Information ( Part 4 ) – 3 Crucial Variables

Dear Readers, Today we will continue to discuss about the Important Part of Crucial Variable of Negotiation that we were discussing.
So, As a Negotiator, you must be sensitive to the Non-Verbal Factors in any Communication. Even Saint Paul advised, “The Letter Kills, but the spirit gives life.“
So During the Negotiation Event, Force yourself to step back so you can listen with your “Third Ear” and Observe with your “Third Eye“. This detachment will enable you to hear the words in their proper Non-Verbal Context and Enable you to see the Pattern. 
In Negotiation, cues are meaningful if they are Part of a Cluster and Indicate the direction of Movement.
To show the significance of cues if they are seen as part of a Pattern, I give you this case in Point. Let’s say you are trying to sell an idea to your Boss. As you start your explanation, you’re aware that the boss is starting out the window at a Telephone Pole. 
That’s a cue that in and of itself may mean nothing, like my rubbing my chin. You continue your discourse. Now the boss leans back in his chair, constructs a steeple with his fingertips, and squints at you through the steeple.
That’s another cue.
But in conjunction with the first cue, it may be meaningful. Nevertheless, you continue to pitch away. The boss starts drumming his desk-top with his left Index Finger. 
That’s another Cue, continuing to form a pattern with the preceding 2. Does the finger tapping mean, “Keep up the good work! You’re doing fine!” Hardly. A literalist would probably think, “Hey, my boss has got a Latin American Beat!“.
Now the boss stands up, puts his arm around your shoulders, and begins to edge you toward the door. That’s still Another Cue.
If you’re a halfway perceptive, the cue pattern is glaringly observable. (A literalist would ask himself,”What’s the story? Why this sudden Affection? What’s this person trying to pull? I thought he had a family!“) 
But it is to be hoped that you aren’t a literalist. By the time you’re at the door, the boss’s eyes are opaque, and he’s nodding goodbye. I’m obviously exaggerating here, but my point is that the big advantage in reading cues is that in a cluster they furnish feedback concerning how you are progressing toward your goal. If the pattern is not to your liking, you can use your lead time ( before you get to the door) to make the necessary adjustments.
How can we apply all this to a negotiating situation?
The key piece of information that any negotiator would like to have about the other party is their Real Limits or just how much they will sacrifice to make this deal. 
In other words, what is the lowest price that the seller will sell for, or what is the absolute top figure that the buyer will pay? Very often this can be ascertained by observing the pattern of concession behavior on the part of the other side.
Suppose that I’m Negotiating with you to Purchase some expensive stereo equipment that contains Advanced Technology new in the Marketplace. Let’s say for the sake of argument that all I have in my budget is $1,500.
Since your product is new, you would like to get as much as you can to Test what the customer demand might be for this Sophisticated Technology.
If my First offer to you is $1,000, and my next offer is $1,400, how much money will you assume I have in my budget? If our relationship is that of adversaries with little Trust, you may well anticipate that I actually have $1,600, $1,800, or even $2,000 to spend.
Why?
Because the increment between $1,000 and $1,400 is so great that you probably will expect that I have more than $1,500. Even if I swear that I have only $1,500, and it happens to be True, you are not likely to believe me in a perceived Competitive Transaction.
This is valid because we all tend to disregard the protestations of the other side. Our Experience teaches us that the increments of concession behavior are the most accurate barometer of True Limits of authorization.
Accordingly, if the Environment for Negotiations is competitive, you see me as an adversary, and in order to achieve a collaborative result, I will have to play the competitive game.
In this climate here’s how I should let you know that $1,500 is my ceiling. I make an initial Offer of $900, which you reject. My next Tender is $1,200. Then I extend myself to $1,350. After some delay I go to $1,425. The next Advance is to a reluctant $1,433.62. 
It is easier to get you to believe I have $1,500 this way, because I have steadily decreased the increments instead of acting like a drunken sailor. Creeping upward as I just did is known as playing the “Monetary-Increment Game.“
Some of you reading this Article who are disciples of Howard Cosell may say, “I don’t like to Play Games. Why can’t I just tell it like it is?“.
Certainly that’s your prerogative, but remember that in order to achieve a collaborative result in a competitive environment, you have to Play the Game. If you don’t want to do this, you have an alternative: You can change the climate of our relationship to build Trust between us. To the extent that you are successful, you can minimize the Gaming.
My Point is merely that you take your reality as it actually is and must always operate in accordance with that reality. So to Repeat: To Achieve a Collaborative result in an Adversary Environment, you have to Play the Competitive Game.

So, Readers In Next Part we will discuss more about this “Monetary-Increment Game“.
So, do not forget to Follow my Website for Updates.
“Information ( Part 5 ) – 3 Crucial Variables“