The Conclusion of Start with No!

Hi! Welcome back.  I’ve had a busy week interviewing and would like with today’s post to end our discussion of Jim Camp’s thirty three rules for negotiation from his excellent book Start with No!  Below is the final set of Mr. Camp’s rules for successful negotiations.

·         Mission and purpose drive everything.

·         Decisions are 100 percent emotional.

·         Interrogative-led questions drive vision.

·         Nurture.

·         No assumptions.  No expectations.  Only blank slate.

·         Who are the decision makers?  Do you know all of them?

·         Pay forward.

In mission and purpose drive everything both you and the person you are negotiating with should be driven to accomplish your objective for the negotiations.  In the case of a job interview which I have been on recently the potential employer is looking for someone to fill a vacancy and I am looking for a stream of income but we both have a greater reason for why we are there.  I can’t speak for a particular employer out there but my purpose is to return to the business world to help coach people to improve them and work with them to improve the systems they use every day in their work to reach the goals they set for themselves and the businesses they work for.  As I evaluate different work scenarios be it as an employee or an independent contractor working on an assignment I am looking to see whether my mission and purpose coincides with that of the employer and can I help them reach their goals and objectives.  That thought process that I just describes is what Camp is saying should be used in all negotiations.

Decisions are 100% percent emotional.  If you would have ask me this question several months ago I would have said that I disagree with that view because I was schooled in the practice of business management and as we all know business managers are suppose to make logical, rational decisions based on empirical evidence found in the data right!?  Well that is not entirely true many decision makers and leaders that I have studies in the past few months have made the decision to do something and then looked for the evidence that supports that decision and only the evidence that supports the decision that they have made.  Much has been made for example in the last ten years about Mr. Bush’s decision to invade Iraq and then Afghanistan.  You will recall the run up to the Iraq War and Colin Powell’s speech at the UN where he claimed that America thought Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.  We know now that that claim by the US was not correct but we continued through with the invasion anyhow.  Did President Bush make his decision before the evidence was gathered and then only look at the evidence that supported his decision?  I don’t know perhaps he did and he would not be the first President or leader to do so.  The point is that more often than we would like to believe decisions by leaders and influential people are made before the evidence and the reasons for the decision are only gathered later as a defense of their original position.

Interrogative questions drive vision is that probing needs analysis that I think I’ve written about quite often in this piece on Camp’s negotiation rules.  What is the adversary really trying to accomplish within the negotiations and can you help them get what they want and in turn get what you want.

Nurture, not a rule you would suppose Camp would use when he labels his rules Start with no!  Nurture as I see it being used here is to serve.  The greatest example of serving especially this time of year is Jesus Christ at the Last Supper when he begins to wash the feet of the disciplines at the table.  Now I’m not suggesting that you bend down and wash your adversary’s feet in your next negotiations but think about what you can say or do to help them move toward their goals and objectives, how can you move the discussions along to a successful conclusion for everyone.

No assumptions. No expectations.  Only a blank slate means don’t come into the negotiations with a preconceived notion of what the adversary will say or do.  Listen, discuss, verify details and develop a custom solution to the issues after all if the solutions to which created the negotiations were obvious you probably wouldn’t need to negotiate in the first place right?

Who are the decision makers?  Do you know them all?  Obviously, you want to be communicating with someone who has the authority to act on the solutions you agree to within the negotiations.  However sometimes that is easier said than done because the person who you are negotiating with is acting as a go-between for the final decision maker.  Remember Camp’s rule about all agreements must be clarified point by point and sealed three times (using 3+)?  Getting to the final decision makers or at least clarifying each point multiple times with your adversary will allow you to find successful closure to your negotiations much easier.

Finally pay forward, a great movie by the way, how can you improve the world around you?  What can you do to make a difference in somebody’s life and circumstance?  It doesn’t have to be substantial, a kind word, a small bit of advice, a contact that can open the door and unlock a potential barrier to a problem can make a huge difference to people you are dealing with.

I hope you took away something from my review of Jim Camp’s Book Start with No!  Trust me my analysis doesn’t do it justice as I’ve written several times this is a great book on how to negotiated but I also see parallels to starting your own business.  Until next time thanks for your readership and all my best!  Jer.

Negotiation tips from Jim Camp Revisited

Hi! Welcome back.  I’m reviewing the thirty three rules for negotiations from Jim Camp’s book Start with No!  In past blogs I’ve listed the first 20 rules today we’ll look at rules 21-25 which are listed below.

·         “No” is good, “yes” is bad, “maybe” is worse.

·         Absolutely no closing.

·         Dance with the tiger.

·         Our greatest strengths are our greatest weakness (Emerson).

·         Paint the pain.

