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.
Alright, I'll bite. I've always loved the study and practice of negotiation... The only thing I reacted to negatively about these comments is the reference to your negotiating counterpart as an adversary. Personally, I prefer to view them as a potential partner. This is important, because as an adversary, you are looking at win-lose (or at least that's the inference); as a potential partner, you are looking to find solutions that optimize benefits to both parties.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the comment. The term adversary is what Jim Camp uses in his book Start with no! I must admit that when I first read the book I thought the word was harsh as well. However, after I began reading about his thirty three rules for negotiations and his approach to the process I came to the conclusion that Camp is very much interested in a partnership with his "adversary".
ReplyDeleteHis major theme which is the title of the book is that each party has the right to walk away from the negotiations so with that in mind he recommends getting to know as clearly as possible what the adversary desires and once you have a clear picture of their situation develop a solution that will meet their desires and yours within the negotiation.
Thanks again for your comments and for reading my blog. Jerry