Welcome to MWI's Negotiation Newsletter, providing you with negotiation news you can use. Our goal is to bring you helpful tips and advice, along with up-to-date information about MWI's work in the world of negotiation.

In this issue:

> MWI's Negotiation Training - 2008 Evaluation Results Summary

> Meet an MWI Negotiation Instructor: Anthony Wanis-St. John

> Featured Negotiation Tip: "Addressing Power Differentials in Negotiation: Don’t let ‘em push you around"

> About MWI's Negotiation Programs and Services
 

MWI's Negotiation Training - 2008 Evaluation Results Summary

This document outlines the aggregate marks and comments from all 2008 workshop evaluation results. We are pleased to report that the results quantify the experience of 694 workshop participants from across the globe.

Questions and categories have been taken directly from our standard Evaluation Form. When numerically possible, numbers reported are averages. Otherwise, the top five most common responses were provided (in order of frequency). We have included both positive comments as well as constructive criticism in this report – we take participant feedback seriously and strive to incorporate beneficial suggestions into our constantly evolving programs. Please note - though the top five comments are reported for each category, MWI consistently receives five or six positive comments for every constructive critique.


For additional information about this report or about MWI’s negotiation training and coaching services, please contact Stephen Frenkel, Director of Negotiation Programs, at 800-348-4888 x24 or sfrenkel@mwi.org.


I. COURSE EVALUATION – This category of questions asks participants about their overall satisfaction with the program. The questions are intentionally open ended, so that participants may comment on those aspects of the program that they feel most strongly about. Course modules have been developed by MWI and/or licensed from the Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School (PON).

a. Please rate your overall evaluation of this workshop on a scale of 1(poor) to 5 (excellent)

4.67

b. What were the most valuable learning points for you? Why?

• Value of preparation provided well needed structure
• The negotiation/Seven Element framework, which is essential to business success
• Finding common interests - reduces the other side’s fear and opposition upfront. Negotiation does not meant you are “against” one another
• Don’t enter negotiations to compete. Strive to collaborate
• The exercises were very valuable because I learned negotiation through experience

c. What presentations, concepts or exercises did you find the most valuable? Why?

• The first role-play exercise - it laid out all significant points, drew out how to use interests and options to benefit all parties, and provided an open-ended opportunity to generate many solutions
• Oil Pricing Exercise because it taught the value of taking a long-term view. It is an evocative and sticky learning experience, offering valuable lessons on winning versus succeeding, and shows the negative effects of mixed messages
• Role playing because it leads to significant opportunities to learn through doing. They were fun, engaging, and well-thought out
• All of the interactive exercises because they got us moving and learning through doing
• 7 Element framework

 d. What presentations, concepts or exercises did you find less valuable? Why?

• 70.5% surveys said that either there was nothing they found to be less valuable or alternatively that all presentations, concepts, or exercises were valuable.
• The first role-play exercise because negotiating the contract was fairly easy and not relevant to our industry (editor’s note: this is done purposely for reasons related to learning transfer). Fact pattern was long and detailed
• The Oil Pricing Exercise took up a lot of time
• Some of the theory required more time to practice and apply
• The segment on Difficult Tactics could have used more examples
• Not enough time

II. TRAINERS – MWI provides one or two trainers per Workshop (depending on the number of participants). MWI’s trainers are active practitioners in the field of Collaborative Negotiation and Dispute Resolution, serving not just as course instructors, but as mediators, consultants and coaches as well, which provides them with a depth of experience unmatched by other training providers. Our global roster of negotiation trainers ensures we can pair appropriate instructors with our clients based on need, experience, location, language capabilities and other important factors.

The responses listed have been combined for our entire training pool.

a. Please rate your Workshop trainers on a scale of 1(poor) to 5(excellent)

4.81


b. What were the trainers’ strengths? What was done well?

• Dynamic and knowledgable
• Sense of humor; uses good anecdotes
• Good listener
• Engaging, good examples
• Good communication

c. What might the trainers do differently the next time to improve?

