Chapter 8
Difficult Negotiators

We've all dealt with difficult negotiators. In the movie Swimming with Sharks, Kevin Spacey played the classic, arrogant Hollywood mogul, Buddy Ackerman. In a scene that begins as a simple office conversation/negotiation by his assistant, Guy, wishing to be treated with a bit more civility (following an alleged mistake), Ackerman escalates it into a verbal dismemberment of his underling. Ackerman sarcastically offers that everyone is entitled to make a mistake, and now that Guy made his mistake, he has used up his quota. When Guy has the temerity to suggest that he didn't actually do anything wrong and doesn't think he should be yelled at, again Ackerman continues his scorching derision—a mock apology for hurting Guy's feelings and an equally hollow compliment to Guy for fostering office communication. Ackerman then closes the door and finishes shredding Guy, no holds barred. He tells Guy that his thoughts, feelings, opinions, in fact, his very existence on earth, are meaningless; he isn't worth flushing in a toilet; he isn't as important as Ackerman's pencils or pens or paperclips, all of which he throws at Guy's head. Guy finally, meekly backs out the door, Ackerman mimicking (and yelling) Guy's request not to be yelled at, then smugly straightening his tie and returning to work—in power, in control—the poster boy for difficult negotiators.

What a despicable guy! He's so smug, so crude, so cruel. Aren't you glad you don't have to deal with him? But you do. That scene may be from the entertainment business, but difficult negotiators are everywhere. They just have different names, wear different clothes, make different demands, and have different styles. If only they didn't exist, negotiating would be so much more pleasant. But they do exist. You can either ignore that reality or learn who they are, what makes them tick, and how to deal with them effectively.

…And the Award for Most Difficult Negotiator Goes To …

In the course of a career, you'll deal with so many kinds of difficult negotiators, you'll be hard pressed to name the single most difficult. But to tell you the truth, in my case, it wasn't a sports team owner or a corporate titan or a political power broker. It was an elderly man who owned a farm.

The Old Man and the Farm

A real estate client called me some years ago with a real challenge. He and his partners were well on their way toward developing a new community by buying up large tracts of farmland. They had acquired 172 farms that would comprise the tract. They had made good progress with the local county as far as zoning and planning ingress and egress from the highway. The only problem was the 173rd farm, which they had not acquired, and just happened to be situated on a stretch of highway that would be the link to the entire community.

I asked the obvious question, “How could you get so far along without the key piece of property?”

His response will strike a familiar chord with any of us who've been down the road with a deal and suddenly faced an obstacle we should have seen earlier. “I thought it wouldn't be a problem.”

I asked, “Can you change the pattern of the roads leading in and out?”

He said, “Maybe, but it could take another six months or more.” Projects like this need momentum. When they take too long, the momentum slows and the project dies. He needed to act now. He asked if I could try to intercede and negotiate to acquire the farm right away.

I started with preparation. I asked him all the questions I could to give me background. Is it an active farm? What's the owner like? Is he well off? How long has the farm been in his family? Is he married? Does he have children? My real estate client told me everything he knew. The farmer was 83 and a widower. The farm had been in his family four or five generations. The farmer had three children but they didn't live on the farm. As far as my client could tell, the farmer did not have a lot of cash and this active farm was his most valuable asset.

I said, “Okay, I'll try to negotiate for you. But if you turn this over to me, I need leeway. I need to have control over what the farmer is paid and the terms of the deal.”

My client said, “If you can make a deal, do it whatever way you can.” It was clear they needed a deal badly.

Did I go right over to see the man and make him an offer? No. I did more preparation so I could be ready with a strategy. I found out that not only was the farmer an old man who lived alone, but he wasn't the nicest person in the world, either. In fact, he was widely perceived to be a very nasty fellow. He didn't like to talk to people. He was known to throw sticks at anyone who set foot on his land. The word was, nobody could even get near him, let alone sit down and negotiate. I started to get a picture of him and I let it sink in. I identified him as a “situationally difficult” person—someone whose conduct was triggered by circumstances impacting his life. (For a full discussion on identifying the three types of difficult negotiators—situationally, strategically, and simply—see my book, Bullies, Tyrants, and Impossible People, Crown Business, 2005.)