The first rule “No” is good, “yes” is bad, “maybe” is worse.  To me means that in a negotiation you don’t want to move to yes too quickly.  Let’s take for example car shopping, many of us dread shopping for a car because we despise the negotiation process that always seems to happen at the car dealership.  You know what I mean you see a car which you think will meet your needs and all you want is for the dealer to give you a fair price.  But if you haven’t done your research and know what the car is worth you might be tempted to reach for an agreement too soon and thus pay too much for the auto.  A maybe answer is even worse because you don’t know where your adversary stands on the issue or whether they are engaged enough in the negotiation to come to an agreement.

The second rule “Absolutely no closing” from Mr. Camp’s perspective means that you are not trying to “sell” your adversary on your position, your position should be such that it address your adversary’s greatness needs and issues that brought the two of you in the negotiations in the first place.  The third rule “Dance with the tiger” follows Camp’s rule of no closing.  The negotiation is a process by which you are engaging with your adversary and working with them to find a solution that first meets their needs and then yours.

Our last rule for this blog today “Paint the pain” to me means that when you are in a negotiation you need to concentrate your efforts on the root causes that are causing your adversary discomfort and ignore the symptoms.  Next time I’ll wrap up my discussion of Camp’s book.  What are your thoughts on this book and blog?  Please drop me a line and let me know I value your input.  Until next time all my best!  Jer.

Negotiation advice from Start with No!

Hi! Welcome back.  I continue to review the thirty three rules from Jim Camp’s book Start with no!  It’s a book that I read several weeks ago and it deals with the art of negotiations.  I found the book an excellent read and I’ve been reviewing the 33 rules Mr. Camp explored in his book. 

Some of Mr. Camp’s rules resonated more with me than others but as I’ve mentioned previously I was looking at them through the lens of someone who is starting their own consulting practice and looking to apply them to that endeavor.  Below I list rules 16-20 from Jim Camp’s book Start with No!

·         The value of the negotiation increases by multiples as time, energy, money, and emotion are spent.

·         No talking.

·         Let the adversary save face at all times.

·         The greatest presentation you will ever give is the one your adversary will never see.

·         A negotiation is only over when we want it to be over.

The two rules in this group that I most remember having an impact on me are the first one “The value of the negotiation increases by multiples as time, energy, money, and emotion are spent”; and “No talking”.

As I recall Camp’s explanation of the first rule “The value of the negotiation increases by multiples as time, energy, money, and emotion are spent” implies that the more we invest time, energy and money into a negotiation the more valuable the outcome of that negotiation is to us.  I think we can all agree that if for example, we have spend many years say investing in a relationship we will work to continue that relationship regardless of how ineffective, unloving or non-nurturing it currently is because we have invested so much of ourselves in that relationship in the past. 

Likewise for example I think we can all agree that an owner is more involved in the process of keeping a property properly maintained and looking good as opposed to someone who is renting a similar piece of properly.  The owner is committed not only because they have a mortgage on the property but also because they have no doubt invested time, energy and money in the upkeep and beautification of the home over the years.  Thus the longer we are involved with something a negotiations, business, relationship or property for example the higher its value is to us because of the amount of attention we have give to it in the past.

Camp’s rule of no talking means that we should focus our efforts in getting the adversary to open up and talk about what they are looking for or what they are trying to accomplish within a negotiations so that we can better understand their issues and make the case that our proposal will help them in some way rectify that situation.  More listening and less talk on your part will clarify the situation and allow you to propose a solution that more directly solves the issue or in the case of No, walk away from the negotiations because you don’t see how you can assist them and yourself at the same time.

Well that’s all I have for today, if you have suggestions as to topics you’d like to see explored on this blog please place your comments below.  Again thanks for reading and until next time all my best!  Jer.

Forget Win-Win, Start with No!

Hi! Welcome back.  I’m in the process of reviewing the rules of negotiation from Jim Camp’s book Start with No!  Mr. Camp offers thirty three rules for negotiations and I’m looking at each of them in five rules segments.  Although the book was written for how to negotiate I think that his rules also apply to starting and maintaining a business and I’ve saved them on my computer to review for that purpose. 

Today let’s look at five more of Camp’s rules for negotiations and I’ll offer some comments as we move through them.  Below are rules 11 through 15 from Jim Camp’s book Start with No!

·         Only one person in a negotiation can feel okay.  That person is the adversary.

·         All action-all decisions-begin with vision.  Without vision, there is no action.

·         Always show respect to the blocker.

·         All agreements must be clarified point by point and sealed three times (using 3+).

·         The clearer the picture of pain, the easier the decision-making process.

In “Only one person in a negotiation can feel okay” I believe Camp’s view is to keep the focus of the negotiations on your adversary or who you are in negotiations with.  Camp is big on this idea of staying focused on what the adversary in the negotiations needs.  As an Organizational Development professional I see this as a needs analysis where you are focusing on the gaps in your adversary’s situation, what is it that they are trying to accomplish.  Stay in their world work in their space and you will have greater success in the negotiations or if it’s a business situation with the client.