• 71.9% surveys gave no response to this question or did not have any suggestions for improvement
• Give more examples of success or failure stories
• Have a faster pace after lunch; use “wake up” activities in the afternoon
• More time
• Answer questions more directly

III. WORKSHOP MATERIALS – Participants are provided with a number of materials at MWI’s workshops, including a manual, negotiation prep sheet pad, role-play materials (which include confidential instructions and learning points), helpful reminder tools and the book, Getting to Yes, by Fisher, Ury and Patton. The workshop is also facilitated with the use of PowerPoint.

a. Please rate the workshop materials on a scale of 1(poor) to 5(excellent)

4.61

b. Which materials (e.g. preparatory material, books, cases, overheads, worksheets, etc.) did you find most useful? Why?

• All - because they are great tools to continue practicing
• Workbook
• The Negotiation Prep Tool - it helps to organize the thought process and keep all parts of the negotiation in perspective
• Case scenarios because they were well designed, non-threatening and led to better understanding and application of techniques
• The slides - helped me follow along

c. Which materials (e.g. preparatory material, books, cases, overheads, worksheets, etc.) did you find least useful? Why?

• 76% surveys said that either there was nothing they found to be less valuable or alternatively that all presentations, concepts, or exercises were valuable
• Cases because they did not lend themselves to quick reference; the second case was detailed and long
• Books because there wasn’t enough time to read them beforehand and the content was repeated in the workshop
• Getting to Yes was a little dry
• There were too many PowerPoint presentations
   

IV. GOING FORWARD – Though we appreciate knowing our participants enjoy their workshop experience, MWI places greater focus on reinforcing application and behavior change. We incorporate Application Sessions into our workshops so participants learn to transfer new skills to their real-world challenges. To that end, we always ask participants to describe what they would like to do differently/incorporate going forward.

a. What key lessons will you take forward in your work?

• Be prepared, think of what to say and how to proceed
• Patience, interactive listening
• Using the seven elements of negotiation
• Collaboration
• Be objective, do not assume

b. Would you recommend this course to others in your organization? Why/why not?

• 100% of all participants would recommend this course
• Great tool for business and personal applications; invaluable; a must for everyday negotiations
• Knowledge is great
• One of the best training sessions I’ve attended
• Good foundation
• Really opens your eyes to dealing with difficult negotiation situations and breaks down the process into a very manageable situation

V. GENERAL COMMENTS

• Enjoyable, Great course
• Would recommend for anyone in a management role
• Thank you for the opportunity to attend this training
• Great workshop and training
• Good for purchasers
   

For more information about MWI’s Negotiation Training and Coaching services, please contact Stephen Frenkel, Director of Negotiation Programs at sfrenkel@mwi.org or 800-348-4888 x24.
 

> click here to comment
 

Outside the Classroom - Meet an MWI Negotiation Instructor

Featuring: Anthony Wanis St. John

Anthony Wanis-St. John is a Senior Negotiation Instructor for MWI, based in Washington, D.C.. In addition to his work with MWI, he is Assistant Professor in the International Peace and Conflict Resolution Division at American University’s School of International Service. Anthony has provided negotiation skills training to a range of MWI clients, including Visa International, Connecticut College, and the mediation program at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University. He has consulted with the World Bank on their judicial reform projects in countries such as Guatemala, Venezuela, El Salvador and Mexico. In addition, he has worked on the teaching teams of numerous executive education programs at Harvard Law School. Anthony earned his Ph.D. (2001) and M.A. (1996) from the Fletcher School, Tufts University. In 1999-2000, Anthony was a Doctoral Fellow at Harvard Law School’s Program on Negotiation.   For more information about Anthony, please click here.

Interview conducted by Stephen Frenkel, MWI’s Director of Negotiation Programs, on December 18, 2008.


SF: Thanks for joining me for this interview, Anthony. How long have you worked in the field of ADR?

AWSJ: I guess I’ve been working in this field since about 1996.

SF: And how did you get started initially?

AWSJ: It all started with courses in negotiation and mediation that I took while a graduate student at Tufts that really began to open my eyes. The professor was the late negotiation guru Jeffrey Rubin. The big “a-ha!” took some time to sink in, but it wasn’t until I was on a teaching team for a negotiation class at Connecticut College, running an Oil Pricing exercise, when it dawned on me much more deeply that life doesn’t have to be a zero-sum game and that we often turn it into one needlessly. Not long ago, I co-taught the International Mediation course in the same classroom at Tufts where I took it from Jeff Rubin ten years earlier. It was a very meaningful coincidence.

