Grant offers several successful negotiating techniques, including:
1) focus on common ground: "agreeing with someone else's argument is disarming" (105) and "Arguments are often far more combative and adversarial than they need to be . . . You should be willing to listen to what someone else is saying and give them a lot of credit for it. It makes you sound like a reasonable person who is taking everything into account" (107);
2) present fewer reasons to support your case: "The more reasons we put on the table, the easier it is for people to discard the shakiest one" (105);
3) express curiosity: "skilled negotiators rarely went on offense or defense" (105);
4) ask questions: the successful negotiator "will search for more information and discover ways to make both sides better off" (106).
Of these four techniques, which do you think would be of the greatest practical benefit to you to enhance your negotating abilities?
I think that asking questions would be the greatest technique to apply to myself. When debating, we are often so intent on explaining why we are right that we don't even want to question why the other person thinks the way they do. Sometimes when we ask them the "why" or "why not" of their stance, they can realize that they may have to rethink their views. Asking questions is a respectful technique to better understand an opposing view.
ReplyDeleteLauren George
I really like your point here, Lauren. I think we have a lot of ideas that we just assume are correct. Even if you're not engaged in a battle of persuasion, having to rationalize those ideas in front of another person is a great way to put our own understanding of the concept to the test. As you suggested, delivering a well-placed "why" can bring both parties closer to the heart of the issue.
DeleteI think that the first technique would be the most beneficial for me, because I often focus on the differences between me and other people instead of the similarities. At times, I also don’t listen to people as much as I should. If everyone was to listen to other people and try to find common ground with other people, I believe the world would be a better place.
ReplyDeleteI think that focusing on common ground would be most beneficial in a debate. I feel that it is a very unexpected and rare tactic. By acknowledging that the other side has a valid point and that it is not entirely different from the goals you wish to reach indicates that you are able to see that there are already some agreements and similarities to work upon during the debate. The ability to be able to listen to someone can often be a more powerful means of gaining one’s respect in an argument or negotiation than rushing to prove someone wrong. I think by focusing on common ground, you can come to a negotiation in an intelligent and polite manner which would be beneficial to both sides.
ReplyDeleteI feel that technique number 2 would provide the greatest benefit to me in negotiating. I find that too often I will try to justify my reasoning for believing something by making a long list of why I think I am right. This is not the best strategy to enter a debate with. It prevents me from listening to any other argument and I spend too much time trying to persuade my audience to think the way I do. After reading this book, I realize that condensing my arguments to few and meaningful points can prevent redundancy and allow me to see the bigger picture of the debate. I am learning that arguments should not be about who is right and wrong, but rather how a conclusion can be reached with both parties being satisfied.
ReplyDeleteI had a hard time deciding whether the first or fourth reason would have been the best. I feel like asking questions would be the most beneficial for me. Finding out what the other thinks and wants will make it easier to end in a win-win situation. Sometimes asking questions will be the exact opposite of what the other wants. Focusing on a common ground would then be the most beneficial for me. When we both see one thing in the same way it is easier to agree to disagree on some of the other things. I feel like the second reason is the worst in my opinion. If you have less reasons than the other, then they will think that they have won and start arguing about something else with more confidence.
ReplyDeletePersonally, the greatest practical benefit to enhance my negotiation abilities would be technique number four, asking questions. In some negotiations I have been involved in, I have incorrectly assumed the meaning of things the other participant has said. Sometimes, when I misunderstand what a person means, it can be easy to dig my heels in on my own opinion. I have found it is easy to misunderstand others, especially in emotionally charged discussions. Everyone has a filter through which we understand information coming in, and that filter is created by so many factors. When I stop and ask more questions for the sake of actually understanding another’s viewpoint, it becomes easier to see the person and not the argument. It also allows me to further clarify my own thoughts and beliefs.
ReplyDeleteJillian, I think this was a good explanation for why number four would work well. Do you think that asking questions makes the arguer appear more human? I personally feel like asking questions makes me seem more kind and engaged.
DeleteOf the listed negotiating techniques, I believe that number two would be the most useful in my negotiating abilities. Part of making a strong argument is using a small set of strong facts. By limiting the amount of facts I use, I am able to maintain clarity in my arguments. The importance of the argument is making sure that the facts I use are well constructed like an impenetrable fortress. Having a lot of facts will only be effective if every fact is strong. I emphasize the importance of quality over quantity when supporting your arguments. Consider a small house made of bricks vs a large house made of straw. The house of bricks is small but can handle much more stress than the house of straw. The house of straw is susceptible to wind and fire, but the house of bricks will hold strong through both of these stimuli. I have used this practice when crafting my medical school application. Instead of filling my application with a ton of activities that I did not know much about, I chose a select few activities that I could describe in detail to an admissions committee. However, it is essential that those activities are as effective as possible because they are all I have. The inability to divert to a new supporting detail in an argument plagues this technique. So I must make sure that my arguments cannot be taken down easily.
ReplyDelete-Reese H. Siegle
I believe that the third technique would enhance my negotiating abilities the most. Expressing genuine curiosity, especially during a debate or negotiation, is something that I do not really outwardly project if I do not care for the topic; I generally argue for my side or realize my side’s flaws and quickly change my mind. But, by expressing my curiosity, I could obtain a more nuanced perspective on the situation, create less tense environments, and have a higher likelihood of achieving objectively positive outcomes.
ReplyDelete- ���������� ����������
I think that adding the fourth technique to my arsenal would most improve my negotiating skills. I tend to use the first technique the most and while it is effective, it is by no means full proof. I would say technique one and four go hand in hand because they both show that you have interest in the other party's needs. I am generally pretty good at finding common ground because I strive to avoid conflict, asking questions would only prove that further. If I were negotiating with someone and they expressed outward interest in my side by asking questions, I would feel more inclined to try and come to a solution that benefitted the both of us.
ReplyDeleteJami, I agree with you that the fourth technique is really helpful during debates or general discussions. Asking someone why they think the way they think goes a long way in my opinion. Sometimes it's easier to just get frustrated and blow up than to stop and think about what reasons they have for their opinion. I also agree that it goes hand in hand with the first one. They both seem to be about hearing eachother out to try to understand rather than judge.
DeleteI would consider expressing curiosity in another person's argument to be the greatest benefit to negotiating abilities because if you show that you are interested in another person's point of view, they will not put up as many walls against you and may listen better to what you have to say. As Adam Grant explains throughout Think Again, when you come at a topic in full prosecutor mode, you have very little chance of swaying the other person or even of getting them thinking about it, because you have offended them and their opinion.
ReplyDeleteI believe that finding common ground is the tip that I would benefit the most from using. When I am trying to convince someone, although I consider their opinion, I very rarely if ever try to find common ground between us. I fully believe in my ideas, and I fully believe the opposing sides' ideas are incorrect. Otherwise I wouldn't be able to even argue my point. But if I took time to find common ground between us, that might lull them into a false sense of security long enough for me to convince them of my point.
ReplyDelete