Negotiating with Style(s)

“Life is a series of negotiations.” –Erica Ariel Fox, Former Director of Harvard Negotiation Insight Initiative

From the moment we wake up until the moment our head hits the pillow at night, we move from one negotiation to another. We do this so often, most of us don’t give it a second thought. But we should. Because for most of us only one or two styles of negotiation come naturally. And depending on the situation, the ability to adopt a different negotiating style could make all the difference.

There are five major styles of negotiation: competing; accommodating; avoiding; compromising; and collaborating. Discover your preferred negotiating style using this indicator: Negotiating Styles

When I was learning about styles, I assumed that some of them were good and others…not so much. Like being avoidant? Who wants to work with an avoidant negotiator? Or someone who sees themselves as competing with you? Yuck. But there is no “right” style. Styles are more like tools, and for each of them there is a time and a place.

The competing style wants to achieve as much as possible. Think Moses and Pharaoh. Pharoah is powerful and keeps changing his mind on whether to let Israel go. Moses is also powerful, and he won’t settle for Israel staying in bondage. “Let my people, go!” While uncomfortable to many church leaders, adopting a competing style is vital when dealing with powerful interests who are unwilling to bargain with you. A few months ago I wrote about Andrew Foster-Conners and his BUILD network taking on a powerful CEO Chester Burrell who was blocking their efforts to revitalize Baltimore. (http://pres-outlook.org/2016/03/building-body-christ/) Foster-Conners and BUILD adopted a competing style to pressure Burrell to the negotiating table. While this isn’t what BUILD was hoping for at first, engaging this style was vital to moving the conversation forward.

Opposite to the competing style the accomodating style seeks to give as much as possible. If you’re like me, this one might have you scratching your head a little bit. How on earth could this be a successful strategy? But the accommodating style is at the very heart of our faith. Jesus said when someone strikes you, don’t hit them back, but offer your other cheek instead. Indeed, God in the person of Jesus, adopts a radically accomodationist style being willing to suffer death on a cross. There is surprising power that comes through sacrifice in the accommodating strategy. Indeed, one of the reasons Pope Francis is so powerful today comes from his authentic, sacrificial life.

Another surprisingly helpful negotiation style is the avoiding style. Again, on this one I was truly baffled at first. Aren’t we supposed to face things? We shouldn’t live in denial or tip toe around the elephant in the room, right? Well… There’s a time and a place. Skillful negotiators know that if an issue isn’t ripe, if deciding later or not at all is preferable to deciding now, then wise negotiators will assume an avoidant style and talk about the weather or baseball or anything but the issue at hand. When the magi negotiated with King Herod to learn the whereabouts of the newborn king, they could have gone back and talked things over with him. They would have had to tell the truth, putting Jesus at risk, or lie, putting themselves in danger. So, wisely, they went home by another road. They avoided Herod, and it was the right thing to do. In The Contrarian’s Guide to Leadership Steven Sample wryly tells us good leaders: “Never make a decision today that they can put off until tomorrow.”

Compromise has come to be something of a dirty word, but good compromise doesn’t mean giving up on principle- it means being wise enough to know most of the time we aren’t going to get everything our little hearts desire. Today, Jerusalem continues to be one of the most tragic examples of a city in need of a good negotiation. Few remember, though, that the city itself was formed as an act of compromise. In the attempt to unify the divided northern tribes, known as Israel, and the southern tribes called Judah, David wisely his capital from Hebron in the south to Jerusalem to the north, giving all the tribes a sense of ownership in this new era.

Finally, the collaborative style probably has the best ring to it. Surely, when it’s possible, most church leaders would enjoy collaborative negotiations where we’re seeking to find the most value for all parties. One of the best examples of this in scripture is Paul in his amazing letter to Philemon. Paul is sending back the runaway slave Onesimus to his former master, Philemon. And although Paul reminds Philemon the apostle could order him to release Onesimus, Paul says he would rather Philemon does this willingly. So, through reminding Philemon how he owes Paul his very self, lifting up how much Paul has come to value Onesimus, and writing in his own hand (a very personal touch), Paul is delicately lifting up reasons Philemon might be persuaded to do the right thing. Collaboration can be time consuming. Surely, it would have just been faster if Paul adopted a competing style and just told Philemon to release Onesimus. But this collaborative style strengthens relationships and creates more buy-in. When time isn’t of the essence, this kind of good will can be invaluable in the church.

So what styles come easily to you? If a negotiation isn’t going well, what style might you try just to switch things up a bit? Let me know- I’d love to hear from you.