Top 5 Sales Tips and Negotiation Skills
By Theodore Olson
Short and sweet...
1) Ask For It
If you don't ask for the sale you won't get it. This may sound simplistic, but many salespeople forget this basic tenant. It's the most important sales tool you possess and also THE MOST EFFECTIVE. Of course you need to adapt and find the most effective way and best timing to "ask for it" for your particular industry and product - but you have to ask!
2) Follow Up
You are not going to close every deal on the spot - that's OK! A good follow up plan will maximize your sales velocity. During the boom times we often let follow up slip. This is a bad habit. Follow up is critical to sales negotiation as many buyers are simply using "radio silence" as a very effective tactic. Take control and follow up - be specific and set the time frame expectations.
3) Sales Training
You may be good, but you can always improve. It's important for YOU to explore different sales training techniques. You may just increase your salary! As sales representatives we need to stay sharp. It's easy to fall into bad habits - don't! Stick with positive people and stay open to learning.
You need a positive attitude plain and simple! There's no way around this. If you want to sell, you must be able to maintain a positive mood during sales negotiations - even when they're going bad. Your clients can and will drive you crazy - expect this - and prepare for it!
5) Sales Drive
Hey - if you you're not driven, excited, and enthusiastic then why in hell would any one want to buy your product? You and only you are responsible to maintain your sales MOJO! Do whatever you have to! Tape a $100 bill on your computer! Hang an inspirational picture! Stand on your freaking head! Do whatever works for you!
-Theodore P. Olson Editor-in-chief, SalesGrail.com The Holy Grail of Sales Techniques
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Theodore_Olson
Negotiation Training - The Ultimate Sales Skill
By Julia Morrison
Is Negotiation a Sales Skill, an Art, or a Science?
It's all of the above and more. Much more, really.
In the context of the sales profession, most people think of negotiation as just another sales skill that needs to be mastered on the way to everyday success in business.
But can the skill, art and science of negotiation ever really be mastered?
Probably not. But at the very least, a knack for effective negotiation can be learned, improved upon, developed, reinforced and ultimately, honed into a sales skill that will yield spectacular competitive advantages in difficult business environments.
There are literally hundreds of nuances, strategies and tactics associated with effective negotiation. Here a few essential ones to get you started in the right direction:
Balance of Power
Never assume that the buyer in a negotiation has all the power. Savvy salespeople recognize that sellers often have just as much (or more) power in a negotiation as the buyer. For example, if the seller manages to find out that the buyer needs his product in a hurry, he can use that fact to his advantage when price, freight terms, quantity discounts and other elements of the sale are negotiated.
Experienced salespeople, when asked to give an approximate price for their goods or services, know that it's better to quote a little higher price than they expect to get for their offerings. But there's a way to take that tactic a step further, by quoting an extremely high price for the purpose of reducing the aspirations (or hopes) of the buyer for getting a good deal. Once the bar is set so high, it becomes much easier to realize a better than average margin when negotiations are concluded, because the buyer's aspirations were controlled by the seller's sales skill and negotiating prowess.
Silence is sometimes golden indeed. There is a natural human desire to keep conversation flowing, and knowledgeable salespeople will sometimes simply go silent at a crucial point in the negotiation for that very reason. This is sometimes very effective after quoting a price; often, the seller using this negotiation tactic will simply stop talking after throwing the number out there. And they won't break the silence because they know the buyer eventually will. When she does, her discomfort about the silence will often lead to the seller getting a higher margin or at a minimum, significant information that might not otherwise have been divulged.
Of course, there are many, many more tactics and situations where effective negotiating methods can be employed to the salesperson's distinct advantage. Stay tuned to bestsalesmantraining.com for more of our negotiation skills series.
Julia Morrison is a sales training professional who helps salespeople in all industries make more sales, faster, with less stress and greater personal satisfaction.
Julia's consulting firm Sales Performance Coaching has trained dozens of sales professionals from reps to managers on how to get motivated, stay positive and close more sales. At [http://www.BestSalesmanTraining.com] you'll find hand-selected training resources to help you too become a top performer too.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Julia_Morrison
Sales Negotiation Training in Hong Kong HK SAR ASIA - Close that deal!
Barriers to negotiations in Hong Kong (HK SAR), China
- Die hard bargainers.
- Lack of trust.
- Informational vacuums and negotiator's dilemma.
- Structural impediments.
