A Few Useful Tips To Avoid Impasse in Negotiation

Negotiation can be pretty rough-and-tumble, as we have been witnessing in Washington the last several weeks, but skillful negotiation isn’t about sending the other side away feeling like a loser.  There is no talent to that and little long-term reward.  While we’re observing the heated, intransigent interactions in D.C, here are some techniques from The Skilled Negotiator to use when conflict has become too heated:

Ask clarification questions.  (The wise negotiator asks more than tells).

Make headway on less contentious issues, returning to others later.

Reposition or frame the problem in positive or mutual-gain terms.

Link something they believe or value to what you also believe or value to reduce the perception of being miles apart or incapable of agreement.  Also even a moment of agreement tends to reduce resistance, since people are more inclined to work with someone they consider at least in some ways similar to themselves.

Emphasize what has been accomplished over what has not.  There is a tendency when negative emotions become involved or people fear losing “face” to focus on the negative. When a negotiation is framed as having already accomplished a fair or significant amount, the focus shifts to the positive and again reduces resistance.

Encapsulate conflict issues to avoid infection of other issues.  Don’t let the mash potatoes infect the string beans.  That’s a useful child’s analogy.  When issues pile on top of each other, effective negotiation is unlikely.

Avoid focusing on petty issues or ones that are likely to resolve themselves later on.  Skillful negotiators are on the look out for topics that will take them away from their goals.  They bring the discussion back to topics of relevance to both parties or discuss priorities to avoid frequent diversions.

If style is part of the problem — you’re too much alike or too different in how you talk to people — meet the other person halfway.  This is difficult when emotions are involved.  But the negotiator that knows his/her negotiation style and also how to adapt to others in not likely to become stuck in conflict.

These are a few tips for avoiding impasse.  Even these few can make a significant difference in what’s accomplished in negotiation or even in simple disagreements.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

How Distributive Negotiation Works — A Look at House Republican Strategy

So much has been written about integrative negotiation where the goal is often win-win, that we forget that another type of negotiation exists as well — distributive.  In this blog published today on Huffington Post, “Are Republicans Crazy? No!” you can read about how distributive negotiation (win-lose) is being used by the Republicans — why to them a shut-down of the government makes sense.  Has the culture in D.C. become distributive all around?  That may well be at the heart of our problems.  It’s not something likely to change overnight.  And some degree of distributive negotiation can even be healthy within a larger integrative format.  But we’re past that point in Washington.  With senators and congressmen talking to empty chambers and communication via speeches, effective negotiation is a stretch.  You have to wonder what would have happened if Jefferson went for coffee whenever John Adams or George Washington got up to speak.  That’s what we have now. And it’s downright dangerous.

 

Posted in Politics | Leave a comment

How Much Has Really Changed For Women Since 1995?

In 1995 my first trade book They Don’t Get It, Do They? was published.  It should be a relic by now.  Here is an article about the book from the L.A. Times of that year.   How much has really changed?

Cinderella and the Glass Ceiling

The title annoyed some people, but it referred to both men and women not getting it in terms of dysfunctional patterns of communication and politics that were holding women back.  As those of you who read this blog know, I’ve segued to fiction with Shadow Campus.  Sometimes a story can convey more effectively than an essay, blog or lecture how subtle exclusions can still slow or terminate a woman’s career if she isn’t watching for communication patterns that undermine her competence and leadership. See Tutorials that deal with some of these patterns by going to the Categories section to the right and clicking on Tutorials for Women.

Posted in Shadow Campus, Tutorials for Women | Leave a comment

A Persuasion Case Study: Hillary Clinton and Benghazi

In case you didn’t get a chance to read my recent post, I’m adding it here.  Whether you are a supporter of Hillary Clinton or not, you may find some useful thoughts about dealing with a huge issue in the path to your goals.

Hillary’s To Do List on Benghazi — And Soon!

