The Negotiation

It was a dark and stormy night.

The phone rang.

Your boss, the Director of IT, picked up the phone, gasped, clutched his chest, and collapsed on the floor. A team of EMTs responded and put him in an ambulance. They said, “He’s alive,” and took him away in an ambulance.

It looks like a heart attack, but you're a project manager, not a doctor.

The phone rang again. The receptionist answered. Turned white. Handed you the phone, saying, “This guy claims to have Al, Bill, Charlene, and Donna (the CEO, CFO, COO, and CIO) hostage. He says he will kill them all, one at a time, unless we give him $40 million and a flight to Havana, Cuba. He wants to talk to whoever is in charge. Can you take the phone?”

She's really asking, “Can you negotiate?”

You can say, “I’m a project manager not a hostage negotiator,” by which you mean, “This is not within my area of expertise, outside of my comfort zone, and way above my pay grade” and refuse to take the phone. But then, at the end of the hostage crisis you’ll be out of a job. Of course, if you take the phone and you fail to negotiate effectively, you’ll also be out of a job, one or more of the top executives may be killed, and the company may go out of business.

You take a deep breath.

Then you remember: as a Project Manager you negotiate all the time, with project sponsors, team members, vendors, and other stakeholders. You negotiated your job, your salary, your vacation, your last raise and bonus. You ARE a negotiator.

You take another deep breath, and you pick up the phone, gingerly.

You can’t say, “Let’s split the difference. If you release Al and Donna, you can keep Bill and Charlene, No one likes them anyway. We'll give you $20 Million, and fly you to Miami, Florida. Then we call it a day.”

This is not a “win-win” negotiation. It's a “lose-lose” situation. Two of the hostages get killed. And the hostage taker is captured in Miami.

Incidents are dynamic and uncertain. Therefore, you can not use the techniques described as the Harvard Negotiation Project in Getting To Yes, by Robert Fisher and William Ury.(1) Negotiations must be based on listening to and understanding the other party.

According to former FBI agent Chris Voss, former hostage negotiator, author of Never Split the Difference, Negotiating as if your Life Depends on It (2), and founder of The Black Swan Group, you have to engage your adversary in negotiations, but you also have to gain his trust, because that's the only way you can reach an agreement. And you have to win it all, because if you lose, someone may get killed. Voss argues that negotiators need to rely on active listening and emotional intelligence more than logic and appeal to rational self-interest – rational actors do not rob banks or take hostages. You also don't want the police or law enforcement going in with guns blazing, because, while they are likely to kill the alleged hostage takers, one or more of the hostages are also likely to get killed.

Voss describes a negotiating strategy built around listening to your adversary, trying to understand what they need, what they want, trying to see the world from their perspective, trying to understand their emotions, and trying to prompt them to understanding your position, your needs, your wants, and your emotions.

He calls this “Tactical Empathy,” listening as a martial art, balancing emotional intelligence and assertive influencing skills. You do this by asking open ended questions then listening carefully to the responses. You may need to ask the same question several times.

Voss describes a hostage negotiation.

“We have your son, Voss. Give us one million dollars or he dies.”

I experienced a flash of panic, but that was to be expected.

“Give me the money or I cut your son's throat right now.”

I gave him a long, slow stare. “How am I supposed to do that?”

He paused. “So you're okay with me killing your son?” he asked.

“I'm sorry, Robert, how do I know he's even alive?”

And he continued, “I am really sorry, but how can I get you any money right now, much less than one million dollars, if I don't even know he's alive?”

This was an exercise in hostage negotiations, not a real hostage negotiation. Voss' adversary was Harvard lecturer Robert Mnookin. Voss writes how after he started answering Mnookin's questions with questions about proving that his son was alive, and logistical questions about getting the money and paying the ransom, Mnookin got flustered and confused. When he addressed Mnookin, his adversary, by his first name, Robert, he started thinking from Voss' perspective. He got more flustered as he realized the logistical complications of paying the ransom.

“Yes,” Voss says, requires “How?”

Spectacular Failures of NegotiationsIn 1938 Neville Chamberlain, Prime Minister of the UK Parliament, mistakenly believed he had negotiated “Peace for our time” by giving in to Nazi demands for Czechoslovakia. This was a catastrophic failure.

More recently, in June, 2000, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak met with PA / PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat and US President Bill Clinton at Camp David to discuss peace between Israel and the Palestinians. According to Clinton and various others, Israel offered the Palestinians almost everything they asked for, including a state comprised of 92% of the West Bank and Gaza, with its security guaranteed by the United States. Arafat rejected the proposal. Barak offered more and more, up to and including joint Israeli and Palestinian control of Jerusalem. Arafat rejected this as well. Arafat returned to Ramallah, allowed the Second Intifada. Barak returned to Israel, his political career over.

By refusing to negotiate, Arafat demonstrated to the Israelis and to the Americans that they were not a serious partner in peace negotiations. Arik Sharon succeeded Ehud Barak as Prime Minister, followed by Benjamin Netanyahu.(3)(4)

Clearly appeasement didn't work in Chamberlain's negotiations of 1938 and attempted appeasement did not work in the Camp David discussions of 2000. Arafat may have gone to his grave proud that he stood up to the Israelis and the Americans, but rather than a state, he got nothing for his people.

