Buyers’ Negotiation Tactics
While we may be attempting to conduct the negotiation under a cooperative model, sometimes the other side are not playing by the same rules! They may be using traditional power tactics or trying to get a simple win-lose solution.
Often, a simple, mature demonstration of the principled approach to negotiation will encourage others to behave in the same way. This communicates the fact that you recognise the "tactic" used by the other party, and this generally "defuses" it.
Your task is to demonstrate that synergistic win-win solutions are achievable and preferable. A sincere focus on the interests of the other party will help you to communicate that the benefits of a cooperative solution outweigh the superficial attraction of the win-lose approach. If the other party is being unfair, you will recognise it as an uncomfortable feeling because your use of the win-win paradigm makes you alert to such tactics. The key is:
Below are some of the tactics used by win-lose negotiators and some suggestions for dealing with them.
Reference to a Higher Authority
Some people may use the excuse of:
"I like the idea, but I will have to get final approval from Head Office"
The obvious counter to this is to ensure that you are negotiating at the right level in the first place! Perhaps you should have confirmed this earlier. Now, however you could use:
"What assistance can I give you there, would you like me to present this to your Head Office Colleagues - who would that be?"
Flinching
A Flinch is a premeditated, visible reaction to your first proposal.
"How much? You've got to be joking if you think we can afford to pay that much!"
Again this is a tactic to throw you off balance and put you on the defensive. It is best to remain neutral, absorb the comment and move on to the next stage of the meeting. Try:
"Well, Sandra, let's talk it through"
The Naive Negotiator
In this case the other party appears naive or to not know the full facts in order to get you to drop your guard and grant concessions by mistake. Kindly and assertively, remind them of the facts.
Selective Memory
Some people have very selective memories, and choose to remember only the contracts that caused problems, rather than the changes we were prepared to make at short notice to get them out of trouble.
Partners will conveniently forget these extra services during negotiations, because it weakens their position. It is your job to remind them of the extras that have been provided.
Here's an idea we came across recently whilst doing some in-field research; keep a "Good Deeds Book". Record all the instances when you have gone the extra mile for the customer, not only to remind them, but to remind yourself!
Final Demand
The aggressive negotiator often tries to maximise the value of concessions to them by claiming:
"You have to do better than that if you think we’re going to go along with it!"
If you have done your homework you will know if this is genuine or if it is being used as a tactic to extract extra concessions. You may negate this tactic by building up the other benefits of the agreement to compensate for the perceived shortfall.
Often coupled with the "Silent Treatment" tactic, which leads to the "Silence Shoot-Out" - next person to speak loses the initiative. Stick to your guns - metaphorically speaking!
Emotional Blackmail
In certain cultures, negotiating parties sometimes use emotion - usually anger or threats - as a tactic to unbalance you. Sometimes this anger is real, sometimes not. There are three techniques that can be used in handling emotional blackmail:
Withdraw: a change in time and place can change the emotional climate of the negotiation.
Listen Silently: while the other party gets it off their chest. Maintain eye contact and stay neutral. Don't reinforce the behaviour by becoming involved. If it is being used as a tactic, that is exactly what they want.
React openly: say you find the discussion unproductive and suggest focusing on a specific, non-emotional issue. In this instance you will need to be quite assertive.
When they are being attacked, most people's natural reaction is to counter attack. In a negotiation this will increase the temperature of the situation. The best response is to keep the other side talking because:
Vague Criticism
Sometimes the other party will make general and hostile statements which require elaboration:
"You people! You are always so inflexible!!"
Unless you can specify the issue, and the feelings tied to it, you will not be able to use win-win synergy to solve the problem. Here you need to use the reflective methods of empathic listening, and perhaps gentle questioning, to elicit specific comments. A really good question is:
"In what way James?"
This is definitely much better than "What are you talking about?"
These tactics are just for starters! A few years ago, during a program for professional purchasing people, I asked them to brainstorm how many different ways they could ask their suppliers for money - they came up with 57 different approaches!
What other tactics have you come across? And what counter measures have you developed?
How to Say "No" (Without Damage!)
Buyers have always pushed for more, and their experience has been that it works! In today's economic environment of course, many companies have had to say no, but they fear always that it will cause conflict or competitive disadvantage.
In situations where the other side is asking for a concession that we cannot give, it might be easier in the first instance to use one of the skills covered in our White Paper: "Negotiation and Consultative Selling - (Part 2)". CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD IT
For example:
By the way, remember that asking you for something they know you cannot do may actually be a strategy for some "clever" buyers. They know that saying "No" twice in rapid succession is difficult, and there is every chance you will weaken when they ask for the follow up concession. Don't be fooled!
