Deals that disappear

A common example of lack of clarity occurs when one party intentionally makes an unrealistic opening offer. Early in the negotiation, one person throws out an outrageous opening offer although it is intended as a trial balloon, it is presented as though it were a reasonable offer or worse, as something for which there is very little negotiating room. If the offer doesn’t get the expected reaction (shock, disbelief, laughter, and ultimately bursting of the balloon), the person who made the offer often recounts, with great animation, that the other person “didn’t even bat an eye.”
Too much is made of the fact that a counterpart doesn’t faint when an unrealistic number is offered. What you don’t hear about so often is the follow-up. As I was writing this book, I purposely followed up every time I heard such a story. I tracked the negotiations to see the results. I was not totally surprised to discover that — in a majority of the cases — the deals fell through. In all but one case, the reason was an excuse other than the initial high demand, such as scheduling conflicts, changing concepts, and postponements. This little study of mine was not scientific in any way, but it provided interesting support for my theory. When you start with an opening offer or a demand that is well outside the reasonable range, the other side will often slink away rather than get involved in a futile negotiation.
It would be difficult to ascertain what percentage of negotiations never get underway because the initial demand was too high. I believe that it happens more often than most people suspect. The person who is turned off may never say a word to the party making the demand. Think of your own behavior. If you think the prices in a boutique are outrageous, do you say so? Or do you smile at the shopkeeper and say, “Just looking”?

The High Cost of Not Being Clear

I realize that my clarion call for clarity flies in the face of advice you may receive from others who are not professionals in the area of negotiating. In fact, some say that ambiguity is the lubricant of negotiations. That saying not only prolongs a bad myth about negotiating, it has spilled blood, cost lives, and wasted millions of dollars, drachmas, and dreams.
The first Gulf War (Desert Storm) may well have been avoided if the diplomats had been clearer in the days just before the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq. President Saddam Hussein of Iraq wanted to destroy Kuwait for a number of reasons — all of which were good and valid to him. He was not prepared to take on the United States, let alone the entire world. Therefore, he met for several hours with America’s Ambassador April Glaspie. The ambassador said to Hussein, “We have no opinion on Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait.”
Astonishing.
The ambassador insists that there was more to the discussion than was printed in the transcript, but she doesn’t deny these comments. A disparity exists between the two parties’ renditions. Assume that each party related the events as accurately as possible. Obviously, they were not as clear with each other at the time of the original discussion as they were in the reporting of the discussion afterward.
Even Hussein’s telling of the tale indicates some lack of clarity regarding his intentions toward Kuwait. He never said his intention was to eliminate Kuwait from the face of the earth. On the other hand, the United States never even hinted at the kind of response that was ultimately invoked. Obviously, the communication was not clear. Clear communications may or may not have prevented the Gulf War. A clear message from the United States to Iraq may not have been believed. Perhaps Iraq was willing to wage war against the United States for some mysterious reason. The world will never know. However, documents show that within the month before the invasion, the United States communicated directly to Saddam Hussein in a way that caused him to think Iraq could cross the border into Kuwait without repercussions. If you ever question the wisdom of being clear, please think for a moment about the men and women who died in the Gulf War and their families who still miss them. Every war provides stories of the high human price paid for failed communications. In World War II, Japan actually intended to send us a two-hour warning before the attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. The Japanese decoder at the embassy was out sick that day, and his replacement could not type. Consequently, the message wasn’t delivered to anybody in authority until after the fact.

General distractions in Negotiation

Other barriers to clarity can be fatigue, laziness in preparation, or the clutter of distracting interruptions.

• Fatigue: You may be just plain tired and unable to focus. Pay attention to your body’s signals. Sometimes a brisk walk outdoors revives you. Good nutrition and adequate rest are requirements for a master negotiator. If you eat right and get plenty of sleep, you can eliminate the need for cup after cup of coffee to stay alert. But, in a pinch, an occasional dose of caffeine works, too.
• Laziness: You may not have prepared well enough and you are dreading being clear on some facts that are unsubstantiated. If this situation strikes a familiar chord, do your homework.
• Interruptions: Your listener may be doodling or not making eye contact. The room temperature may be extreme. Noise levels may be too high for you to be heard clearly. Hopefully, you are assertive enough to request these changes appropriately.

If the conversation or negotiation is important, be sure that you are well rested, prepared, and in an environment where clear communications can be heard.