- Cultural and gender differences.
- Communication problems.
- The power of dialogue.
Tactics are always an important part of the negotiating process. But tactics don't often jump up and down shouting "Here I am, look at me." If they did, the other side would see right through them and they would not be effective. More often than not they are subtle, difficult to identify and used for multiple purposes. Tactics are more frequently used in distributive negotiations and when the focus in on taking as much value off the table as possible. Many negotiation tactics exist. Below are a few commonly used tactics.
Auction: The bidding process is designed to create competition. When multiple parties want the same thing, pit them against one another. When people know that they may lose out on something, they will want it even more. Not only do they want the thing that is being bid on, they also want to win, just to win. Taking advantage of someone’s competitive nature can drive up the price.
Brinksmanship: One party aggressively pursues a set of terms to the point at which the other negotiating party must either agree or walk away. Brinkmanship is a type of “hard nut” approach to bargaining in which one party pushes the other party to the “brink” or edge of what that party is willing to accommodate. Successful brinksmanship convinces the other party they have no choice but to accept the offer and there is no acceptable alternative to the proposed agreement.
Bogey: Negotiators use the bogey tactic to pretend that an issue of little or no importance to him or her is very important. Then, later in the negotiation, the issue can be traded for a major concession of actual importance.
Chicken: Negotiators propose extreme measures, often bluffs, to force the other party to chicken out and give them what they want. This tactic can be dangerous when parties are unwilling to back down and go through with the extreme measure.
Defence in Depth: Several layers of decision-making authority is used to allow further concessions each time the agreement goes through a different level of authority. In other words, each time the offer goes to a decision maker, that decision maker asks to add another concession in order to close the deal.
Deadlines: Give the other party a deadline forcing them to make a decision. This method uses time to apply pressure to the other party. Deadlines given can be actual or artificial.
Flinch: Flinching is showing a strong negative physical reaction to a proposal. Common examples of flinching are gasping for air, or a visible expression of surprise of shock. The flinch can be done consciously or unconsciously. The flinch signals to the opposite party that you think the offer or proposal is absurd in hopes the other party will lower their aspirations. Seeing a physical reaction is more believable than hearing someone saying, “I’m shocked.”
Good Guy/Bad Guy: The good guy/bad guy approach is typically used in team negotiations where one member of the team makes extreme or unreasonable demands, and the other offers a more rational approach. This tactic is named after a police interrogation technique often portrayed in the media. The “good guy” will appear more reasonable and understanding, and therefore, easier to work with. In essence, it is using the law of relativity to attract cooperation. The good guy will appear more agreeable relative to the “bad guy.” This tactic is easy to spot because of its frequent use.
Highball/Lowball: Depending on whether selling or buying, sellers or buyers use a ridiculously high, or ridiculously low opening offer that will never be achieved. The theory is that the extreme offer will cause the other party to reevaluate his or her own opening offer and move close to the resistance point (as far as you are willing to go to reach an agreement). Another advantage is that the person giving the extreme demand appears more flexible he or she makes concessions toward a more reasonable outcome. A danger of this tactic is that the opposite party may think negotiating is a waste of time.
The Nibble: Nibbling is asking for proportionally small concessions that haven’t been discussed previously just before closing the deal. This method takes advantage of the other party’s desire to close by adding “just one more thing.”
Snow Job: Negotiators overwhelm the other party with so much information that he or she has difficulty determining which facts are important, and which facts are diversions. Negotiators may also use technical language or jargon to mask a simple answer to a question asked by a non-expert.
Nonverbal communication in negotiation
Communication is a key element of negotiation. Effective negotiation requires that participants effectively convey and interpret information. Participants in a negotiation will communicate information not only verbally but non-verbally through body language and gestures. By understanding how nonverbal communication works, a negotiator is better equipped to interpret the information other participants are leaking non-verbally while keeping secret those things that would inhibit his/her ability to negotiate.
Examples of non-verbal communication in negotiation
Non-verbal "anchoring" In a negotiation, a person can gain the advantage by verbally expressing his/or her position first. By “anchoring” your position, you establish the position from which the negotiation will proceed. In a like manner, one can “anchor” and gain advantage with non verbal (body language) ques.
- Personal Space: The person at the head of the table is the apparent symbol of power. Negotiators can repel this strategic advantage by positioning allies in the room to surround that individual.
