bring in another offer) is that I
can now get even more when I quit from here. My suggestion is that if you're
getting screwed over and the company want to keep you - get the best deal your
company can give and then use THIS as a baseline for your next offer.

------
d2
This is one of my all time favorite business books. Great summary.

"Be the one who writes the contract." and the Higher Authority gambit are a
favorite among VC's.

Also, suggesting something is standard is very popular among VC's and isn't in
this book. It works in many spheres. A friend leases parking from the city
outside her building. She clamps wheels if you park in a bay without
permission and charges $400 for release. She was getting a lot of people
complaining about the price. So I told her to say "It's standard", and it
worked like a charm. Many more clampees paid up without complaint.

------
bmcleod
Learning particular techniques is a fun part of negotiating, but it's actually
not a particularly important part of it. In the long run you'll be better off
if you use these a little bit (any more and your start pissing people off),
but the focus needs to still be on simple things like leverage, BATNA etc.

A lot of these ploys are becoming far too well known as well. For instance,
nibbling seems to be in every negotiation book ever and it's really obvious
when someone pulls it.

As a side note I continue to not understand people who don't like making the
first offer, the evidence against it is very flimsy and it lets you frame the
conversation. It only fails miserably if you accidentally come in under what
the other party was expecting. Research should allow you to avoid that and in
all other cases you'll get a slightly better deal.

Possibly the most important part of looking at lists like this is working out
how to counter them rather than how to utilize them yourself.

~~~
bdclimber14
I strongly disagree with the first offer remark. Generally most negotiations
start with some sort of frame, but it can be vague. Consider a salary
negotiation for a entry-level software engineering position. Both parties know
generally what the range could be. In Arizona, it is roughly $40k to $100k.
That's a fairly big range. The first offer always narrows this range. If the
applicant said he was looking for at least $50k, then the employer would
magically be right inline with that (assuming their willingness was at least
that) when they may have well had an expected range of up to $80k.

If the first offer is wildly favorable for the receiving party, you generally
hear "that's about what I was thinking too." I've used that phrase plenty of
times when in reality I was thinking a fraction of what they said.

~~~
cookiecaper
Pretty sad that you would screw your employees like that.

Also, if you have two people who both know this rule to never make the first
offer, you aren't going to get anywhere. Someone has to man up and produce a
number that's at least vaguely realistic.

~~~
bdclimber14
I'm not sure why you think I'm screwing over employees; I don't have any, I am
one. This is true that _someone_ has to make the first offer, but I stand by
my argument that it's always to your advantage to nudge the other party to go
first. If they ask what you need or are expecting, just say "above market
rate."

~~~
cookiecaper
You're exploiting the naivety of your candidates by pretending that their
initial offer is "about what you were thinking", even though it was really
much lower. You should pay a fair salary even if your candidates are naive
about what actually constitutes a fair salary. You're screwing over the people
whose salaries you control by encouraging/allowing them to take a much worse
offer just because they didn't know any better. Why is this good?

~~~
bdclimber14
I see what you're saying, but let me reiterate, I've only done this on the
receiving end as an applicant, candidate, potential employee. Saying "about
what I was thinking" is something I say when I would take a job for $500, but
they offer $2,000. Am I screwing over an employer by encouraging and allowing
them to pay me that much?

------
luu
Do these tricks actually work? Every time I’ve run into these, I’ve felt like
I’m negotiating with a used car salesman. Most of the time, that’s actually
been the case. But, a few times, I actually ran into this nonsense after
getting a job offer. Each time, after a few rounds of “higher authority” and
“good guy, bad guy” I got tired of the games and turned down the offer, in
favor of a company that gave me a reasonable offer in the first place, and
actually let me talk to someone who had the power to make a decision (or at
least didn’t pretend that they didn’t have the power to make a decision). I
imagine hitting these techniques is equally obnoxious from the other side.

------
jc123
Great book and it's the only one I've bothered to read about negotiating.
However, the blog post didn't mention succinctly that a power negotiator makes
the other side feel like they have 'won': that's what 'power negotiating' is.
Keep that in perspective while studying and practicing the gambits.