SF: Funny how that happens, isn’t it? So what do you do in this field to support the transition from a zero-sum game to collaboration?

AWSJ: Well, my principal interests are international, so I’ve focused a lot on conflict resolution and negotiation work abroad. For example, I have looked at ADR systems in developing countries as part of judicial reform projects. This often took me to countries where there has been a conflict, looking at the condition of their public institutions and assessing what’s needed. Often the core systems are part of the problem – they’re slow, corrupt, part of an oppressive political system, and they don’t provide people with an easy way to resolve their conflicts without violence. So my role has been to propose and monitor the implementation of mediation systems in some countries. Additionally, I have worked as a mediator in labor-management cases here in the US, particularly between public school boards and teachers unions. Also, I’ve done some mediation within corporations, among partners and executives.

SF: That sounds like some fascinating work. You’re also a Professor and negotiation instructor and coach, correct?

AWSJ: Yes, I work at the Peace and Conflict Resolution Program here at American University. I’ve been teaching ADR subjects since 1996. I started first as a teaching assistant in places like the Program on Instruction for Lawyers (PIL) at the Harvard Law School. There was also a course on Negotiation at the Harvard Business School that I got to TA in. After that, I started actually teaching my own courses in different places such as Clark University. In the consulting and training sphere, I’ve done negotiation training and coaching as far as Singapore and as close as Mexico and Canada. Conflicts within organizations sometimes have cross-cultural dynamics and I’ve moved into this area also.

SF: What types of courses are you teaching now at American University?

AWSJ: We have a full Master’s degree in International Peace and Conflict Resolution. I’ve been able to revamp an existing international negotiations course to focus on contemporary problems in international negotiations including terrorism, hostages, ceasefires, peace processes, etc. We have a required course called Culture, Peace and Conflict Resolution, that looks at the role of cultural differences in both facilitating conflict, but also in gaining knowledge that helps us resolve it

Then I created two brand new courses. One is called Comparative Peace Processes, which is all about the several different kinds of peace process negotiations that have been implemented in the last 20 years or so, post Cold-War era, in which negotiations were principally between ethnic or other groups within the same country—internal wars.

The other new course is called Negotiation Analysis and Skills, that much more focused on the interpersonal and intergroup domain, helping people figure out what’s going on in negotiations, what sort of tricks our minds are playing on us when we deal with people in conflict situations, and also how to improve our skills. It’s like a muscular form of the two day workshop that MWI conducts. It’s a lot of fun.

SF: That sounds great! How do you think your work in academia, your previous work with international dispute resolution systems and your other experience at a practitioner level inform and influence your work as a private negotiation instructor?

AWSJ: Well, some other aspects of the practice side I’ve focused on included years of full-time negotiation consulting and lots of mediation cases before going back to academia. I also got to do some Track II work on the international side, which is dispute resolution with people who are stepping out of their official roles to come together with people from the ‘enemy’ side. I did that with the Palestinian-Israeli conflict for a couple of years.

All of that practice lends you some credibility as an instructor. You can tell people what you did, what mistakes you made, how you fixed them, how you identified what was going on to help conflict parties get through. This makes instruction come to life and hopefully shows learners that you can put your money where your mouth is. Not all practitioners make good teachers (and vice versa), but negotiation and conflict resolution are things we can only partially teach through lecture. You have to give experiential knowledge too. I’ve created a lot of simulations and cases, all based on the real work I’ve done, but tightly linked to the concepts from theory. They go together.

SF: What do you like most about being part of this field?

AWSJ: One of my favorite parts is seeing how relevant this topic is to me. Like many people I’ve encountered conflict in my own life and conflict resolution for me was a very personally enriching discovery or, if you will, a journey of discovery. I’ve got a collection of childhood memories of violent encounters in the schoolyards and streets of Brooklyn and Queens. I believe in conflict resolution because it was personally useful and personally vital to me; I always wanted to believe that life did not have to be about ruthless social advancement based on victimizing others at the interpersonal or the international levels. Negotiation and conflict resolution were part of my own growth and transformation. Because I believe in it, it makes for a stronger case when I’m in front of the room with people.