- First Impression: Begin the negotiation with positive gestures and enthusiasm. Look the person in the eye with sincerity. If you cannot maintain eye contact, the other person might think you are hiding something or that you are insincere. Give a solid handshake.
- Nervous Laugh: A laugh not matching the situation. This could be a sign of nervousness or discomfort. When this happens, it may be good to probe with questions to discover the person’s true feelings.
- Positive words but negative body language: If someone asks their negotiation partner if they are annoyed and the person pounds their fist and responds sharply, “what makes you think anything is bothering me?”
- Hands raised in a clenched position: The person raising his/her hands in this position reveals frustration even when he/she is smiling. This is a signal that the person doing it may be holding back a negative attitude.
- If possible, it may be helpful for negotiation partners to spend time together in a comfortable setting outside of the negotiation room. Knowing how each partner non-verbally communicates outside of the negotiation setting will help negotiation partners to sense incongruity between verbal and non-verbal communication within the negotiation setting.
Conveying receptivity They way negotiation partners position their bodies relative to each other may influence how receptive each is to the other person's message and ideas.
- Face and eyes: Receptive negotiators smile, make plenty of eye contact. This conveys the idea that there is more interest in the person than in what is being said. On the other hand, non-receptive negotiators make little to no eye contact. Their eyes may be squinted, jaw muscles clenched and head turned slightly away from the speaker
- Arms and hands: To show receptivity, negotiators should spread arms and open hands on table or relaxed on their lap. Negotiators show poor receptivity when their hands are clenched, crossed, positioned in front of their mouth, or rubbing the back of their neck.
- Legs and Feet: Receptive negotiators sit with legs together or one leg slightly in front of the other. When standing, they distribute weight evenly and place hands on their hips with their body tilted toward the speaker. Non-receptive negotiators stand with legs crossed, pointing away from the speaker.
- Torso: Receptive negotiators sit on the edge of their chair, unbutton their suit coat with their body tilted toward the speaker. Non-receptive negotiators may lean back in their chair and keep their suit coat buttoned.
28. Harvard Business Essentials, Negotiation, Boston, Massachusetts.
29. Gates, Steve (2011). The Negotiation Book. United Kingdom: A John Wiley and Sons, LTD, Publication. p. 232. ISBN 978-0-470-66491-9.
30. Gates, Steve (2011). The Negotiation Book. United Kingdom: A John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Publication. p. 240. ISBN 978-0-470-66491-9.
31. Goldman, Alvin (1991). Settling For More: Mastering Negotiating Strategies and Techniques. Washington, DC: The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. p. 83. ISBN 0-87179-651-1.
32. Lewicki, R.J.; D.M. Saunders, J.W. Minton (2001). Essentials of Negotiation. New York: McGraw-Hill Higher Education. p. 82. ISBN 0-07-231285-8.
33. Gates, Steve (2011). The Negotiation Book. United Kingdom: A John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Publication. p. 246. ISBN 978-0-470-66491-9.
34. Coburn, Calum. "Neutralising Manipulative Negotiation Tactics". Negotiation Training Solutions. Retrieved 1 October 2012.
35. Gates, Steve (2011). The Negotiation Book. United Kingdom: A John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Publication. p. 245. ISBN 978-0-470-66491-9.
36. Lewicki, R.J.; D.M. Saunders, J.W. Minton (2001). Essentials of Negotiation. New York: McGraw-Hill Higher Education. p. 81. ISBN 0-07-231285-8.
37. Lewicki, R.J.; D.M. Saunders, J.W. Minton (2001). Essentials of Negotiation. New York: McGraw-Hill Higher Education. p. 86. ISBN 0-07-231285-8.
38. Hui, Zhou; Tingqin Zhang. "Body Language in Business Negotiation". International Journal of Business Management 3 (2).
39. Body Language Magic.
40. Donaldson, Michael C. Indianapolis, Indiana: Wiley Publishing, Inc. ISBN 1118068084.
41. Pease, Barbara and Alan (2006). The Difinitive Book of Body Language. New York, NY: Bantam Dell. ISBN 0553804723.4
42. Donaldson, Michael C.; Donaldson, Mimi (1996). Negotiating for dummies. New York, N.Y.: Hungry Minds. ISBN 9781568848679.
