Negotiation Tips & Articles

More of the same should seal the race for Romney

By Clive Rich|January 15th, 2012|Blog|Comments Off on More of the same should seal the race for Romney

As the US Republican nomination race continues, the key issue remains which candidate can provide most “reassurance” for mainstream America. At a time of great economic uncertainty, and with the US’ role in leading world affairs under scrutiny, the Republicans need to find a candidate who can make a majority of the US electorate feel that everything’s going to be ok in the end.

Mitt Romney’s campaign to become the Republican candidate looks to be right on track following his recent win in New Hampshire. He managed to pull off a commanding victory in the New Hampshire primary, winning 39% of the overall vote and his strong message, to shake the country out of its economic doldrums, seems to be striking a chord with the public.

Over the past few weeks, we have seen various Republican candidates representing the more ‘extreme’ side of the party come to the fore in several of the State votes, only to fall away again just as quickly. With Rick Perry and Herman Cain having already fallen by the wayside due to well-publicised ‘blunders’, the most recent challengers to Romney’s position as leading candidate havebeen Rick Santorum (who surprisingly polled second Iowa), Jon Huntsman, Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul (second in the New Hampshire vote).

The problem seems to be that aside from Romney, the other candidates are campaigning for policies that seemingly alienate large portions of US society. Rick Santorum, along with Newt Gingrich openly opposes same-sex marriage and Ron Paul strongly opposes abortion, even in the case of rape. Following his surge into second place in Iowa, Santorum proceeded to shoot himself in the foot by stating that marijuana, even for medicinal purposes, was a ‘hazard […]

Strikes highlight important lessons about using ‘Push’ Negotiation tactics

By Clive Rich|January 17th, 2012|Blog|Comments Off on Strikes highlight important lessons about using ‘Push’ Negotiation tactics

Once again strikes are in the news – but are they just an old fashioned pressure tactic in negotiating terms?

It’s not just in the public sector that strikes over reforms to pension plans are taking place. Unilever is facing a rolling wave of strikes as Unions mobilise against reforms of its final salary pension scheme.

Unions such as Unite, the GMB and Usdaw have said the stoppages will hit production of a number of leading brands and products including Marmite, Flora, Hellmann’s mayonnaise, and PG Tips.

The strike action commences in the same week that strikes have been announced at tax offices and the National Gallery. The strikes at tax offices – timed to disrupt the January 31st self-assessment tax deadline – are directed at alleged privatisation of work at call centres and Inquiry offices. The strikes at the National Gallery are all about staff cuts.

From a negotiating point of view, strikes are a pressure tactic. This is a form of “push” behaviour – all about “my” agenda rather than “yours” in the negotiation.

There is nothing wrong with using “push” behaviour as long as it is used at the right time, and in the right way, when it can be most effective. Here’s some pointers on how to best implement ‘Push’ behaviour:

1. Don’t use pressures too early in a negotiation, or the other side won’t feel pressurised. If they are used near the end of a negotiation when the other side feels it has something to lose if the deal isn’t done, then pressures are far more likely to be effective. These strike actions feel like they may be coming too early in the respective disputes.

2. If pressure tactics like strikes are applied too early in […]

Conflict looms if Iran and West persist with ‘Pressure Tactics’

By Clive Rich|January 23rd, 2012|Blog|Comments Off on Conflict looms if Iran and West persist with ‘Pressure Tactics’

Looking at the increasing tensions over Iran, a game of brinkmanship seems to be playing out.

Iran and the West seem to be swapping moves calculated to put pressure on the other. Pressure tactics are fine in a negotiation as long as they are used constructively and selectively. When pressure tactics are the only tactic deployed then the negotiation becomes quite attritional, and getting an edge over the other side becomes more important than finding a solution that suits all parties. On any analysis the situation in Iran requires a negotiation in which the parties focus on the needs and interests of each other. The most effective negotiators “fuse” the interests of the parties to create currency for both parties. However exclusive use of pressure tactics by “users” tends to result in both parties ending up as “losers”.