There are issues that you just have to get in front of if you’re going to win an argument or an election. Among those who study persuasion, a term for this is “inoculation.” You take a flu shot to prevent yourself from getting the flu. In politics, you inoculate against issues likely to be raised by your opponents before they have a chance to infect too many voters. When there’s an impending political threat, your counter-narrative must be communicated quickly, widely, firmly and consistently.

The leader among potential election-breakers requiring Hillary Clinton’s early attention is, of course, what has come to be known simply as “Benghazi.” Regardless of yesterday’s release of a State Department audit that (counter to specious GOP claims) confirmed as unbiased the review headed by Ambassador Thomas Pickering and former Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen, the anti-Clinton brigade sees Benghazi as a premier weapon in its arsenal.

There are limits to how Secretary Clinton can inoculate against the droning replays of the now familiar out-of-context take on her reply to Senator Ron Johnson’s (R-WI) insistence that the country was misled regarding the origins of the attack. This elicited from her a response that is rarely heard intact. It’s sliced and diced for best effect.

Just so we remember, Secretary Clinton actually said this: “With all due respect, we had four dead Americans … Was it because of a protest, or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided they’d go kill some Americans? What difference, at this point, does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to keep it from ever happening again, Senator.” Her point was that the most pressing issue is one of prevention, not that the death of four Americans does not matter. She likely wishes she’d said, “At this point what matters most…” instead of “What difference, at this point, does it make?” But that is water over the dam.

In advance of the Benghazi onslaught that will surely come if she runs for president, Secretary Clinton needs to (1) set a proactive tone — a la “Let’s talk about Benghazi.” She needs to (2) repeatedly acknowledge that people have a right to ask what actually happened and what has and is being done to prevent similar attacks in the future, while (3) making the point, not the excuse, that fatal attacks against U.S. diplomats have happened during Democratic and Republican administrations alike but that toting up fatalities, like manipulating quotes for political gain, would be gratuitous, tasteless and futile.

President Obama recently took an it’s-your-right-to-ask approach when he spoke to Americans about his reasons for choosing among options a military strike against Syria. Such acknowledgement wasn’t his first approach, but by the time he spoke to the nation, he was making it clear that he understood and indeed welcomed questions and challenges.

It’s important that Secretary Clinton take a similar approach, no matter how many times she has to explain what transpired during the Benghazi attack. In attitude and tone, she must from now on avoid even a whiff of resistance, annoyance or stridency when responding to challenges and charges on that issue. To do otherwise will only provide fuel for the fire.

With this approach to the topic firmly in place, Secretary Clinton should additionally provide a persuasive counter-narrative that surrounds the events with a full and truthful context composed of at least these arguments:

(1) What happened in Benghazi did not happen in isolation of budget and other decisionsmade in the Senate and the House.

(2) Events like the Benghazi attack as they transpire in real time are always different than those we envision in hindsight.

(3) No president or secretary of state is free of concern about diplomats — and all have done what they considered the very best for their country at the times when similar securitydecisions were made.

(4) No one who serves this country is free of the burden of such losses. It credits no legislator, pundit or presidential candidate to use this issue as a club or to pretend they bear no responsibility at all.

Secretary Clinton needs to shape the message to fit her deepest understanding of the events — proactively, sensitively and repeatedly. If she does so, most Americans will tire of seeing the politicizing of Benghazi to blame the one candidate who has openly and honestly respected their right to know the truth.
Kathleen latest book is the debut mystery-thriller Shadow Campus and she also blogs atkathleenkelleyreardon.com.

Posted in Choice Points, Politics | 2 Comments

New Facebook Page for Shadow Campus

Yesterday I posted a new author Facebook Page.  Stop by to visit at www.facebook.com/kathleenkelleyreardon and click “Like” if you want to keep up with what is happening with the book and the characters.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

First Book Club Visit for Shadow Campus

The First Book Club Visit for Shadow Campus

I should have done a video of this book club visit because it was so enjoyable.  Held in East Greenwich, Rhode Island it is a book club sponsored by the YMCA.  It was my first visit to a book club as an author and the first time they’d had an author come to visit.  It was special.