Emotion in negotiation
Emotions play an important part in the negotiation process, although it is only in recent years that their effect is being studied. Emotions have the potential to play either a positive or negative role in negotiation. During negotiations, the decision as to whether or not to settle rests in part on emotional factors. Negative emotions can cause intense and even irrational behavior, and can cause conflicts to escalate and negotiations to break down, but may be instrumental in attaining concessions. On the other hand, positive emotions often facilitate reaching an agreement and help to maximize joint gains, but can also be instrumental in attaining concessions. Positive and negative discrete emotions can be strategically displayed to influence task and relational outcomes and may play out differently across cultural boundaries.
Dispositional affects affect the various stages of the negotiation process: which strategies are planned to be used, which strategies are actually chosen, the way the other party and his or her intentions are perceived, their willingness to reach an agreement and the final negotiated outcomes. Positive affectivity (PA) and negative affectivity (NA) of one or more of the negotiating sides can lead to very different outcomes.
Positive affect in negotiation
Even before the negotiation process starts, people in a positive mood have more confidence, and higher tendencies to plan to use a cooperative strategy. During the negotiation, negotiators who are in a positive mood tend to enjoy the interaction more, show less contentious behavior, use less aggressive tactics and more cooperative strategies. This in turn increases the likelihood that parties will reach their instrumental goals, and enhance the ability to find integrative gains. Indeed, compared with negotiators with negative or natural affectivity, negotiators with positive affectivity reached more agreements and tended to honor those agreements more. Those favorable outcomes are due to better decision making processes, such as flexible thinking, creative problem solving, respect for others' perspectives, willingness to take risks and higher confidence. Post negotiation positive affect has beneficial consequences as well. It increases satisfaction with achieved outcome and influences one's desire for future interactions. The PA aroused by reaching an agreement facilitates the dyadic relationship, which result in affective commitment that sets the stage for subsequent interactions.
PA also has its drawbacks: it distorts perception of
self performance,such that performance is judged to be relatively better than it actually is. Thus, studies involving self reports on achieved outcomes might be biased.
Negative affect in negotiation
Negative affect has detrimental effects on various stages in the negotiation process. Although various negative emotions affect negotiation outcomes, by far the most researched is anger. Angry negotiators plan to use more competitive strategies and to cooperate less, even before the negotiation starts. These competitive strategies are related to reduced joint outcomes. During negotiations, anger disrupts the process by reducing the level of trust, clouding parties' judgment, narrowing parties' focus of attention and changing their central goal from reaching agreement to retaliating against the other side. Angry negotiators pay less attention to opponent’s interests and are less accurate in judging their interests, thus achieve lower joint gains. Moreover, because anger makes negotiators more self-centered in their preferences, it increases the likelihood that they will reject profitable offers. Opponents who really get angry (or cry, or otherwise lose control) are more likely to make errors: make sure they are in your favor. Anger does not help in achieving negotiation goals either: it reduces joint gains and does not help to boost personal gains, as angry negotiators do not succeed in claiming more for themselves. Moreover, negative emotions lead to acceptance of settlements that are not in the positive utility function but rather have a negative utility. However, expression of negative emotions during negotiation can sometimes be beneficial: legitimately expressed anger can be an effective way to show one's commitment, sincerity, and needs. Moreover, although NA reduces gains in integrative tasks, it is a better strategy than PA in distributive tasks (such as zero-sum). In his work on negative affect arousal and white noise, Seidner found support for the existence of a negative affect arousal mechanism through observations regarding the devaluation of speakers from other ethnic origins." Negotiation may be negatively affected, in turn, by submerged hostility toward an ethnic or gender group.
Conditions for emotion affect in negotiation
Research indicates that negotiator’s emotions do not necessarily affect the negotiation process. Albarracın et al. (2003) suggested that there are two conditions for emotional affect, both related to the ability (presence of environmental or cognitive disturbances) and the motivation:
Identification of the affect: requires high motivation, high ability or both.
Determination that the affect is relevant and important for the judgment: requires that either the motivation, the ability or both are low.
According to this model, emotions are expected to affect negotiations only when one is high and the other is low. When both ability and motivation are low the affect will not be identified, and when both are high the affect will be identify but discounted as irrelevant for judgment. A possible implication of this model is, for example, that the positive effects PA has on negotiations (as described above) will be seen only when either motivation or ability are low.
