“There is probably nothing in this book that you did not already know at some level of your experience. What we have tried to do is organize common sense and common experience in a way that provides a usable framework for thinking and acting. The more consistent these ideas are with your knowledge and intuition the better.”
-Roger Fisher, William Ury, Bruce Patton.
A Lesson in Occupational Wellness…
As an Amazon Affiliate it is policy to inform you that this is an advertisement. However, this is still a reflection of a great book that I’ve read many times over. I believe it would benefit any who may read it. You can find the link for it in my references located at the bottom of this page.
Here we go again…
Quite some time ago, during the spiritual lessons, we covered the topic of manipulation. Most of you were probably unaware of this since I was shadowbanned for a while as a result. I triggered a lot of snowflakes that day. Let’s dare to hope that doesn’t happen this time. Because today we are revisiting the topic. I suggest recapping that information as we progress through this meditation. As we’ve discussed during that time, manipulation is a morally grey skill. It is only as wicked and as a twisted as the performer. There is a right way and a wrong way to do it. This time, we will explore one of the right ways to do so.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Do you desire a world without conflict? The absence of conflict is what it means to be pacified. Hell is a world without conflict. Suffering is precisely what makes this world so beautiful. There is no desire without suffering. There is no creativity. There is no growth without conflict. No progress. Those who fear conflict take the longest to mature. If you cannot handle conflict, you will never reach your full potential. We are not learning how to eliminate conflict. We are learning how to use it to our advantage. That is the essence of negotiation.
A negotiation is verbal warfare. Just like any other war, an agreement between both sides should be reached as quickly as possible. Both sides must remain intact, and lines of communication should be improved upon. You will likely encounter many difficult opponents. Resistance is something that you should expect. It should be something you are also capable of. It’s an important part of the game. Without resistance, you will lose everything. In a typical negotiation, you will hear the word “no” dozens of times before you hear the word “yes.”
Here it comes…
Resistance is one thing, but you also have to prepare yourself for any tricks the opponent may try. Tricks are anything that involves psychological warfare, deception, or abuse of power. Tricks are often dishonorable, but never forget that there is no such thing as a fair fight. I’m not telling you not to use them. Use your darkness as you see fit. Just know that if a trick backfires that you will lose a lot of respect. You will encourage your opponent to defeat you instead of working with you.
To counter a trick, the first step is detection. You wouldn’t walk into a trap if you knew it was there. Do some homework on your opponent. Learn what they have done and what they are capable of. This will also prove helpful in learning how to communicate with them. You aren’t studying the opponent to make assumptions. Making an assumption would be smug. But you have to have an idea about who you are up against. You should also make sure to enter negotiations with some sort of fact checker in case of deception.
The next step to countering a trick would be calling it out. This doesn’t mean flipping the table. You hold your opponent accountable. Not by blaming or insulting them but by questioning the reason behind their actions. An opponent engaging in trickery will likely gaslight you upon discovery. Call this out too. If the opponent has any interest in working with you, the tricks will stop. Because you could always just close negotiations. Reaching an agreement isn’t always the best course of action for you.
Power doesn’t always mean physical strength or superior weaponry. It doesn’t even matter who has more money in most cases. What determines power is the amount of leverage you have. The way to obtain leverage is knowing exactly what you would do if an agreement has not been reached. Don’t ever give the opponent the impression that you can’t do anything without them. Their cooperation is always encouraged, but never necessary.
A negotiation represents a different way to go about things. It’s safer not to expect anything to come out of a negotiation. You were going to do whatever it was you were going to do anyway. You may or may not have to make your opponent aware of this. You should never find yourself negotiating out of desperation. The funny thing about leverage is that two sides can believe they have it. A negotiation shouldn’t become a discussion about “who needs who” or about “who could do what to whom.” It should be about how you could help each other. Or at the very least, it should become about how you could stay out of each other’s way.
