Purchasing and Negotiation Training

Robert Menard, Certified Purchasing Professional, Certified Professional Purchasing Consultant

Editor’s note: this is Part 5 of a 5 part series on the importance of verbal communication in negotiations.  Part I deals with open mind assumptions.  Part II deals with questioning techniques.  Part III deals with word usage while Part IV addresses common statements and Part 5 wraps up the lose ends.

These are the last three tips for better listening and speaking skills in negotiation

The major difficulty with listening skills is that ears can hear faster than mouths can speak.  The average American English speaker talks at the rate of about 125 to 150 words per minute (wpm).  We can hear and understand about 3 to 4 times more than that.  Recall the FedEx ad of the 80’s with the fellow talking about 500 wpm about “getting the package to Pittsburgh.”  When I focused intently on what he was saying, shut the lights off, and shooed the kids and dog out of the room, I could understand him, for the most part.  The point is complete attention was required. 

 So, when a speaker is talking at the average 125 wpm rate of speed, and we are not exhibiting undivided attention, what are we doing with the other three quarters of our time?  In order, here are the four responses most often received:

1. Day dreaming
2. Forming hasty decisions
3. Making mental arguments
4. Filling in with busy work 

The reason for day dreaming being most predominant stems from the practical mechanics of attention span studies.  The repeating sine wave has troughs and crests.  We are on high absorption at the crests and in deep fantasy at the crest.  It is just a fact of human nature and a factor impeding our efforts to negotiate effectively.  

Forming hasty decisions springs from our internal prejudices.  We all have them.  We tune out someone because we know want they are going to say.  “She always says that,” is one tell tale sign. 

 Mental argument simulates the “Oh, yeah” response.  Something said strikes a chord, harmonic or dissonant, and we want to respond.  If we agree, we are planning our response, just waiting for forthe opening to jump in and say, “Oh yeah, well I can top that.”  If we disagree, we may interupt in mid sentence, so angry are we with such propaganda.  “Oh, yeah, that is not so and here is why,” is a fairly typical interjection. 

 15     Establish expectations 

One of the payoffs of improving listening skills is that it trains the negotiator in establishing the expectations of the other side’s demands.  Instead of automatically assuming that we know the other side’s position, it is far better for both sides if the other side states and stakes out its position.  I was fortunate to learn much about dispute resolution in the 80’s while serving as an arbitrator.  In the 90’s, I served as a mediator in dispute resolution.  Arbitrators cannot participate in settlement talks, because they may have to impose settlement, while mediators are active advocates in settlement talks.  

Click here for Bob's book and CDs

One of my first objectives in one mediation was to establish criteria.  To my amazement, the claimant had a far different positon than had been put forth in the filings alleging  extensive damages and remedies .  In our initial talks, the claimant divulged that it really did not want to pursue anything but payment of the balance of the contract.  If it was paid that balance within 15 days, it would be satisfied.  The respondent, who also claimed huge amounts of counter damages, similarly had no appetite for protracted wrangling and jumped at the chance to drive a stake through the heart of this dispute.  Claimant and respondent settled that week and continued to do business together.  Fortunately, I did not assume that what each party wanted was as stated in their claims.  As is often the case, positions are far less important than motivations. 

16     Never accept a ‘no’ from someone who cannot say ‘yes’ 

This is not as obvious a statement as it might appear.  The feint of putting light weight personnel who can only say ‘no’ in the apparent position of authority is a very effective tactic used by all many in alleged “Customer Service”.  Part of the justification for this  roadblock is that some customers cheat and will use any excuse to chisel on payment.  Sometimes, however, the motivation can be rather ignoble.  We will take this purely theoretical example to make the point.  

Suppose that you complain to your cell phone supplier about questionable time usage charges.  Your daily reading research uncovers newspaper and magazine articles about a class action suit against the phone supplier.  In testimony, the phone company has admitted ‘some overcharges’ due to delays in billing for minutes from rented signal towers that have “forced” them to “push minutes into inappropriate and undue billing periods”.  While not the customers’ fault, they are charged for exceeding their contracted monthly limit, despite the phone company’s complicity, unless the customers are alert enough to spot the mistake and savvy enough to challenge the bureaucracy.  

Suppose further that the phone company hires a collection agency to harass customers.  The collection agent only has the authority to remove outrageous late charges and not to mitigate the undue balance, or even admit that the balance is phony.  In this case, dealing with the collectors would be fruitless.   They don’t have the authority to settle the dispute for the correct amount.  You would be taking ‘no’ from someone who doesn’t have the authority to say ‘yes’.