SF: I understand and I’m sure our readers will too. Can I ask you some personal questions so our readers can get to know you a little better?

AWSJ: Of course.

SF: You’re located in Washington D.C., correct?

AWSJ: Yes, American University is at the heart of the political capital of the country; not a bad place to be in an election year. I myself live north of Baltimore, not far from the border with Pennsylvania.

SF: And what do you enjoy doing in your spare time, when you’re not working?

AWSJ: I love to play guitar – 80’s rock and acoustic guitar! I enjoy hiking and biking throughout Maryland and Virginia, and when there’s down time, sitting in front of our fireplace and reading to our three children. Right now we’re doing Mark Twain’s The Prince and the Pauper. The kids regularly put me to shame in chess, soccer and all creative activities. When there’s enough time, we really enjoy cooking big meals…everything from Middle Eastern to French or Mexican recipes. To our delight we discovered that our favorite restaurant from our eight years in Boston, the Helmand, opened a location in Baltimore. The best appetizers on the planet and a decent wine list. Why do such amazing foods come from zones of conflict? Despite the academic life, I cannot go to sleep without reading for pleasure. On my night table are titles like The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes, by Arthur Conan Doyle; The Name of the Rose, by Umberto Eco; Heaven’s Mirror, by Graham Hancock; and El General en Su Laberinto, by Gabriel García Márquez. Last year, I discovered an anthology of C.G Jung that has been a real eye-opener. Jung understood our blind-spots with regard to our ‘contribution’ to conflict in our lives. When in a cynical mood about organizational dynamics and workplace conflict, I devour the Dilbert cartoon strip. I’ve read The Lord of the Rings almost every year since 1981. I am addicted to J.R.R. Tolkien, especially while listening to the music of Yes or Led Zeppelin. This makes me as trendy as a fossil for my younger students.

SF: Last question - Do you have a quote that comes to mind in terms of your vision of collaborative negotiation or something that encompasses your work in the field.

AWSJ: I do – I hope it works for you. “The world is really what you make it – conflictual or collaborative. We can affect the world we live in and in some cases we can determine a lot about it.”

SF: Perfect. Thanks again, Anthony.

For more information about Anthony and his professional experience, please click here. Information about MWI’s Negotiation Training and Services can be found by clicking here.
 

> click here to comment
 

Featured Negotiation Tip and Article: “Addressing Power Differentials in Negotiation: Don’t let ‘em push you around"

by Stephen Frenkel, MWI's Director of Negotiation Programs

Participants in MWI’s Collaborative Negotiation Trainings often ask how they should handle significant power differentials (most frequently this question is asked by those who perceive themselves to be in a position of lower power).  “A collaborative approach is all well and good,” they say, “but what happens when the other side doesn’t need to buy into that approach because they have the upper hand?” 

My first inclination is to challenge them on the assumption that they have little or no power in their negotiations.  Negotiators often see the “grass as greener on the other side” and, in our experience (having worked with both sides of the table), we find negotiators most often buy into the false assumption that they are the more vulnerable party. 

It’s essential to point out that, even if one party has less power by certain standards (resources, level of influence, etc..)  they still have some and, even more importantly, the power they do have can be leveraged.  When we consider that the entire purpose of a negotiation is to create and extract as much value as possible from the combined experience or resources of both or all players, this becomes more apparent.  After all, if either party could go it alone, why would they be negotiating with the other in the first place?  They’re negotiating because they need each other (or could at least see the possibility of benefiting from the involvement of the other) in some form or fashion.  In other words, they’re already aware that the value that can be created between the entities is greater than the value they can create on their own. 