Here are some of the pressures that have been applied over the last few months;

Sep 04 – Iran announces that their first nuclear power plant is ‘online’ , sparking increased UN concern.
Sep 28 – Iran claims they will be sending ships near U.S. waters.
Oct 11 – US says it has broken up a ‘terror plot’ by agents linked to Iran to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to Washington using explosives.
Nov 21 – Iran is hit by fresh sanctions by the West (US, UK and Canada) over concerns about their nuclear programme, backed by a UN report. Hillary Clinton speaks of a “significant ratcheting-up of pressure” on Iran.
Nov 24 – Iran arrests 12 people for ‘CIA spying’.
Nov 29 – Iranian students storm the UK embassy, throwing around papers and replacing the British flag with an Iranian one.
Nov 30 – UK retaliates by warning […]

Missed Opportunity for Negotiation on NHS Reforms

By Clive Rich|April 20th, 2012|Blog|Comments Off on Missed Opportunity for Negotiation on NHS Reforms

The Bill to reform the National Health Service has finally received Royal Assent, but the debate about the National Health reforms is a good example of not choosing the right negotiating behaviour for the type of negotiation at hand. Every negotiation calls for different behaviours, depending on the subject matter, the stage the negotiation has reached and the personalities on the other side.

In the case of the National Health reforms, the Government has been negotiating with both health care professionals and with the public at large. The Government has been deploying arguments based on reason – about the need to use resources more efficiently and take medical decisions away from bureaucrats in hospitals and back towards medics. The Reforms have proposed to abolish NHS Primary Care Trusts and Strategic Health Authorities and transfer their £60-£80 billion of commissioning of health care funds to “clinical commissioning groups” principally run by GP’s, as well as the establishment of “Monitor” as an economic/competition regulator. Primary Care trusts would be amalgamated into “foundation trusts” and NHS hospitals would be allowed to earn much more of their income from private patients – up to 49%.

Lack of Emotional Argument

However the NHS is an emotional subject. It is an emotional subject for GP’s and Health care professionals such as Nurses, most of whom enter the profession on a vocational basis. It is also an emotional subject for the public at large, with the NHS forming an iconic part of Britain’s social welfare heritage. The Conservatives are not trusted with this social welfare agenda precisely because (maybe unfairly) they are perceived historically as addressing it in pounds and pence rather than as an emotionally-based priority. The Government also got off to a […]

“Pie” is not a fixed number for the Public Sector

By Clive Rich|October 10th, 2012|Blog|Comments Off on “Pie” is not a fixed number for the Public Sector

The threat of public sector strikes has now widened from protest over pension reform to protest at the proposed public sector pay freeze. The coalition government has frozen public sector pay for two years, calling it vital to help drive down the budget deficit. Ministers say the pay-freeze will save the government £3.3bn a year.

The TUC voted at its annual Congress to support a co-ordinated strike action if talks over the public sector pay-freeze break down. Unison boss Dave Prentis said ministers had “declared war on our people” and vowed to lead a “fightback”. Mark Serwotka, general secretary of the Public and Commercial Services union, said that a “sense of urgency” was needed:
“The way to really push the government is to follow up the day of demonstration by mass co-ordinated strike action across the public and private sectors.” Ed Miliband has said that he will attend the Trade Union march against the government’s austerity strategy planned for that date.

At the same time, a spokesman for David Cameron said there will be no compromise on the public sector wage freezes or pension cuts:
“We have put in place some changes in pensions and we do not intend to reopen these talks. We have put in place a public-sector pay freeze for two years and we do not intend to reopen that decision either. Strike action would benefit no-one.”

Positions not Motivations

The negotiation feels very positional and therefore very fixed. On this basis it’s not possible for either side to win except at the expense of the other. However, the most effective negotiations arise when each side focuses on the motivations of the other side – why they want the things […]