I strategized—I wrote a note to myself on my pad: “Four or five visits. Do little or nothing on the first couple of visits.” Why did I write that down? Because I could tell this negotiation was going to be like a marathon. I would have to pace myself. My client might be in a hurry, but I'd have to proceed at just the right tempo if we had any chance of making this deal.

Was it worth that kind of time and effort on my part? Yes. My client would lose millions of dollars already invested, as well as the enthusiasm and trust of his coinvestors for future deals. On the other hand, if, somehow, this deal could be pulled off, everyone stood to gain.

I'll never forget the day I finally drove out to see the old farmer. It was thirteen miles north of where I live, many miles north of where most people live, truly the heart of farm country. I came to a long gravelly driveway and made my way down, looking around the whole time for flying sticks. I walked up to this old farmhouse, onto the porch, and there, next to the front door was—yes, I swear—a shotgun. My client told me all kinds of things about this guy but he never mentioned a shotgun. Well, I figured, at least it's where I can see it. (I'm an incurable optimist.) I reached for the bell, which was the old-fashioned kind you turn. It rang but there was no answer. I turned it again. More rings, no answer. I was in about my third midturn when the door flew open and this grizzled old character yelled, “What the hell is going on? Who the hell are you? What do you want? Get off my damn porch.” And that's the printable version. He tore me apart for a good five minutes, using every four-letter word I'd ever heard.

What did I do? Did I give it right back to him? No, I counted. As Thomas Jefferson said, when you're upset, count to 10, and when you're really upset count to 100. I got well past 100. But I followed the number one rule in dealing with difficult negotiators. Don't get emotional. Neutralize your emotions. Let the other person get emotional, but don't let their emotion get you emotional. Don't take it personally and don't get personal. I just kept counting. (By the way, the same applies at home. When your spouse or significant other is upset, it's rarely a personal attack. It may feel personal and it's tempting to get personal back when it feels that way. But usually, your partner is dealing with something or someone other than you and it's carrying over into your life together.)

Back to the farmer: He finally ran out of breath and four-letter words. When he did, I didn't say anything about buying or selling or making deals. I said, “You've got a nice farm here.” He laid into me all over again, unloading another barrage of salty language. At his next pause, I said, “I live on a farm, too.” I handed him my card and said, “I'll see you again,” turned my back, prayed he didn't pick up the shotgun, walked to my car, and drove home.

Four days later, I came back. There was the shotgun next to the door. I rang. He came out. He let me have it again. But he stopped a little sooner this time (unless it was my optimism again). I then said, “I live on a 170-acre farm. Yours is over 500 acres. How do you handle it?” He just looked at me and didn't speak. I repeated my question, “How do you handle it?” He stared at me for a while. Then he told me about this cooperative that existed in the north part of the county that helped him.

What I was doing was “sailing” with the old man, not literally, but figuratively. If you sail, you know if you want to move forward, you can't sail directly into the wind. You have to sail at angles to the wind, from side to side, working your way forward. You're tacking. That's what I was doing with the farmer, not going directly at him with my demands, but moving from side to side, asking apparently unrelated questions. It takes patience and, though tacking is not the shortest distance between two points, it's often a far more effective way to control the encounter than making a direct assault.

The farmer and I talked a little more about his concerns with farming, the pressures, where he needed help, and how difficult it is to run a farm. I was empathizing with him and could understand his problems and he could tell that I did. After a while, I said, “I'll see you again.” That was the whole conversation on my second visit.