I found myself talking about Shamus, the lead character, and the others as if they exist.  For me they do and what I truly enjoy is all the e-mails I’ve received from readers telling me how much they like, are intrigued by, want to know more about, or hope will be in the sequel.  There appear to be many women out there who would LOVE to meet Shamus and certainly want him in the books to come.  I’m pretty fond of him too — though he is rough around the edges.

And what of the sequel? I was asked.  Will there be a sequel?  At the moment I’m working on two sequels. Soon I’ll be focusing completely on one.  And, yes, Shamus will be in both of them.

What about Dr. Michaels?  That was the question from a young woman, Neta.  She’s with the YMCA and visited the book club yesterday, especially to talk about the characters and how much she’d enjoyed Shadow Campus.  She really knew the characters, which made it all the more enjoyable. “Will Dr. Michaels become closer to Meg?”  “Will he even be in the sequel?” she wondered.  The handsome, competent, 50ish doctor is indeed hard to dismiss.  If we don’t see him extensively in the next book, it’s likely he won’t be gone for long.  I guess the best answer is, “We’ll see.”

If you could choose an actress to play Meg, who would that be?  I’m one of those people who aren’t good at thinking of the names of actors off the top of her head, even when I remember great acting.  One member of the group suggested I describe a part played by an actress who could do Meg’s character and they’d figure out who she is.  But as that was being suggested, I thought of Sandra Bullock.  She has an edge as an actress and could do the scenes between brother and sister with warmth, annoyance and anger as required.  She can portray strong, but also sensitive.  It seemed most of us liked the choice, thought I’m sure there are others.  I mentioned Bullock would need to be sandy blonde.  Neta said she tends to think of Meg as a red head.  I asked if she thinks of Shamus as a red head too, and she said no.  They both, however, have wavy hair that is sometimes bothersome to Shamus.

How long did it take to write Shadow Campus?  Now that’s a tough question because between being a professor, writing articles and books about communication and politics at work, like The Secret Handshake and It’s All Politics, raising three children and so on, the manuscript for SC rarely came out of my desk over the past several years except during the summers.  I’ve also dealt with some medical issues for which the YMCA has been a great help.  A marvelous artist friend of mine, Grace DeVito, when asked that question answers with “About 25 years.”  What she means by that is that it took her 25 plus years to develop the skill that went into the painting being inquired about.  I’d like to say the same, but my career has taken a variety of twists and turns and so I’ve been learning to write in many different ways – from weighty social science, Harvard Business Review type articles, to complex and simple, short blogs.

The “bones” of the entire story was written in a very intense week.  Some time ago during a one-week semester break, I just couldn’t seem to not get up around 5 a.m. and begin to write this story.  It flowed.  I’d get up, write, get the kids off to school, and write, write, write.  That was the beginning of Shadow Campus.  To be honest, I think the story benefitted from being in the drawer so much over the past several years because during those busier times I could not have given the characters the attention they deserved.  So let’s say 5 years  (5  summers for sure) in the making, but maybe as Grace says, it was far more in the learning.

How did you feel when you finished and knew it would be published?  I had to think for a bit on this one when Judy, who’d arranged my visit, asked after the meeting was over.  Even with my nonfiction books, when you’re pushing for a deadline and the copyeditor is getting back to you and you back to him/her, you’re painting sample covers as I did,  your husband is experimenting with graphics for the cover, there are loose ends to tie up, you’re so busy there isn’t time to think about being finished or what that means.  But for a first novel, especially, publication is meaningful.  I remember one night before going to sleep I was alone thinking, “It’s really going to be published now.”  Shamus, Meg, Rashid, and the others who had lived in my brain and heart would now belong to everyone who reads Shadow Campus.  I wondered for a brief moment if they and I were ready.  But fortunately that passed quickly.  It’s a little like having children, you’re never truly ready.

