The College of Engineering hosted an insightful workshop on how to negotiate better, covering indispensable skills that undergraduate and graduate students alike will need in their future career paths. Specifically, the Ombuds Office, which specializes in solving problems without conflict and through mediation, presented terms and scenarios in which negotiations may have high stakes and can lead to issues arising among participants. The office consists of University Ombuds Jim Wohl and Assistant Ombuds Cinnamon Adams who both spoke at this event in the Francis L. Castleman building.
Mr. Wohl, a former teacher of negotiations, initiated the workshop by describing the classic negotiation of a buyer at a car dealership, and how the dealer is oftentimes restrictive with information and their expressions to keep a foothold in profiting off the buyer. I was partially compelled to attend this workshop because my mother is a strong negotiator, once chipping a few hundred bucks a month off our lease of a Toyota Highlander, which makes sense given the common tactic in the past was for a seller to be stern and not budge on their offer. Even in this situation, however, interdependence among both parties is crucial for goals to be achieved, considering dealerships need to sell their cars, and people need to drive.
Alluding to the title of the event, “The Art of Negotiation,” information should be gradually given between counterparts, or the two people or groups in a negotiation, to maximize the mutual contentment felt by the end. Wohl elaborated by separating positions and interests during a negotiation, meaning that a car buyer proclaiming they will pay $20,000 is a position, but if they divulge that $20,000 is all they can invest in a car, that displays their interests. In a sense, someone stating their upper threshold of payment at the beginning of a negotiation is like playing their advantageous cards too early.
Wohl mentioned to not “get married to your target price.”
University Ombuds Jim Wohl
Though it may not happen immediately, the dealer is willing to make sacrifices by expanding the pie, or relinquishing information, if it means their car sells, since that is their target goal. The buyer also has a target goal, except theirs is obtaining a car. There is more nuance to targets such as the emotional vitality of wanting to buy a particular car under a certain price, so Wohl mentioned to not “get married to your target price.” Furthermore, counterparts should consider their best alternative to a negotiated agreement, or their BATNA, if the deal falls through. Therefore, buyers should weigh their options at other dealerships before striking a deal, and sellers should name a more reasonable price before dropping the deal and potentially losing out on a sale. Using reference points, they can eventually reach a zone of possible agreement, where the transaction is finalized.
We practiced playing our metaphorical cards properly by negotiating in an imaginary scenario with a partner, each representing rival companies. By selecting from a deck of real cards, those with clubs became Dr. Terry Jones, a scientist who has found the cure to a pregnancy-related disease, except he lacks enough of the antidote — the juice of rare oranges — to save the thousands of infected women. Those with hearts negotiated as Dr. Pat Roland, who desires the rinds of those specific oranges, for a different cause involving a gas leak. The task was to find a financial and moral consensus between their respective companies that could solve both issues while avoiding an outright bidding war for the oranges. In essence, a negotiation was to take place between the companies.
Partaking in the exercise and reflecting on it showed just how little each businessman knew about each other. The companies had ongoing lawsuits against each other, so they likely wanted those dropped in light of an agreement on the oranges. Patent money was also on the line, yet those factors were not mentioned during the negotiation. Despite being silly in nature, my partner and I came up with a solution to have the orange seller separate the rinds from the oranges, as we would pay an equal amount for our parts of the oranges.
In real negotiations, many types of questions would need to be asked, including open-ended, closed, probing and leading questions to reach a satisfactory conclusion. Being an active listener also makes the other party feel valuable, as well as favorable non-verbal communication, including eye contact, that demonstrates intent listening. Finally, it is imperative to repeat the statements of your counterpart to maintain accuracy, but if the negotiation ever goes awry, perspective-taking and understanding must be shown to prevent emotions from escalating.
The workshop was enjoyable because of its interactivity, taking a lecture and transforming it into something more interpersonal. I asked Mrs. Adams if there would be any similar events in the future, though she told me the Ombuds Office usually helps engineering students in a one-on-one setting for any conflicts that arise during graduate school. Additionally, a fifth-year chemical engineering doctoral student, who chose to remain anonymous, stated that the event was valuable, and she joked that I withheld information from her during our negotiation exercise.