I came back a third time, continued to empathize and acknowledged some more of his concerns. I said, “I understand this farm has been in your family for four or five generations. I suppose you really would like to give it to your children.” He looked at me, wondering where this was leading. I went on asking questions, “You've got three kids and I have seven. My older ones are spread all over the country. Yours are too, right?” I could tell by looking at him, I was touching on something that he felt. We were bonding, only a little, but still bonding. I asked if he thought his kids would come back and live on the farm. He said he doubted it but he still wanted to leave it to them. He said, “It belongs in our family.”

That's when I started negotiations. I responded, “I know you own this land, but unless you have a lot of money, you're not going to give this place to your children.” He got hot. Who was I to tell him he couldn't leave his farm to his own children? I said, “I'm not your lawyer. Do you have a lawyer?” He said he did. I asked if he had talked to his lawyer about his estate. He said, “I haven't talked to him about anything for years!” I suggested he talk to his lawyer about the difficulty of giving the farm to his children. Then I changed the subject to cattle. I asked him about raising and slaughtering cattle. Shortly after, I left.

On my fourth visit, by the time I got up to the house, he was asking me questions. First, he told me the lawyer said I was right. He didn't have the cash it would take to cover the taxes. I told him I wasn't an estate lawyer and he should consult one. The lawyer, in turn, told him that since his wife was deceased, he couldn't get a marital deduction and if he gave it to his kids he'd be taxed brutally.

That's when he asked me what I'd give him for the farm. Four visits later, after being hollered at, after counting, after talking about farms and children and estate taxes, we were finally talking about a deal. Tacking was paying off.

I told him he'd be paid more than any other neighboring farmer had been paid, “You will get what's called ‘most favored nations’ treatment.” I told him it was because he'd been through tough times and had good reason to hold back in selling. He would get paid a dollar more than the highest amount paid anyone else. His eyes lit up.

Was it enough to just give him more than anyone else? Is that the secret to winning over the situationally difficult negotiator? Just give them a little more? No. You have to give them something else, something that acknowledges their particular concerns or needs. They want to win and the best way to get what you want is to help them get what they want. We needed to enable the old man to recognize the value of dealing with us but also save face—so we could accomplish our objectives.

What could we do here? He wanted to keep the farm and stay in his house. We let him. We paid him handsomely for 570 acres of his 581-acre farm. We gave him the 11 acres surrounding the house and worked around it. My client could develop and build access roads and still leave him alone. Of course, we might need to use his parcel some day but the reality was, he was 83. We leased it to him for five years with a five-year option at $1.00 a year. It was WIN–win. We liked the deal. He liked the deal. He must have because he never once picked up the shotgun.

Dealing with the Difficult Negotiator (Without Becoming One)

Let's take a recreation break. If you play golf or tennis and you get angry and then hit the ball, where does it go? Into the net? Into the trees? It tends to go everywhere except where you want it to go. It may feel good for a moment to let your frustrations out on the tennis or golf ball, but the results are usually terrible. The same holds for negotiation. It may feel good to lash out (or lash back) at the difficult negotiator, but if you do, the negotiation tension will likely escalate, possibly to a full-scale war. Remember, in golf, tennis, and negotiation, when you let your frustrations out, the results are usually terrible.

Neutralize Your Emotions: Don't Take It Personally—Don't Get Personal

Difficult negotiators' conduct may seem unfair, inflammatory, provocative, even mean. They use or display these emotional approaches that put you in an emotional—less rational, less measured, more volatile and vulnerable—state. They can cause you to lose focus on your game plan. If you do, you're prone to make mistakes. Therefore, I always remind myself, “Don't take it personally—don't get personal.”

A Full Court Emotional and Psychological Press

Former Chicago Bulls and Los Angeles Lakers coach (and current New York Knicks president) Phil Jackson, in a story in INC. Magazine, discussed teaching his players to deal with emotional and psychological attacks. Rather than succumb to the temptation to strike back emotionally or physically, he drilled them in the art of refocusing on the game they were playing every time they were attacked. When the Bulls played the Pistons in the late 1980s—a team notorious for their outrageous tactics—Detroit often won because they could incite the Bulls into fighting back, thereby losing concentration. When the Bulls learned to control their desire to strike back and turn it into focus, they changed the outcome of the games. Jackson stated, “Everybody on our team was slammed around …players were tackled, tripped, elbowed, and smacked in the face. But they all laughed it off. The Pistons didn't know how to respond. We completely disarmed them by not striking back. At that moment, our players became true champions.”