Get the right idea…
A negotiation is not a standoff. It is war. It’s very easy to push someone to the edge during a negotiation. Even a gentle spirit would become violent if they had no other choice. You will feel pressure to settle matters quickly. Spiritual pressure can come from anywhere, not just from your opponent. Perhaps those who are depending on you are hoping you will reach some sort of agreement. Spiritual pressure makes you rush. If you sense that a negotiation is being rushed, slow it down. The faster you move, the blinder you become. Negotiations should be settled quickly, but that doesn’t mean you rush. Rushing in a war will have you springing traps left and right.
It is difficult to be creative while in a rush. It will likely take a bit of brainstorming to come up with a solution that fits each side. Your imagination should be active before meeting with your opponent. If you’ve done your proper research on your opponent, you may already have a few offers in mind. This will give your opponent something to work with. You would want your opponent to brainstorm alongside you during negotiations. You will begin on opposing sides, but your goal should be to end things on the same side. Regardless of who changes their position.
If you are brainstorming with the opponent, you are on the right track. But before you get to this phase in the discussion, you’ll have to reach clarity through argument. You should expect resistance from your opponent at all times. Some will have a higher resistance than others. Remain confident and respectful in your approach even when dealing with difficult opponents. If your opponent stoops to a lower level, do not react to foolishness with more foolishness. Hold them to your higher standard.
You must see the best in your opponents while expecting them to do their worst. Your opponents are not monsters or demons. They are people. They are your equals. You shouldn’t enter a negotiation with any hatred or greed in your heart. The spirit must be ablazed, but not enraged. Anger and fear are the enemies of common sense. Don’t fight what confuses you. Question it.
Two people can have completely different experiences during the same event. It is important to see things as they are, but it is also important to see things the way your opponent sees things. Misunderstandings happen all the time. This is part of the reason why we don’t rush. We must remain sympathetic to the other side. You can pause a negotiation at any time to recap what has been said so far. It is not recommended to proceed with negotiations unless you are sure you are on the same page.
Make yourself clear…
The negotiation is possibly the best form of dialogue when it comes to forging empathy with another. Don’t derail the conversation to talk about morals, but if something is bothering you, settle the matter right there. Do the same if you’ve noticed any strange energy from your opponent. It is your opponent’s perception that is the problem after all. You don’t have to be kind, but you must be clear. This is the difference between being a nice guy and a good man.
Your reputation can determine a lot of your leverage. What you represent may be precisely what your opponent fears. Clarity is the reason we establish common ground. You could both fear the same outcome. What you and your opponent represent may not be opposite sides. A negotiation could be settled expediently if a misunderstanding was clarified. Keep an eye out for these moments. Opposite and different do not carry the same meaning. You can’t agree with what is opposite to you. However, you might be able to work something out based on your differences. You might not want the same thing, and that might be precisely why you work so well together.
It’s important to be transparent during negotiations, but if your opponent has you pegged, that’s not necessarily a good thing. Look for chances to surprise your opponent. A good way to shock your opponent is through keen observation. Another way to shock the opponent is to offer more than they had expected. Shock them in a way that inspires respect. A shocked opponent will listen closely to your next statement or question. You can properly set your opponent up for a shock by not sharing more than you have to. Too much transparency could give away your leverage.
Before entering negotiations, it would be wise to consider your opponent’s alternatives to reaching an agreement with you. Your opponent is just as uncertain of the benefits of an alliance as you are. The opponent will only agree to an offer that is better than saying no to you. To increase the chances of reaching an agreement, you have to find a way to make rejection a less favorable option. I’m not suggesting coercive acts such as blackmail or sabotage or taking hostages. But there has to be a way to pressure your opponent without doing so directly. Perhaps you have another entity making you a similar offer. Or perhaps you are the best choice out of the selection available to the opponent. Either way, if your alternative is better than theirs, they will be more inclined to agree with you.
Keep calm and identify the criteria…
No matter how tense a negotiation can get, you must do your best to separate the people from the problem. Each side is only doing what they believe is in their best interests. If the opponent makes a triggering comment or an emotional outburst directed at you, instead of attacking the opponent, educate them. Show them how little they know and then forgive them regardless of an apology. It is foolish to resort to personal attacks in a negotiation regardless of whether it was retaliatory or not. You want your opponent to follow your lead. Instead of focusing on each other, focus on the issues. Take the ego out of it and identify the criteria they are using to make their argument.