I remembered my father asking when I was in my late twenties, “Why don’t you write a novel?”  I was touched by his faith in me, but replied, “I’m not ready yet, Dad.”  He said, “Yes you are.”  So the book is dedicated to him – for always nudging me further — and to my mother who was always there for support, for laughter, for helping me understand people.  I remember one day when I was quite young seeing someone in the grocery store acting oddly.  I said something to my mother.  She replied, “Kathleen, you never know what other people are going through.”  I’ve never forgotten that.  When I develop characters, they aren’t people who we know on the surface only.  We sense, in most cases, that much has gone one in their lives because it must have.  My mom gave me that awareness then and by the way she lived.   She was a good, caring, insightful person and funny too.  None of us is a single note.  We’re each a symphony.

I loved the relationship development between Shamus and his sister and the way they talked with each other.  How did you do that?  I have a brother, Kevin, who is three years older than I.  While Meg and Shamus’ interactions of defensiveness, warmth, anger, verbal sparring are not identical to the way Kevin and I talk, some of the tone is similar at times.  I also have three children and a nephew and niece whose interactions likely contributed and friends whose siblings I also know.  You can’t help but pick up pieces here and there.

The scene where Shamus brings yellow flowers to Meg is a case in point. I was thinking of a particular brother and sister and extending that.  It’s tender and a bit self-judgmental with a twinge of residual jealousy.  He loves his sister but he’s still somewhat angry at her and at himself.  We begin to see that not so deep down he has warm feelings for her and feels guilt.  He isn’t just her estranged brother who doesn’t care and never did.  He does care.  But he is not comfortable with realizing that let alone saying such things unless, of course, as in this case, she is in a coma.  That may say something about many sibling relationships.

Also, Shamus and Meg are in what is described in my nonfiction books and in some of the blogs below as an UREP (pronounced URP) – an unwanted repetitive episode.  Most of us have those with someone close to us.  They are negative patterns that we often can’t seem to break because we don’t stop to notice how repetitive and damaging they are.  Nor do we use “choice points” in the conversations – opportunities we have – to turn things around by not doing what we always do but instead tweaking and being less predictable.  We learn early on in the book the burden Shamus carries, but throughout their changing relationship it is very difficult for Shamus, in particular, to break out of the UREP.  Until people recognize UREPs in their relationships, they can’t really change them.  They are habits of communication that resist being undone.

How character names are chosen.  This came up when I was signing a book for Emma.  What a lovely name that is.  Whether that has anything to do with Jane Austin, I’m not sure.  But Emma and I talked about her name and her appreciation for it now that wasn’t there as a child.  Even that little story is something that can one day show up in fiction.  I like to choose the names of people I know, mostly for fun, but they also need to fit the character – at least in my mind.  Who knows, Emma may be a character in the future.  The real Emma told me she is looking forward to it.

Thanks you to the Kent YMCA for the invitation to visit.  It was a pleasure to meet all of you and I hope to do so again.  K

 

Posted in Shadow Campus, Uncategorized | 3 Comments

Hand-Raising at Harvard: Will It Help Level The Field?

How does a top business graduate school level the playing field for women? How does it retain female faculty in a culture that the university admits has been unwelcoming to women? If it’s Harvard Business School, it begins to change the culture — a gut-wrenching effort for some of the graduate students who make a large investment in tuition.

On the schedule for change is overt sexual harassment, reports the New York Times’ Jody Kantor in Sunday’s front page, above-the-fold article. So, too, are a gender gap in grades and awards among students, and poor retention of female faculty.

“Year after year, women who had arrived with the same test scores and grades as men fell behind,” Kantor writes. “Attracting and retaining female professors was a losing battle; from 2006 to 2007 a third of the female junior faculty left.”