Be Prepared

The more difficult the negotiator, the more prepared you should be. Before I met with the old farmer, I used my research about him to determine the cause of his being difficult and to formulate a strategy for dealing with him—multiple meetings, tacking, finding common ground. Know what to do before the situations occur and you can overcome the most difficult negotiators without reverting to becoming one of them.

Take a Time-Out

People are reactive creatures, not computerized responders. Be conscious of your human tendencies and you've taken the first step toward staying calm in the face of provocation.

Don't respond to emotion with emotion. That's easy to say, not so easy to do. After all, you've just been bombarded, even if only verbally. One way to assure you won't have an emotional response to an emotional prod is to have no response—take a time-out.

Slow Down

Take your time. Again, start counting. Or stop the process altogether and call a time-out. Ask for a break. Go to the bathroom. Get coffee. Do anything that interrupts the emotional momentum. Emotion tends to build on itself. Break the chain and the emotion recedes. It's amazing how the expression, the demand, or the challenge that causes a visceral reflex loses its bite even 30 seconds later. It's even less upsetting after a few more minutes. Write it down. That will make it even less emotional. Look at the words and the meaning. Ask yourself what the other side was trying to get you to do. As soon as you start to analyze it, you begin to defuse your emotions and move toward rational action.

Controlling a Situationally Difficult Encounter—Tacking

As demonstrated in the story of The Old Man and the Farm, tacking can be an invaluable negotiation tool. When sailors meet strong headwinds, they tack, turning the ship at an angle to the wind, moving forward in zigs and zags, rather than confronting the force and being rebuffed. Sailors are patient. They don't have engines, only nature. But they inevitably get where they're going. To get where you want to go in negotiation, use the tools of tacking.

Empathize: Understand their pressures. Why is the difficult negotiator being difficult? Maybe the person is just plain unpleasant, one of those social misfits who doesn't like anyone and lets it show. Maybe, but chances are there are other forces at work. Someone or something is applying pressure on them: There's an unreasonable but unseen boss in the background. Or they just hate this kind of task. Or they had a deal like this once before and it went bad. Or there's a deadline looming. Or there are financial issues at home. Something else is applying pressure.

I do believe that in order to be a successful negotiator that as a diplomat, you have to be able to put yourself into the other person's shoes. Unless you can understand what is motivating them, you are never going to be able to figure out how to solve a particular problem.

—Madeleine Albright
Ask Questions. Start tacking by asking questions that may reveal the real reason for their behavior. Instead of attacking the deal or the dealmaker, probe into the surrounding issues. The moment you get an answer, you begin to mute the emotional fervor. You'll find yourselves discussing unpleasant bosses, the negotiation process, other deals, deadlines, or your personal lives.
Respond: Acknowledge their concerns. Once you know some of the issues or pressure points affecting the other side, continue tacking by letting them know that you have some of your own issues as well. Joke about those bosses of yours. Share stories about your past deals. Commiserate on the ticking clock of deadlines. Tell them you've got bills to pay, too; who doesn't? Simply acknowledging their concerns may turn the heat down. Then you can return to the issues of the deal as people who share the same or similar concerns.

As you finalize your response, consider letting them save face as a part of the solution. (This is how tacking often concludes.) Just as I did in the situation with the old man, craft solutions that the other side can justify to themselves or those they answer to. Satisfy their need to win by conceding a less significant point. Address the issues behind their issues and they can walk away with a victory or the appearance of a victory. You don't need the trappings of a win as long as you get what you came for.