A negotiation must not come to a contest of willpower. Time will be wasted, and situations will escalate. If an argument becomes about who’s right or wrong, you are having a debate. Instead, you should maintain a negotiation based on criteria. Identify the opponent’s criteria. This would be like speaking fluently in their language. The mind tends to wander during conversation even for the most attentive conversationalist. If you don’t prove that you are listening, this makes it easier for the opponent to trick you. If you can’t repeat someone’s words back to them, you are selling yourself short during negotiations.
Remember the steel-man defense I spoke of in the previous briefing? Where you validate the strong points of the opponent’s argument to develop common ground? This is an example of active listening during a negotiation. If you pay no attention to their good points, they will only end up repeating themselves, which will annoy the both of you. So summarize what they tell you to show that you are listening. If possible, summarize in a way that was smoother than the original. If you are able to get your opponent’s point across better than they can, the opponent is more likely to rethink their position when you expose it’s flaws. If you understand the opponent’s criteria, then you know how to persuade them. Once you identify the opponent’s criteria, you can engage in my personal favorite way to win an argument. I call it hijacking: using the opponent’s argument against them.
Don’t just dismiss an opponent’s criteria because you don’t understand. Try to understand. However, no matter the criteria the opponent chooses, you will only change your position if the opponent manages to convince you by satisfying your criteria. In a negotiation, you typically have to win multiple times before an agreement is reached. Before you hear “yes” you will hear “no” a bunch of times. Count on that. But every time you encounter resistance; you need to be ready to question it.
Reach clarity…
Depending on the basis of your negotiations, there are usually many criteria you could choose from to base your argument. You could make a morality argument. You could base your argument off of tradition. You could make a scientific argument and so on. In other words, you can attack from any angle you see fit. Choosing a criteria is important because it helps your opponent think of answers that are suitable for you. The opponent even has a chance to point out a flaw in your thinking if they can find one. It’s important that everyone knows what rules they are playing by. It keeps the conversation contained. Whichever criteria you find yourself operating under, keep the ego out of it.
It doesn’t necessarily matter whose criteria is satisfied. Once it happens, the only result is clarity. Over the discourse, the interests of each side should’ve been made clear. Now that you know each other’s interests, you can trust each other to act according to those interests. Instead of standing against each other, you should now stand united against the issue. However, there is still plenty to disagree about. The negotiations have not ended. It has entered its second stage. Now, it’s time to create a solution that suits the both of you. You should invite the opponent to brainstorm with you.
For each solution you bring to the negotiation, make sure your opponent has an input. The more it feels like it was their idea, the more likely they are to agree. If you’re a salesman, look at it this way, people love buying stuff, but they don’t like being sold to. Your opponent would reject a perfect proposal if they had no hand in the brainstorming process. Even if you are just trying to be efficient, it is low-key disrespectful and will be taken as such. There are many insidious messages that could be conveyed. Such as “I know better than you.” Or “There’s a lot I’m not telling you.”
Your opponent is more likely to brainstorm with you if you set it up correctly. Brainstorming effectively starts with a hypothesis. State the hypothesis before welcoming the opponent to help you brainstorm. The hypothesis will justify any wild idea that may come up. An idea isn’t a decision, so don’t be afraid to bring up something unprecedented. While coming up with ideas, do not be critical of anything the opponent may come up with. You want their imagination active. Once you and your opponent finish listing ideas. Take the time to highlight the best ideas. This will eliminate the bad ideas as a result. Take your time with each of the highlighted ideas and build them up.
You must be creative before you become decisive. It is important to be as flexible as you are powerful. Whenever you make an offer to your opponent, you should also consider 2 or 3 other variants in the case of resistance. Build on whichever version of your solution they like the best. Once you have formed a new offer, repeat these actions until your solution can be improved no further. Do this with every idea that you and your opponent found plausible during the initial brainstorming. Eventually, you will come to a final offer. Then it will be a yes or a no. Will you reach an agreement or not?