The effect of the partner’s emotions
Most studies on emotion in negotiations focus on the effect of the negotiator’s own emotions on the process. However, what the other party feels might be just as important, as group emotions are known to affect processes both at the group and the personal levels. When it comes to negotiations, trust in the other party is a necessary condition for its emotion to affect, and visibility enhances the effect. Emotions contribute to negotiation processes by signalling what one feels and thinks and can thus prevent the other party from engaging in destructive behaviours and to indicate what steps should be taken next: PA signals to keep in the same way, while NA points that mental or behavioural adjustments are needed.
Partner’s emotions can have two basic effects on negotiator’s emotions and behaviour: mimetic/ reciprocal or complementary. For example, disappointment or sadness might lead to compassion and more cooperation. In a study by Butt et al. (2005) which simulated real multi-phase negotiation, most people reacted to the partner’s emotions in reciprocal, rather than complementary, manner. Specific emotions were found to have different effects on the opponent’s feelings and strategies chosen:
Angercaused the opponents to place lower demands and to concede more in a zero-sum negotiation, but also to evaluate the negotiation less favourably. It provoked both dominating and yielding behaviours of the opponent.
Prideled to more integrative and compromise strategies by the partner.
Guilt or regretexpressed by the negotiator led to better impression of him by the opponent, however it also led the opponent to place higher demands. On the other hand, personal guilt was related to more satisfaction with what one achieved.
Worry or disappointmentleft bad impression on the opponent, but led to relatively lower demands by the opponent.
12 Kopelman, S., Rosette, A., and Thompson, L. (2006). The three faces of eve: Strategic displays of positive neutral and negative emotions in negotiations. Organization Behavior and Human Decision Processes (OBHDP), 99 (1), 81-101.
13 Kopelman, S. and Rosette, A.S. (2008). Cultural variation in response to strategic display of emotions in negotiations. Special Issue on Emotion and Negotiation in Group Decision and Negotiation (GDN), 17 (1) 65-77.
14 Forgas, J. P. (1998) "On feeling good and getting your way: Mood effects on negotiator cognition and behavior". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 565–577.
15 Van Kleef, G.A., De Dreu, C.KW., & Manstead, A.S.R. (2006) "Supplication and Appeasement in Conflict and Negotiation: The Interpersonal Effects of Disappointment, Worry, Guilt, and Regret". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(1), 124–142
16. Butt AN, Choi JN, Jaeger A (2005) "The effects of self-emotion, counterpart emotion, and counterpart behavior on negotiator behavior: a comparison of individual-level and dyad-level dynamics". Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(6), 681 - 704
17. Kramer, R. M., Newton, E. & Pommerenke, P. L. (1993) "Self-enhancement biases and negotiator judgment: Effects of self-esteem and mood". Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 56, 110-133.
18. Maiese, Michelle "Emotions" Beyond Intractability. Eds. Guy Burgess and Heidi Burgess. Conflict Research Consortium, University of Colorado, Boulder. Posted: July 2005 downloaded: 30.08.2007
19. Carnevale, P. J. D. & Isen, A. M. (1986) "The influence of positive affect and visual access on the discovery of integrative solutions in bilateral negotiation". Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, 1-13.
20. Barry, B., Fulmer, I. S., & Van Kleef, G. A. (2004) I laughed, I cried, I settled: The role of emotion in negotiation. In M. J. Gelfand & J. M. Brett (Eds.), The handbook of negotiation and culture (pp. 71–94). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
21. Allred, K. G., Mallozzi, J. S., Matsui, F., & Raia, C. P. (1997) "The influence of anger and compassion on negotiation performance". Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 70, 175–187.
22. Davidson, M. N., & Greenhalgh, L. (1999) "The role of emotion in negotiation: The impact of anger and race". Research on Negotiation in Organizations, 7, 3–26.
23. Seidner, Stanley S. (1991), Negative Affect Arousal Reactions from Mexican and Puerto Rican Respondents, Washington, D.C.: ERIC, ISBN ED346711 http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/custom/portlets/recordDetails/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED346711&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=ED346711
23. Albarracin D. & Kumkale, G.T. (2003) "Affect as Information in Persuasion: A Model of Affect Identification and Discounting". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(3) 453-469.