A Case Study

Fresh feelings, strong wills, and conflicting goals—a story from my career in which I helped control a situationally difficult encounter.

Cal Ripken Wanted Three More Years—The Owner Wanted Two

Just before we were about to enter into negotiations for the extension of Cal Ripken's contract, I'd come out of very tense dealings with the Orioles representing their broadcaster, Jon Miller. In a short time, Jon had risen to national stature, not only as a voice of the Orioles, but also doing play-by-play for ESPN.

Jon wanted to stay in Baltimore but he and I, and the Orioles management, were never able to arrive at an acceptable contract and eventually he accepted a lucrative five-year contract from the San Francisco Giants plus an extension from ESPN.

Coming off the tense Miller dealings, I was now taking on Cal's contract extension. Cal wanted a three-year extension. With him approaching 40, the club insisted on a two-year extension. I was concerned about facing a situationally difficult negotiator—the Orioles management.

From the outset, I felt unusual tension from the Orioles' General Manager, Pat Gillick. In response, I refrained from diving right into the negotiations. I instead told Pat that I empathized with his situation and the tense feelings that existed at the Orioles concerning me. “I have been through similar post-negotiation fallout myself.”

After some “asking,” during my preliminary dealings with Pat, it became apparent that a good deal of their behavior did in fact stem from residual feelings from the Jon Miller negotiations. Following some back and forth, Pat revealed that club owner Peter Angelos was contemplating personally negotiating the contract.

I “responded” to the situation by informing Pat that Cal would negotiate directly with Peter, and that I would stay out of the negotiations to reduce tensions. I had told Cal, due to the hard feelings, it may not be in his best interest for me to be at the center in the negotiations. (Sometimes the best tactic is to replace yourself.) Peter and Cal had a good relationship and it made sense for them to discuss the contract directly.

Cal and I would meet to strategize, but when it came time for the face-to-face sessions, it was Cal who attended the meetings, did the probing, and, eventually, the proposing. His “power of nice” plus the elements of tacking we'd employed earlier, enabled us to achieve together what might not have occurred through me.

Cal got his three-year contract and Peter Angelos got his two-year contract. It sounds impossible but creative solutions often seem that way at first. The Orioles signed Cal to a two-year contract plus a third option year. If the Orioles chose not to exercise the option for year three, the club would make a substantial buyout payment to Cal. And we felt confident that Cal's performance would result in the full three years.

Postscript: How many years did the “Orioles' two-year/Cal's three-year” contract deal end up lasting? Three. The team exercised their option to pay him his full salary for a third year.

Emotional Tactics—Nonemotional Responses

When the other side gets emotional, see their use of emotion for what it may well be: a negotiation ploy or tactic. It may simply be a device by a strategic negotiator to elicit a particular reaction from you, just as an opening low bid is meant to get you to drop your high asking price and eventually meet somewhere near the middle.

Don't Get Emotional Back

Emotional attacks are often negotiation tactics, not personal condemnation. Don't counter personal attacks with personal attacks. Just as the nonemotional response will neutralize the emotional ones, the impersonal approach will neutralize the personal. It takes discipline and a reminder of your purpose. Remember, the best retaliation against being called nasty names is to make the deal you want, not calling them even worse names.

The way to avoid emotional responses is to be ready for emotional tactics.

Tactic: Anger

You've made certain proposals that cause the other side to take offense. They feel you asked for too much. They're furious. Your proposal is unreasonable. They're outraged. They get loud and volatile. You better give in on something or they'll stay angry. They insist you make a concession in exchange for them lowering their rage.

Response: Find Out Why

Do you ignore their anger? No. You respond to it, but not to the emotional blackmail. What is it about your request that made them angry? Did they fully understand it? Can you put it another way or explain your reasoning better? Perhaps you can learn information from them as to why they're angry and what it takes to put the negotiation back on track. Respond to the anger, not the demand.