Our challenge is to make this understanding explicit; to confirm that both parties recognize the value of taking a collaborative approach to negotiating and, through this confirmation, to incentivize them to continue conversations in a productive manner that enables both parties to benefit from the interaction.  We build our capacity to do this through systematic pre-negotiation preparation that takes the following into account:

Effective preparation begins with an analysis of your and their Interests (i.e., their needs, concerns, goals and fears).  Define what’s important to them and ask yourself - how does working with you meet those needs better than working with any of your competitors?  Though many choose to focus on price, I’d caution you against this.  Price wars tend to do little but drive the bottom line down for your entire industry and train your negotiating counterpart to threaten to walk so you’ll give in on this issue.  Rather, shift the focus to the other matters that are important to them – customer service, access, time to market, quality of product or services, payment terms, and other tangible or intangible aspects of the deal that make up the total value of the arrangement.

It’s vital to find out what’s important to your counterpart and to articulate, however you can, how you meet those needs better than anyone else they might work with – this is essentially your value proposition.  In this way, you make yourself as indispensable as possible and limit their power as they realize that they need you as much as you need them or that they benefit more from your involvement and contribution than from anyone else’s.  You’re no longer a “commodity,” you’re a rare exception that brings more value to the partnership than anyone else in the field.

Second, at the same time that you’re articulating your value proposition to them (and therefore limiting the attraction of their Alternatives, i.e. what they’ll do to meet their needs if they don’t come to agreement with you), you should be researching and improving your own Alternatives.  Who else could you meet with and work with that would satisfy your Interests as well as they can?  Sometimes, this is less likely – such as in business development instances, in which you’re already pursuing other business whether or not you win theirs.  In these instances, you can’t necessarily find a replacement as you could in a negotiation over a car.  Admittedly however, should you happen to win all other business pursuits, you become much less “desperate” for theirs.

Knowing how you define success, and what you’d do if you don’t reach agreement, can prepare you to walk away if the proposed outcome does not meet your needs.  Furthermore, if they’re pushing unfavorable terms (such as unreasonable risk or liability without appropriate rewards), knowing you have the Alternative of walking away and turning down business that’s potentially harmful to you can be empowering in and of itself. 

Which brings us to our third source of power in negotiation – Objective Standards.  Objective Standards are benchmarks, industry norms, precedents and other ways that negotiators determine if an idea or potential resolution is fair.  Researching Objective Standards, and raising them at appropriate times, can protect you from susceptibility to unreasonable requests.  You should know what’s fair – as determined not by you or your counterpart, but by others – your industry, laws, expert opinions or other facts that aren’t capable of being manipulated by either of you.  Understanding what’s fair and reasonable and having the capability to inform yourself and your counterpart on what’s “reasonable” (outside of the control of either of you) is a source of power.

In conjunction with the Objective Standards you raise, it’s important to Communicate your level of Commitment and the consequences to them and to your Relationship should they try to coerce you to accept unfavorable terms.  Help them take a long-term view, pointing out the short-term benefits of their taking advantage of their power as well as the long term consequences – which can include but are not limited to: a damaged relationship, your looking to extract value elsewhere in the process, both of you building a damaged reputation for business in your industry, etc.  It’s important for them to realize that a bad deal for you is essentially a bad deal for them.

Once it’s clear that you’re interested in a deal that’s fair, reasonable, durable and sustainable, together you can generate the Options that satisfy both of your needs.  Your success depends not only on your ability to prepare for the negotiation and to execute effectively, but also on your ability to engage with your counterparts and to educate them on the value of taking a collaborative approach.  Securing a commitment from your counterpart to negotiate collaboratively is a critical first step in dealing with perceived power imbalances.   Negotiations should be viewed as an opportunity for sustained partnership generation and long-term value creation.  Failing to persuade your counterpart to negotiate collaboratively with you will result in outcomes that are based not on the strength of your combined ideas but rather on who can exert more power over the other.  The result of this is multiple casualties over the long-term, whether either of you realize it at the time or not.

> click here to comment

 

MWI offers customized negotiation training and coaching services. Our work is built on the ideas of collaborative/interest-based negotiation, generated at the Harvard Negotiation Project and captured in the bestseller Getting to Yes by Roger Fisher and Bill Ury. The underlying goal of these programs is to maximize value for all parties while improving long-term working relationships. For more information about these services for you or your organization, please click here.


> click here to comment

Questions and comments should be sent to negotiation@mwi.org.

Copyright 2008 Mediation Works Incorporated.  All rights reserved.