On the other hand, Chamberlain could have said, “I understand your concerns about ethnic Germans in Czechoslovakia. And I need to see proof that Czech authorities are doing to the ethnic Germans what you Nazis are doing to the Jews in Germany. However, as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, I do not have the authority to give you Czechoslovakia. Neither does my King or our Parliament. What would you have me do?” Like Voss asking, “How do I know my son is alive?” Chamberlain could have continued to repeat “How do I know what you are alleging is really happening?” And “What would you have me do?” while refusing to give Czechoslovakia to the Nazis.

Similarly, when Arafat responded to Ehud Barak's offers with silence, rather than fill the silence with more offers, with appeasement, Barak could have filled the silence saying,

“Yasser, your people and mine may be adversaries at present but that does not mean we cannot come to some form of agreement, such that both of our peoples can thrive in the future.”

“Yasser, we believe that it is in both sides best interests for the Palestinians to govern themselves in their own nation state. How may we proceed?”

Niether Clinton, Barak, or Chamberlain appear to have planned sufficiently to understand the other party's desired outcomes or how to lead their opponent to their desired outcome. Their negotiation errors; failures to plan, lead, and communicate, continue to echo throughout history.

Job Interviews, Performance Reviews, and Wage and Salary Negotiations

Like hostage negotiations, discussions between diplomats and politicians with opposing agendas, and lawyers representing clients on opposite sides of a dispute are difficult and often perceived as zero sum games. Job negotiations may seem like life and death negotiations, especially for job seekers who are out of work with bills to pay and children to feed. However, job Interviews and wage and salary negotiations and negotiations between project managers and their sponsors, stakeholders, and teams, can be win-win.

Job and salary negotiations are about more than money. They are about vacation time, other benefits, remote work, flex-time, etc. They are also, in the abstract, about more than financial compensation. They are about recognition: the applicant's potential during the job interview and the employee's accomplishments during performance reviews. It’s always hard, whether at a large publicly traded company or a small privately held company. But it’s also always easy. The key, regardless of the side of the table you are sitting on, whether you are the applicant negotiating your compensation package, or the hiring manager looking to bring someone in, is illustrating or understanding the value or the applicant or your colleague brings to the table, and the work you are doing or the work that the hiring manager need getting done.

Effective resumes list accomplishments.

Effective job descriptions describe the work that needs to be done, specific goals, and specific skills.

Effective follow up letters describe the applicant's understanding of the work that needs to get done – and how he or she can accomplish those goals.

Effective salary negotiations require an understanding of the value the applicant or the team member brings to the table; his or her accomplishments, his or her potential for continued success.

For example, when you are negotiating compensation at the interview it means the hiring team wants to hire the applicant.

Phil, the hiring manager can say something along the lines of, “Congratulations Susan, the job pay is yours. We have budgeted $x per year.”

Susan, the applicant can respond, “That's very generous, Phil, however, I was hoping for $ (x + y).”Or Phil, the hiring manager can start off with, “Congratulations Susan, we would like to offer you the job, how much are you looking for?”

Susan can now respond with, “That's great, Phil. I'm very excited, I believe, given my experience and knowledge, I should be worth around $x to the company.”

When Phil and Susan are in the same ballpark the negotiations are simple. Phil can clarify the performance incentives, saying, “Acme Corporation rewards our staff with annual performance based raises and bonuses. This will bring your annual compensation in line with your expectations. Plus, I believe you will find we have built and are continuing to build, an environment in which people are proud to work.”

Performance reviews are similar.

A year later, Sue could say, “You hired me based on my experience, education, and references. I believe you can agree that I have been effective. I have delivered at or beyond your expectations. And I love it here.”

She should expect a reasonable incentive based compensation.

In the face of adverse economic considerations, Phil could say something along the lines of, “Susan, you have done well. However, due to circumstances outside of our control, the company is facing tough economic headwinds. Orders are being cut or delayed. We are having trouble getting parts and supplies. We therefre have been forced to adjust our raises and bonus compensation plans. We expect this to be temporary and also expect to be in a position to reward loyal, hardworking, and productive members of the team when things return to normal.”

These examples illustrate the idea that negotiations are build around trust, empathy, and understanding your emotional stake and your position, and the stake and position of the people on the other side of the table. They also illustrate that the keys to successful negotiations are planning, effective communications and leadership.

As project managers we are unlikely to negotiate with actual dictators or terrorists (altho some managers may have dictatorial or terroristic tendancies). However, we have to negotiate project charters, plans, scope, schedules, budgets, etc. with sponsors, team members, and other stakeholders. We also have to negotiate around vulnerabilities, risks and incidents, including unexpected “black swan” events. Our greatest strengths are our abilities to listen, to trust and be trusted by the people we are negotiating with, the people with whom we negotiate. We have to understand our and our counter party's positions, we have to lead the negotiations to our desired resolution, Successful negotiations, like successful project management generally, requires planning, communications, and leadership.

-----

(1) Roger Fisher, William Ury, Getting to Yes, Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In, Penguin, 3rd Edition, 2011.

(2) Chris Voss, Never Split the Difference, Negotiating as if your life depends on it, Harper Business, Harper Collins, New York, NY, 2016.

(3) Aaron David Miller, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace,, July 13, 2020, “Lost In the Woods, a Camp David Retrospective,” https://carnegieendowment.org/2020/07/13/lost-in-woods-camp-david-retrospective-pub-82287(

4) Michael Hirsch, Newsweek, June 26, 2001, “Clinton to Arafat: It's All Your Fault,” https://www.newsweek.com/clinton-arafat-its-all-your-fault-153779

-----

Lawrence Furman, MBA, PMP, has been working in IT for over 20 years, He is currently exploring leadership and innovation in “Adventures in Project Management,” a book he is publishing in 2024.