Tactic: Insulted

The other side claims to be insulted by your offer. In fact, they're so insulted, they insist you make another, more realistic offer. They're trying to get you to bid against yourself. Don't. Remember, it should be difficult, if not impossible to insult a negotiator with an offer. By definition, an offer demonstrates you are engaging in business conversation. It may be a low number; it may have tough terms; it may have out clauses, but it is no more insulting than the other side coming back with a high number, better terms, and no out clauses. This is the process of negotiation, back and forth.

Response: Learn What Wouldn't Be Insulting

If the other side says they've been insulted, ask them to tell you what kind of offer they would consider “not insulting.” By doing so, they're showing what aspects of your offer were unacceptable and are, in fact, countering rather than having you bid against yourself.

Tactic: Guilt

Guilt can be a powerful and effective emotion when employed by a skilled dealmaker. You should feel bad for asking for so much. Just because you have the upper hand, you've put us in a corner. How can you do this to us?

Response: Focus on the Issues

Remember, guilt is a negotiation device, just like anger. It's used to make you feel bad and soften your requests. Isolate the emotion from the issues. Focus on the issues. What would they propose back? How would they proceed with the deal? What do they see as fair? Don't feel guilt (unless you're negotiating against your mother).

Tactic: Exasperation

The other side is overwhelmed, too busy, inundated with problems. They want you to solve this one. They're under immense pressure; their world is chaos. They want you to handle this one and get back to them.

This is just another negotiating ploy. They're taking themselves out of the give-and-take process necessary to making a deal. This forces you to be both sides, making concessions in anticipation of what they might want. It also allows them to come in at the last minute and reject everything you've done (since you did it without them).

Response: Understand

Tell them you understand the pressures they face. Ask if there is anything you can do to help with their immediate problems or if they'd rather wait to do this deal when things have calmed down. Sympathize with their exasperation but keep them in the process.

Tactic: False Flattery

Watch out for anyone who keeps telling you how brilliant you are during the negotiation. We all like to have our egos stroked. Deft negotiators will use this human foible to praise us into concessions. After all, if we've gained every point all day, why not give up a minor one here and there? Some compliments are real, but beware of a flood.

Response: Refocus

Smile. Say thanks. And refocus. Don't be surprised if the compliments ebb as the deal comes to a close.

Challenging Personalities

Negotiators don't come in just two flavors, difficult and easy. They possess an infinite array of characteristics, in an infinite number of combinations. The first step in getting them to make the deal your way is recognizing the characteristics you're up against.

The Extrovert

Personality Traits. Think of Rodney Dangerfield in Caddyshack. Extroverts are outgoing, impulsive, and full of energy. The plus is enthusiasm. The minus is lack of focus.

How Extroverts Become Challenging. They don't prepare because preparing isn't “doing.” They'd rather “do.” They talk instead of listen. Action is mistaken for progress. Extroverts can be infuriating because you can never pin them down on details. They agree with you one day and then change their story the next.

How to Negotiate with an Extrovert. Let them do what they do best—extend themselves. Their surroundings are often cluttered with trophies, celebrity photos, and mementos. Each one is a story. Listen. Extroverts seek recognition. Give it to them. Let them know how much this deal will enhance their reputation. Then, when it comes time to deal, document. Get promises in writing. Keep the Extrovert focused by using agendas.

The Pragmatic

Personality Traits. Think of Gordon Gekko in Wall Street saying, “Greed is good.” The Pragmatic always wants to take charge of the negotiation. Pragmatics have lists of deal points or key issues they want to tick off so they can get to the bottom line fast. They're impatient and consider time almost as valuable as money.

How Pragmatics Become Challenging. They play hardball. They want to win and they want you to lose. They lack patience. They abhor loss of control and sometimes revert to dictates and threats. As a result, they cause deadlocks and are rarely willing to expend the effort or time to work it out.

How to Negotiate with a Pragmatic. Know what you want and be prepared to stand your ground. Start off by aiming high. Put additional items in your proposal that you'll eventually give away. After a struggle (perhaps just before a deadlock) give in. Let the Pragmatic declare victory while you go home with the deal you wanted.