Don’t expect a perfect run…
Keep in mind that things could still go wrong even if you’ve reached some sort of understanding with the opponent. Establishing empathy with the opponent doesn’t necessarily mean that an agreement will be reached. There is still your alternative to reaching an agreement that must be considered. Has any offer your opponent made sound better than not doing it? What if another problem occurs? Negotiating could take weeks, if not months. Many setbacks could occur that could raise new arguments and more criteria that must be satisfied through new arguments to reach clarity once again. Not reaching an agreement may still be within your best interest.
There is also always a possibility of the agreement itself being some sort of trick by the opponent. The opponent could renege on your deal. Sure, you could make a contract, and you should. But people have ways of dissolving, or voiding, or flat-out breaking the terms without any fear of consequences. You can only trust people to act within their interests. Just make it so that it is in the opponent’s best interest that they don’t go back on their word.
The opponent may also try to push the envelope by continuously making additions to the final agreement right before a decision is made. Taking advantage of your eagerness to finalize a deal, there would always be “one more thing.” If you spot this, put an end to negotiations for that day and suggest your opponent come up with any final amendments to the agreement they’d like you to consider. Be prepared to question any unreasonable demands.
There will be plenty of times where you’ll have to make a threat. Threats have their place in a negotiation, so it’s something you’ll have to learn how to do effectively. There’s a few decent reasons for making a threat. Perhaps you are dealing with an overly aggressive opponent. Perhaps the tricks will not stop. Threats should be used to temporarily silence the opponent while you get your point across. Threats cannot be empty. Your threat must come off as a promise you do not wish to fulfill.
Threatening someone isn’t quite the same as coercing them even though the line is very thin. You are still respecting your opponent’s choice when making a threat. There’s a bit of an art to it. Your threat is basically letting the opponent know that you are about whatever they are about. After your threat, it is guaranteed that the opponent will listen very closely to your next few words. You could use this moment to make an offer of some sort. Something low cost to you but of high interest to them.
This world needs more conflict…
To ensure that negotiations go as smooth as possible, make sure to have a mediator present whenever possible. It would be best if the mediator was some sort of mutually trusted 3rd party. Negotiations should be held on neutral ground, but if they are being held on the opponent’s turf, make sure you request proper accommodations. Inquire about any necessary accommodations if the opponent agrees to negotiate on your turf. Ensure that only the required parties are involved in the discussion. An audience would likely turn an argument into a debate. Each side would appeal to the audience instead of each other. And make sure you know what you want before meeting your opponent. Be free of any afflictions before you present yourself.
Before we shut the book on this one, I’d like to remind you of an underrated negotiation tactic: Silence. Silence is louder than you think. The first thing every master learned was how to get comfortable with silence. There should be no such thing as an awkward silence to you anymore. If the opponent says something that you disagree with. Remain silent for a second. Don’t react. Respond. It might take a few seconds to come up with a response. That’s okay. Let your opponent rush to break the silence. The silent moment might even pressure the opponent to reconsider.
The point of warfare is victory. But the opponent doesn’t have to lose in order for you to win. Who said that no good could come from manipulation? That is absurd. Like it or not, it is something you are going to have to learn how to do the right way if you are going to get anywhere. There will be no shortage of conflicts that need to be resolved. And that’s a good thing. This world needs more conflict, not less. The absence of conflict is not peace it is apathy. Nothing changes without suffering. You will not change if you avoid suffering. You have no choice but to face your opponent. A win-win solution may not always be possible, but a wise choice could still be made. Be clear of any afflictions and be creative before you become decisive.
References and photos
Getting to “yes” – Roger Fisher, William Ury, Bruce Patton.
My Hero Academia – Kōhei Horikoshi
Jimmy Neutron – Nickelodeon Studio
Invincible! – Cory Walker, Robert Kirkman