There will be many situations in which you need to be able to say "No" with confidence. Furthermore, you need to say "No" in a way which creates positive opportunities, not just allow it to be a dead end which may damage the fabric of the relationship.
The Blunt "No"
Expressed Neutrally: "No."
Expressed with amusement: "No, come on. You know that's not on!"
You may be able to dismiss the demand as simply as this, but if the buyer persists, you need other options as backup.
The Company Policy "No"
"Our Financial Director is quite adamant on this issue."
"This is a company policy. We have no say in the matter."
We do not recommend this as a method of first choice, since it creates the impersonal image of an unfeeling Company. If you have to justify your position, use the principle of fairness and "reasonableness":
"We want to make sure that all our customers have a fair go."
The Equally Unacceptable Counter Demand
Simply make your acceptance conditional on a major and probably unacceptable commitment by them. This is often very successful when done in a mildly humorous way:
“Well I suppose we might be able to….if you could triple the order!”
The "Unacceptable Consequences" No
This is a tough one since we often stand to lose more than they do. So wrap it up in "mutuality":
"John, I hear what you say, but if you were to do that/insist on that then we would have to withdraw support elsewhere."
In this instance you probably also need an alternative.
The Rational Argument
Demonstrate that this is not a viable course of action for both sides. Variations on the theme include:
The Alternative
Having probed the customer's reasons, you can attempt a straightforward "change of ground":
"I understand your point John; we too are always interested to find ways of increasing sales. But I have an idea which should achieve an even better result for both of us... " (Sell it!)
In most situations, the “Alternative” is probably your best bet.
Have you created any neat ways to say "No" to customers? Be one of the first five to comment and I'll send you a free copy of The Charlie Brown version in cartoon form - very funny!
While we may be attempting to conduct the negotiation under a cooperative model, sometimes the other side are not playing by the same rules! They may be using traditional power tactics or trying to get a simple win-lose solution.
Often, a simple, mature demonstration of the principled approach to negotiation will encourage others to behave in the same way. This communicates the fact that you recognise the "tactic" used by the other party, and this generally "defuses" it.
Your task is to demonstrate that synergistic win-win solutions are achievable and preferable. A sincere focus on the interests of the other party will help you to communicate that the benefits of a cooperative solution outweigh the superficial attraction of the win-lose approach. If the other party is being unfair, you will recognise it as an uncomfortable feeling because your use of the win-win paradigm makes you alert to such tactics. The key is:
- learning to sidestep the tactics
- not responding in kind
- identifying the tactic
- communicating (somehow) that you have identified it
- reaffirming the win-win rules for agreement
Below are some of the tactics used by win-lose negotiators and some suggestions for dealing with them.
Reference to a Higher Authority
Some people may use the excuse of:
"I like the idea, but I will have to get final approval from Head Office"
The obvious counter to this is to ensure that you are negotiating at the right level in the first place! Perhaps you should have confirmed this earlier. Now, however you could use:
"What assistance can I give you there, would you like me to present this to your Head Office Colleagues - who would that be?"
Flinching
A Flinch is a premeditated, visible reaction to your first proposal.
"How much? You've got to be joking if you think we can afford to pay that much!"
Again this is a tactic to throw you off balance and put you on the defensive. It is best to remain neutral, absorb the comment and move on to the next stage of the meeting. Try:
"Well, Sandra, let's talk it through"
The Naive Negotiator
In this case the other party appears naive or to not know the full facts in order to get you to drop your guard and grant concessions by mistake. Kindly and assertively, remind them of the facts.
Selective Memory
Some people have very selective memories, and choose to remember only the contracts that caused problems, rather than the changes we were prepared to make at short notice to get them out of trouble.
Partners will conveniently forget these extra services during negotiations, because it weakens their position. It is your job to remind them of the extras that have been provided.
Here's an idea we came across recently whilst doing some in-field research; keep a "Good Deeds Book". Record all the instances when you have gone the extra mile for the customer, not only to remind them, but to remind yourself!
Final Demand
The aggressive negotiator often tries to maximise the value of concessions to them by claiming:
"You have to do better than that if you think we’re going to go along with it!"
If you have done your homework you will know if this is genuine or if it is being used as a tactic to extract extra concessions. You may negate this tactic by building up the other benefits of the agreement to compensate for the perceived shortfall.