Harvard MBA candidates were learning to raise their hands this year because class participation counts for 50 percent of each final mark. It sounds ludicrous — how could accomplished, intelligent women enter Harvard Business School not having learned how to raise their hands in class?

One answer: Women often consider their answers for a longer time — not because they think less quickly than men, but because they take time to more deeply examine alternatives and present them in socially conscious ways. You could say, as some researchers have, that society has given women that option, although there can be a cost, especially in business. Considering alternatives can initially appear as indecisiveness. And, supposedly, great leaders aren’t indecisive — ever!

It may well be that that women aren’t at all too slow at raising their hands, but that Harvard men are trying to answer too quickly. Which, by the way, would be cultural too. Personally, I’ll take a good answer over a quick one anytime. But I understand what they’re trying to achieve by encouraging women to speak up.

With regard to dealing with disparagement of women (and according to the NYT there appears to be plenty of that being dished out) Harvard’s plan has its benefits. The word seems to be out that HBS isn’t a great place for young female faculty: Performance ratings have been low, and even attracting them to Harvard is difficult. Under the new plan, they are being observed and recorded during classes and given advice for improvement. For some, it is working.

My hat is off to Harvard for its efforts to foster an educational environment that levels the playing field for women — for recognizing that lower grades among women equally competent as the men was indicative of problems — that male students’ hazing of female students and openly ruminating about who they would “kill, sleep with or marry” is bad stuff. You just have to wonder, though, how it got so bad at one of the premier leadership training grounds — why it took so long to start turning it around and how much that has to do with women remaining — after decades of disparity — underrepresented at the top of U.S. businesses.

This blog was also published at the Huffington Post.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Persuasion: The Lost Art at The Top

My blog, “Why Should We Believe Them This Time?” is on Huffington Post today.  It’s a question that must be in the minds of not only Americans but people around the world trying to assess whether this time our leaders are telling the truth.  They have what is commonly known as a credibility gap and it isn’t getting any smaller.

I’ve studied and taught persuasion and negotiation for many years.  I’ve had time to observe how easy it is to become accepting of the “some people say” variety of evidence. How often we hear, “A study just showed…” with no reference to the source or recognition that one study rarely “shows” anything.

Persuasion is very challenging because people come to most situations with opinions of their own.  Changing those requires them to give up a part of themselves — especially if they’ve expressed those ideas and committed to them in the past.  To persuade effectively requires that we understand the perceptions of the other person or group and work from there to show them how an alternative view is something that is appropriate in terms of the situation, consistent in some way with their views or past behaviors, or effective in terms of reaching their goals.  That is why in Persuasion in Practice I described persuasion at its best as something done with not to people.

This is work.  Increasingly, it appears that it is work that many of us prefer to avoid. With all the information we take in each day, we’ve become lazy processors.  It’s an easy trap to fall into.  We’ve come to expect less from those who seek to persuade us.

Essentially that is what the blog on Huffpo is about.  Why indeed should we believe our government this time?  Where is the data?  What nearly unequivocal support have they presented to persuade us that this time they’re telling us the truth?  Why have we not heard directly from the man at the top?  Isn’t this a decision with such major implications for the world that a presidential explanation is required?

When explanations of major decisions are delegated, that in itself has persuasive force.  It suggests that something is amiss.  And since we’ve been here more than once before, there is good reason to expect that nothing has changed.

 

Posted in Politics, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Leadership Tutorials for Women

If you’ve stopped by to read the Leadership Tutorials for Women, you can go to that section by clicking “Categories” in the right column of this page and then “Tutorials for Women.”  You’ll find them a lot more quickly that way.

——————————————————

Also, this response was posted by me on Forbes Women (Linkedin) – September 8th.  It’s a response to Richard Branson’s article here.

