Negotiating in Maine

In Maine, like everywhere else, we are always negotiating. From talking a teenager into emptying the garbage to reaching an understanding on a contractor’s completion schedule, negotiation is almost continuous. We negotiate with ourselves, our spouses, our business acquaintances. The list is endless. 

Yet for such an important life skill one would think it would be a high priority in our education system but unless we were on the debate team in school, it is for the most part self-taught. So as part of our continuing education, let us consider what tools we need as property managers, condo board members, or all the other related professions to smoothly turn the gears of our world.

We have all known born negotiators. We have come across aggressive and argumentative people but how often have we crossed paths with good negotiators. Experts in the field says the formula for successful negotiating requires a focus on people instead of the problem; interests instead of positions; options instead of decisions; and criteria instead of results.

Negotiations involve people. People are bundled up with emotions, agendas, and backgrounds which often we know little about. Yet when we start negotiations we often forget about this important element of the equation and jump right into trying to force the solution to the problem. It is better to communicate before negotiating. Find out the perception of the other party because their perception is their truth. I have found when both parties have exactly the same facts often as not they will come up with the same conclusions. The difficulty is rarely are the facts undisputed or at least not available equally to both. By communicating to the other party your understanding of their position, the differences often become evident and self resolving.

But knowing the other party’s position is the easiest to learn. It is in the demand letter, or angry phone call, or the agenda item at the board meeting. Of more importance is learning the other party’s interests, that is, what is motivating the position in the first place and if there are common interests between the parties. Always ask ‘why’ or ‘why not’. The key to good negotiations is not taking a strong position but rather making a strong presentation of your interests and demonstrating a willingness to learn the other party’s interests. Here again the common thread is communications, as a misunderstanding of the parties’ interests is more detrimental to a satisfactory settlement than a mistake over positions.

One of the corners that inexperienced negotiators find themselves painted into is the assumption there is only one solution to every problem. This kind of thinking is neither creative nor flexible, attributes all successful negotiators posses. Developing acceptable options is a powerful tool, as it demonstrates a willingness to accommodate without giving anything up; it shows a willingness to understand the other side of the table; and it shows a willingness to make the discussions an easy and mutually satisfying process.

This type of thinking outside of the box generates some counter intuitive ideas. One such idea is that many agreements are based on disagreements. After all, if both parties want exactly the same thing then both parties can not obtain what they want. Instead, a successful negotiation will reveal each party’s interests and how to satisfy that need. If the interests are met the positions are irrelevant.

In going into negotiations, next to being well prepared, the best tool to bring to the table is standards for decisions making. Like a boxing match, the best fighters do not take all of the blows head on but divert them and use their opponents’ strength against them. Instead of insisting on being right about a certain point, step aside and let a set of standards or criteria speak for your argument.

As an example, say there was a difference of opinion on the reason a newly installed window was leaking. Rather than arguing with the contractor over his construction methods, simply ask what a nationally recognized authority would recommend. In this case, it might be the American Architectural Manufacturing Association standard practice guidebook could be the criteria to be recognized. Thus the issue is not a head-to-head two party dispute but now a neutral third party steps in as the arbitrator to a fair resolution.

If effect, this method develops a joint venture with the two parties searching for a mutual settlement based on objective criteria or appropriate standard. If the dispute is over construction cost estimates, allow a publication like RS Means or Marshall & Swift to provide guidance. If the argument is a condo governance issue, drag out the state statutes or bylaws to act as the mediator. A good negotiation is not only satisfying to both parties but preserves a relationship for the future.