There are no easy negotiations in the world. However, there are some very difficult negotiations. If you were a difficult negotiator, who would come to mind? Is it the person who negotiates with absolute ‘A’’s monopoly position, the person who makes it difficult emotionally by saying bad words at the negotiating table, or the person who makes unreasonable demands without any hesitation?
They will probably all be tough opponents. If you think about these negotiators, you can find something in common: they have more power than you. So, in order to negotiate well, you must develop “strength”. However, there are situations in which it is difficult to negotiate even if the power gap is not large, without making unreasonable demands, or without saying a word. It is time to negotiate within the organization. Let's find out why internal negotiation is not easy and how to solve it. Increase your own value In negotiation, the buyer usually has the upper hand. Because money is where you buy it. However, sometimes the buyer who pays the money is taken to the seller. It's time to deal with monopoly suppliers. There is no other place to get the things you need except this company, so you have to ask for money. In negotiation, this is explained by the concept of ‘BATNA (Best Alternative To Negotiated Agreement)’.
Batna means that it is the best alternative to take in the event of a breakdown in negotiations. There is no batna for purchases with monopoly suppliers. If you cannot do business with this company, there is no other alternative. So, in negotiation science, it is said that the presence or absence of a batna determines negotiation power.
So let's get into the internal negotiation situation. If you work in Planning Team 1, you need support from Planning Team 2 to start a new project. This is because the Planning Team 2 has a lot of related data and know-how as it has had similar work experience in the past. Only with that can your work go smoothly. Unfortunately, negotiating with the Planning Team 2 is not easy.
He only repeats the saying, “It is difficult to apply because I am busy with internal work alone.” I asked, “I will go and look for it in person, so please let me see the data,” but there is no answer.
Negotiation in a deadlock situation, if a team other than Planning 2 has similar information, it can be a battling. It is because you can get what you want without having to cling to the uncooperative Planning 2 team. But if it's only in Planning Team 2, there's no way.
So how do you negotiate without a batna like this? You have to “use” the Batna right away. Let's take a look at the case of Seoul's negotiation, which made the negotiation advantageous by using Batna.
When purchasing a bus that serves as a foothold for citizens, the Seoul Metropolitan Government pays a certain percentage of vehicle subsidies to city bus companies. However, the city of Seoul wanted to lower the vehicle subsidy, which rises every year. As a result, the city manager suggested a method called “joint purchase” to city bus companies.
It was made so that city bus companies did not negotiate with vehicle manufacturers individually, but rather with the union as a representative. As a result, the bus market, which was centered on suppliers (vehicle manufacturers), has shifted to consumers (city bus companies). A favorable negotiating board was created.
In addition, in order to lower the unit purchase price of parts, which has been rising every year, he said that he is considering switching to international bidding so that overseas companies can also supply them. We were able to succeed in unit price management thanks to breaking down the supplier's monopoly position.
So, how can we make Batna in inter-departmental negotiations? If there is a need for human resource support from other teams, it can be solved with ‘money’.
It would be nice to have internal manpower support, but if that is difficult, you can use external manpower. In this way, there is a way to solve negotiations in which alternatives are created with external resources. Unfortunately, in internal negotiations, this method often does not work.
A typical example is the case of information sharing in the previous example. Giving money to the outside does not create internal information. Since you can't create a department that listens to you, that is, Batna yourself, what you need is to give a lot to the 'past'.
It means that the opposing team should have made the opposing team feel a debt of their heart to them, rather than only visiting them when they are sad. By raising your own value in this way, you can gain an edge in negotiations.
Are internal negotiations always difficult? Let's ask ourselves one more time. What value were you “first” to the other person? If you cannot readily answer this question, internal negotiations will inevitably be difficult. It is not a matter of good intentions to be the first giver in a peer relationship. It is an issue of performance. Let's instill a positive image in others Let's look at another situation. During internal negotiations, divisions of work between departments are sometimes discussed. The superior made A to do the work. But for A, it seems that B does better. When I asked B to do it, he said, “Didn’t the leader tell A to do that?”
It's true, so I don't have much to say, but I'm upset. A recommended a more suitable person considering ‘efficient work output’. Then, what is the mind of B? He, of course, must have been selfish in wanting to do more. But it may not be the only one.
These types of people think of ‘following clear instructions’. The superior clearly told A to do it, but it is a burden to change it at will. Can you tell someone in your organization to ignore the latter?
Negotiations in this situation are really difficult to solve. This is because the intrinsic values pursued in negotiations are different. In general, business negotiations are often about money issues of 'cheap' and 'expensive'.
Both sides are pursuing the same essence of 'economic value'. At this time, if the economic value can be satisfied in another way, the negotiation may be resolved.
If a supplier who wants a higher price is offered a method such as changing the ‘payment method’ or increasing the ‘quantity’, the problem can be solved even if the unit price is kept low.
However, when the values pursued are different, the dimension is different. For example, “Your competitor has been very helpful in the past. Consider the person who says, "I can't abandon that person, so I can't do business with you as a competitor." No matter how much money you give him, he won't move. Rather, you may become angry, saying, “Are you trying to buy people’s hearts with money?”
This is because other dimensions of value are more important to this person than economic value. These are intangible values such as ‘fairness’, ‘thanks’, and ‘trust’. These negotiations are really difficult. This is because, no matter how hard you try, you have to move the 'heart' of the other person.
Let's go back to internal negotiations. There is one way to solve the problem with a partner who pursues the value of ‘implementing the instructions’. The superior will give the instructions again. Because work goes to B, not A. In other words, there is no need to negotiate.
For this, A must negotiate with the ‘superior’. Of course, this is also difficult. Because A is also a member of the organization.
However, if the essence pursued by the boss and A is the same: ‘Work more efficiently and produce more effective output’, the problem is slightly different. This is because you can change the behavior by stimulating the value of the other person. It has a higher chance of success than trying to move value.
Therefore, it is necessary to read the leader's thoughts and adapt them accordingly. This is not to say that you should line up in a bad sense, or do in house politics. It means that work should be done in the same direction based on the same work values. That's the most likely way to resolve in-house negotiations.
Skills in persuasive speaking and dialogue are also important for good negotiation. However, what is more important than how to make a proposal and what kind of evidence to present is to create a positive image of 'what kind of person am I usually'.
This is especially true in internal negotiations where we have been and will continue to work together. For this reason, it is difficult to negotiate within the company, but if you think of it in the sense of making a ‘good me’, it is worth trying harder.