Often coupled with the "Silent Treatment" tactic, which leads to the "Silence Shoot-Out" - next person to speak loses the initiative. Stick to your guns - metaphorically speaking!
Emotional Blackmail
In certain cultures, negotiating parties sometimes use emotion - usually anger or threats - as a tactic to unbalance you. Sometimes this anger is real, sometimes not. There are three techniques that can be used in handling emotional blackmail:
Withdraw: a change in time and place can change the emotional climate of the negotiation.
Listen Silently: while the other party gets it off their chest. Maintain eye contact and stay neutral. Don't reinforce the behaviour by becoming involved. If it is being used as a tactic, that is exactly what they want.
React openly: say you find the discussion unproductive and suggest focusing on a specific, non-emotional issue. In this instance you will need to be quite assertive.
When they are being attacked, most people's natural reaction is to counter attack. In a negotiation this will increase the temperature of the situation. The best response is to keep the other side talking because:
- you may obtain more information
- keeping quiet helps diffuse emotion
- if you are listening you are not making concessions
- asking questions and listening conveys your interest which also diffuses emotion
Vague Criticism
Sometimes the other party will make general and hostile statements which require elaboration:
"You people! You are always so inflexible!!"
Unless you can specify the issue, and the feelings tied to it, you will not be able to use win-win synergy to solve the problem. Here you need to use the reflective methods of empathic listening, and perhaps gentle questioning, to elicit specific comments. A really good question is:
"In what way James?"
This is definitely much better than "What are you talking about?"
These tactics are just for starters! A few years ago, during a program for professional purchasing people, I asked them to brainstorm how many different ways they could ask their suppliers for money - they came up with 57 different approaches!
What other tactics have you come across? And what counter measures have you developed?
How to Say "No" (Without Damage!)
Buyers have always pushed for more, and their experience has been that it works! In today's economic environment of course, many companies have had to say no, but they fear always that it will cause conflict or competitive disadvantage.
In situations where the other side is asking for a concession that we cannot give, it might be easier in the first instance to use one of the skills covered in our White Paper: "Negotiation and Consultative Selling - (Part 2)". CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD IT
For example:
- build up our cost of giving the concession
- minimise the importance to the buyer of the concession
- "persuade" them the benefits still justify acceptance, without the concession
- offer an alternative concession, or ask for something unacceptable to them
- summarise the problem area and offer alternative concession or choice of alternatives
- show the concession would put the buyer at a disadvantage
By the way, remember that asking you for something they know you cannot do may actually be a strategy for some "clever" buyers. They know that saying "No" twice in rapid succession is difficult, and there is every chance you will weaken when they ask for the follow up concession. Don't be fooled!
There will be many situations in which you need to be able to say "No" with confidence. Furthermore, you need to say "No" in a way which creates positive opportunities, not just allow it to be a dead end which may damage the fabric of the relationship.
The Blunt "No"
Expressed Neutrally: "No."
Expressed with amusement: "No, come on. You know that's not on!"
You may be able to dismiss the demand as simply as this, but if the buyer persists, you need other options as backup.
The Company Policy "No"
"Our Financial Director is quite adamant on this issue."
"This is a company policy. We have no say in the matter."
We do not recommend this as a method of first choice, since it creates the impersonal image of an unfeeling Company. If you have to justify your position, use the principle of fairness and "reasonableness":
"We want to make sure that all our customers have a fair go."
The Equally Unacceptable Counter Demand
Simply make your acceptance conditional on a major and probably unacceptable commitment by them. This is often very successful when done in a mildly humorous way:
“Well I suppose we might be able to….if you could triple the order!”
The "Unacceptable Consequences" No
This is a tough one since we often stand to lose more than they do. So wrap it up in "mutuality":
"John, I hear what you say, but if you were to do that/insist on that then we would have to withdraw support elsewhere."
In this instance you probably also need an alternative.
The Rational Argument
Demonstrate that this is not a viable course of action for both sides. Variations on the theme include:
- we have no $$$
- you would lose out
- it would cause us both problems
- there might be better ways of doing it
The Alternative
Having probed the customer's reasons, you can attempt a straightforward "change of ground":
"I understand your point John; we too are always interested to find ways of increasing sales. But I have an idea which should achieve an even better result for both of us... " (Sell it!)
In most situations, the “Alternative” is probably your best bet.
Have you created any neat ways to say "No" to customers? Be one of the first five to comment and I'll send you a free copy of The Charlie Brown version in cartoon form - very funny!