“All action-all decisions begin with vision” boils down to where do you and your adversary ultimately want to be?  It analogous to the saying if you have no goals or objectives as to what you are trying to do any action will get you there.  As someone attempting to start a new business for example, you get many solicitations of advice, but you can’t be everything to everybody so you have to keep your eyes on where you ultimately wish to go and try to do those things that can advance your chances of fulfilling your vision or desire.

“Always show respect to the blocker” refers to those people administrative assistants, secretary etc.  Who by the duties of their positions run interference for the adversary or client.  You should treat these people with respect first because it’s the right thing to do and second because often times they setup the appointments and are the gatekeepers to the people you wish to see.  Get on their bad side and they can talk negatively about you to your negotiation adversary or business client; treat them with respect and be courteous and they may open doors to those individuals who are critical to helping you get what you want.

”All agreements must be clarified point by point and sealed three times” emphasizes thoroughness in your agreements.  By restating the each point and its clarification three times you are making sure that both you and the adversary understand each point in the agreement and how it will be resolved.

Finally, “The clearer the picture of pain, the easier the decision-making process” means that as I see it unless the party you are dealing with has a definite need or in this case a “pain” about a particular issue you aren’t going to get to a decision on the topic your discussing no matter how hard you try.  If your adversary is in a bind and not doing something is going to hurt them and what they wish to accomplish they will ultimately reach a decision on the issue.  If however they don’t have or feel pain about the issue chances are they will never come to a decision no matter how long or hard you try.

Well there you have it.  Camp’s rules number 11 through 15 on negotiations.  I’ve addressed almost half of Jim Camp’s rules for negotiations what do you think about them so far?  Do you agree or disagree with any of them?  Do you have any further comments if so please post them below and thanks again for reading.  Until next time all my best!  Jer 

More on Start with No!

Hi! Welcome back.  Before I continue with my blog post on Jim Camp’s thirty three rules from his book Start with No!  I’d like to send my prayers and best wishes to my fellow neighbors in Southern Indiana and Northern Kentucky who lived through yesterdays’ furious tornados.  I live just north of Louisville, KY in New Albany, Indiana and last night it was reported that there were 23 tornados in the Louisville, KY area alone; so it was quite an usual day weather wise and many of those affected by yesterday’s storms will never forget it God bless you.

Today let’s look at five more of Mr. Camp’s rules for negotiations.  As I wrote last time as I read this book I thought about my efforts to start my organizational and staff development business called Yurway Coaching Consultants and apply these rules to that process, here are today’s rules:

·         The only valid goals are those you can control; behavior and activity.

·         Mission and purpose must be set in the adversary’s world; your world must be secondary.

·         Spend maximum time on payside activity and minimum time on non-payside activity.

·         You do not need it.  You only want it.

·         No saving. You cannot save the adversary.

How true is the first rule about the only valid goals are those you can control?  How many times have you worried about things and got all worked up over issues that later never happened?  I’m finding as I get older that I can only do what I can do, if I handle those items that require my attention on a daily basis that’s the best I can do.  The issue may not work out to my satisfaction but at least I know that I did all I could do and did it to the best of my abilities at the time.  Sure after it’s over I might review my efforts and see areas where I could improve on if I get a chance to do it over, but I don’t regret attempting to handle the issue.  In a negotiations you can only control your actions and behaviors what your opponent does and how they react is not under your control, don’t fret about it stay on task.

The second goal about the mission and purpose being set in the adversary’s world means to look at the issues being discussed in a negotiation from your adversary’s point of view.  Since as we saw last time that everyone has the right to say no, keeping focused on your opponent’s needs will help you move the process forward.  That’s not to say that you forget your needs you don’t you just attempt to address their issues first.

Spend maximum time on payside activity and minimum time on non-payside activity means to concentrate on those items that affect monetary issues.  I guess it’s like Steven Covey’s “First things first” mantra if you are negotiating issues that involve something of value spend most of your time addressing those issues whether that be your client costs or revenue, or your revenue and costs.

I honestly forgot Jim Camp’s point about needs and wants so I’ll move on to the final rule for today no saving.  You are not Christ!  You cannot save your adversary nor should you.  What you should try and accomplish is to meet their needs for which you are in negotiations or business for.  Your adversary may certainly have additional issues that lie outside of the scope of your negotiations don’t get involved with them you will only get sidetracked spend too much time on non-payside activities and probably won’t help your adversary anyhow.  In order to be successful within a negotiation, satisfy your adversary’s needs and meet your requirements you must maintain your focus. 

Do you see some relevance in these five rules?  Can you apply any of these to your next negotiations or business transaction?  I hope so until next time thanks for reading my post and all my best!  Jer.