When Betty Friedan and I were teaching leadership diversity to graduate students in the 1990s, we would not have anticipated that women’s representation at the top of business and government would be so low today. But I’ve been one of the observers of this and if you don’t mind me sounding like a professor for a minute, I’ll share a few conclusions.

Persuasion regarding the benefits of women in leadership positions has not worked – as Richard Branson mentions. Senior managers asking women about the obstacles they face is useful, but women are often hesitant to articulate them or may be unclear about which ones are problematic, especially when many are so well disguised by politics. No one wants to be labeled a “troublemaker” or “loose canon” so much goes unsaid. If you understand politics, however, you are in a better position to express yourself without such fear or concern because you know how things are said and done where you work by those who get ahead. If someone says “You came on a bit strong in that meeting,”instead of worrying about it your answer might be “Someone had to. The issue is much too important to just sit there.”

There are at least 4 types of political arenas in organizations: minimally, moderately, highly and pathologically political. If your style does not fit the arena in which you work or training fails to provide preparation as it usually does, the chances of succeeding are low. For example, a political purist believes deeply that people are promoted on merit. If she works in a highly political organization or division where the only effective political style is street fighting, promotion to high levels is unlikely (see The Secret Handshake for more). Women and men interested in this issue need to understand the politics where they work, their own styles, the degree of fit between the two and what needs to be done to improve that fit. You can find some help with that here http://bit.ly/1eE5kO4

I’ve also just published a novel that shows how politics of the pathological type can stop a highly competent woman in her tracks. It has been on the top 25 of Amazon Kindle Hot New Releases most of the time since it’s publication last month, which may say something about the desire to better understand politics — even in fiction. You might take a look at Shadow Campus.http://amzn.to/19YI7Zc

Whether you work at an large or small organization, in education, for government, or volunteer, politics are much the same. If you understand the politics of your workplace, your chances of promotion are increased considerably. The issue of fairness has not won the argument for women and neither has repeatedly informing businesses of the benefits women leaders bring — of which there are many. Look to politics. Persuasion alone is not enough. If you understand both, your chances of advancement are greater and so are the chances of changing your organization for the better.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

President Obama’s Education Plan

I just posted a blog on Huffpo “President Obama’s Education Plan — A No-Brainer for Colleges.”  That one deals with the ability of colleges to respond with some ease to the president’s concerns because they are set up to do so in terms of research and standards.

What’s important is that we’re having the discussion.  When students arrive on university campuses often they are befuddled at best.  There’s much to learn and 4 years looks like a long time to them.  And yet right away their choices of courses influence whether they will indeed graduate in that time.

Even as a professor, I found the orientation day for one of my college-bound sons to be very informative but so full of information that I wondered if follow-up messages would help my son and I sort out his journey from freshman to graduating senior.  It did prove to be less than crystal clear.

For all the talk about “helicopter parents,” and I suppose there are some annoying ones, as a professor I didn’t meet them.  And as a parent, by my son’s junior year I was thinking that there is much to be said for checking in regularly when you are investing thousands in your adult child’s education.  Why leave it chance?  I learned the hard way that keeping a distance so they grow up faster is sometimes a way to find yourself paying more to be sure all credit requirements are met.

That’s why I suggest that colleges provide students, along with their grades, information clearly articulating each semester what they need to do from there on to graduate in 4 years (or more).  They should understand how much it will cost to go beyond that and parents, if paying part of the expenses, should be informed.  If that means your student signing a paper to allow your involvement, go for it.

There’s much to learn when a child goes off to college.  Loan debt can grow exponentially if not paid on time.  Colleges need to help students and parents know this and guide the student toward decisions that keep costs down and potential for a good job high.

I welcome metrics that tell us more about colleges when young people are making decisions that affect them long term.  It is not difficult for colleges to assess how they’re doing as they assess things all the time, including student performance.

It’s not too much to expect.  The colleges that do this sooner rather than later will be rewarded.  And so will their students.

Posted in Politics | Leave a comment