This contract tip is about one of my most successful negotiation strategies and how it is counterintuitive.
I focus as much as I can on making sure my counterparty gets what they need from this deal.
I didn't adopt that strategy until much later in my career. Early on, contract negotiations were all about my client and me. How could I advance our priorities? How could I get the counterparty to agree to our language? What do I want them to agree to in the contract to advance to get the contract where I want it to be? If they end up with the crumbs I leave behind, that was ok.
At some point, I started to notice that I was able to get better outcomes when I started my strategy with figuring out there goals and needs. I'd ask myself, "What changes could I make to the deal structure and terms that would benefit them?"
To be clear, this isn't giving away the farm. I remain a zealous advocate and make sure that I'm optimizing the deal to support my client. What I learned over the years is that advocacy and empathy are not mutually exclusive. In my negotiations, this means I fight for what we need from the deal and concede quickly whatever we can to help our counterparty achieve the same thing.
If you negotiate a contract with me, you'll see I make a lot of concessions that aren't meaningful to my company or client. When we get to the stuff that is important to us, my focus isn't on winning. It is about finding the path to agreement on terms that work for both parties.
Empathy in negotiation is not a weakness. Quick concessions on less important points do not mean we are losing the negotiation.
Empathy is understanding our counterparties' objectives and priorities and working hard to help them achieve those while protecting our interests.
Have you tried this strategy? What was your experience with it?