The Analytic

Personality Traits. Think of Mr. Spock in Star Trek. Everything must be based on logic. Analytic negotiators are very cautious, obsessed with process more than outcome. They try to take the human element out of a human process.

How Analytics Become Challenging. Analytics slow the negotiation process down to give themselves time to study, and restudy, all available information and alternatives. You have a deadline. You want to get the deal done. The Analytic can become a nitpicker whose analysis, or overanalysis stops the deal dead in its tracks.

How to Negotiate with an Analytic. Do not try to jam the deal down the Analytic's throat. The more you push, the more they resist. The more you hurry, the more uncomfortable they become. Force yourself to slow down to their pace. Avoid being unpredictable. Since preparation is so important to them, do your own homework. Instead of trying to convert them to your principles, work with theirs to the extent that you can still get a deal done that works for you. (This may be against your instincts. It will require great self-discipline but may be well worth it.)

The Amiable

Personality Traits. Think of former President Clinton when he “feels your pain.” Amiables are relationship-driven. People are more important than facts. They avoid confrontation at all costs.

How Amiables Become Challenging. Amiables are difficult to pin down in their decision-making process. Amiables want so much to be liked that they will tell you whatever you want to hear at the moment, only to change their tune when the next person expresses a different position. Eventually, negotiations break down because the Amiable is unable to make a commitment or decision.

How to Negotiate with an Amiable. Focus on people issues. Let the Amiable play host; be the guest. Avoid impatience. Let time pass so the Amiable can build a relationship. Let the deal unfold.

Combinations and Permutations

Challenging negotiators come in all shapes, sizes, and variations. So do the means to handle them. Realize that your next difficult negotiator isn't likely to be a textbook Analytic or a classic Amiable. You're more likely to run up against a Pragmatic Extrovert, or an Amiable Analytic…and you'll have to use a combination of methods. And sometimes, you'll encounter a truly unique negotiator.

Negotiating against God

Charlie Casserly, the former general manager of the Washington Redskins, was trying to sign Sean Gilbert, an extremely talented defensive lineman. Each side had put its best-and-final offer on the table. The Redskins offered $3.6 million per year. Gilbert said he would not take less than $5 million. Neither side would give an inch. Negotiations broke down. No matter what the Redskins tried, they could not get Sean Gilbert's agent, Gus Sunseri, to even discuss reducing his demand of $5 million per year. Charlie Casserly could not understand why this figure was totally nonnegotiable. That is, until he read an AP report in the sport section. Sunseri said, “It's over money, but it's not about money. It's a spiritual thing. Sean feels he's had a revelation from God that this should be the figure” (in his contract). Now that's a challenging negotiation tactic. Charlie ultimately decided that “no deal” was the best deal.

Realize that in order to negotiate successfully, you'll have to employ a combination of the tools provided, customized to the particular challenging negotiation you face. Listen to their stories, flex with their timetable, recognize guilt as a ploy and get to what's behind it, let them save face, brainstorm a menu of alternatives, offer an outside standard of projections, and be prepared to revisit and revise throughout.

Refresher

Chapter 8: Difficult Negotiators

Dealing with the Difficult Negotiator without Becoming One

Neutralize your emotions: Don't take it personally. Don't get personal.
Be prepared (for difficult negotiator); have a strategy.
Take a time-out. Slow down, cool off.
Control a Situationally Difficult Encounter—Tacking.
1. Empathize: Understand their pressures.
2. Ask questions.
3. Respond: Acknowledge their concerns.

Emotional Tactics	Nonemotional Responses
Anger	Find out why they're angry
Insulted	What wouldn't be insulting
Guilt	Focus on issues
Exasperation	Understand
False flattery	Refocus

*“My people will get back to your people.”*

Eldon Dedini © 1991 from *The New Yorker Collection*. All Rights. Reserved.