10 Guidelines for Effective Negotiation Skills
By Rabison Shumba
Never enter into any agreement or negotiation from a point of desperation. The moment you show how desperate you are, you disarm yourself of the bargaining power. The value of the transaction will be compromised by your appetite & apparent desire. Rather stand back, gather yourself & your thoughts & reschedule the talks. Often we place a price tag on goods based on our needs. No one desires to spend more than the real value of product or service. As african businessmen, politicians and the like we have missed the power of effective negotiation hence time, value and resources have gone to waste. Where we potentially could have reaped $millions, we have settled for a few $thousands which of course could pay a few bills and get an economy going. Question stands whether we adequately calculate and plan and prepare for negotiations, deals or agreements or we see the dotted line as the partying of the red sea, an imminent breakthrough and forget the fine print. I have watched with great interest how sudden bursts of joy at the signing of mergers between companies and political parties, even churches have turned into a series of mourning experiences as the dotted and signed document is activated. Before you can have the famous handshake to signal an agreement, consider your actions closely. Decisions you make at this point have long lasting effects on where your organization will be in the next foreseeable future. Realize that those who have entrusted you with the negotiations responsibility bank on you to make decisions in the best interest of the organization.
Here are a few negotiation guidelines
• Do some research and investigations on the other party before the meeting. Check trade references and outcomes of previous agreements the other party entered into. Use your checklist of non-negotiable to determine if you should proceed with negotiations. It may not be necessary to enter into any negotiation if the other party fails the "non-negotiable" test in advance.
• Prepare questions in advance which seek to get clarity on any clauses on documents you have previously received. Get your legal representative to look into and review contracts or agreements. Preparation entails anticipating questions and answering them before you engage. It entails presenting your best case and alternatives when called for hence it is important. There is nothing wrong in preparing for a stalemate position and how to break beyond it.
• Go into major meetings with a witness(es) or people who can help with discussion. This could be your Personal Assistant or senior Manager in your team. You may need someone who can give you hints and tips. Someone whom you can use eye contact with to determine whether you should proceed or not. Sometimes when you are alone negotiating with a panel you lose on the basis of numbers as you may have 5 active brains thinking ahead of you.
• Do not rush to make the decision - Always look at the negotiating party directly in the eye and avoid being bullied into making a decision here and now. The push must never be just to ensure the agreement is signed off without the parties taking ownership of the decisions they are making. Whenever there is a rush, it must flag within you that there could be something hidden in the agreement. Take your time. You don't have to sign instantly.
• Understand the time factor - There is always a time conducive enough for negotiations to take place. You will not negotiate effectively when you are in a hurry or when there is fatigue on either side of the negotiation table. Depending on how tense the negotiations can be, it is healthy to call for a "time out" so that you regain yourself.
• Avoid emotional bargaining - Separate your own emotions from the issue being negotiated on. When you become angry or over excited you lose your composure and negotiating power.
• Avoid attacking the person but look at the matter under negotiation - There is a tendency to address personalities at the expense of the matter under discussion or negotiation. While it is important to know the kind of person you are negotiating with, the issue on hand supersedes personalities.
• Pay attention to detail- In the event that you get documents in the meeting without prior reading, it is important to read the fine print or give a specialist within your team to scrutinize while you discuss. The fine print is usually the source of all problems in any negotiation.
• Be prepared for compromise - Before you get into a negotiation process, you should know both your best case and worst case scenarios, the benefits and demerits of each case. You should obviously start the negotiation by putting on the table your best case. As you bargain, a little bit of compromise is necessary but not to go below your worst case scenario. I have heard it said that "in a negotiation, both parties must leave feeling like they won some and lost some".
• Never make your desperation apparent to the other party - It is important to do a SWOT analysis of yourself and your team that you are going with. Once you know your strengths, you will not let someone with no deep knowledge of the current issue on the table lead the discussion. Do not expose the weaknesses you may have as the other party will ride on that making your proposal futile.
"Your ability to negotiate, communicate, influence and persuade others to do things is absolutely Indispensable to everything you accomplish in life" Brian Tracy, American self-help author
Rabison Shumba is a young African entrepreneur who has interests in Information and
Communication Technology, Agriculture and Mining. He is also a motivational speaker, trainer and author. His book, The Greatness Manual and various online articles are tools for personal and professional development. Together with 100 other Career Experts, Rabison co-authored the 101 Great Ways to Enhance your Career. Rabison has a personal vision of impacting the lives of children in marginalized communities by creating platforms for career counsel and guidance, information empowerment and capacity building through the Greatness Factory Trust, where he currently holds the position of Chairman of the Board of Trustees and Acting Executive Director. He is actively involved in the organization of career enhancement and guidance colloquiums to propel and inspire both young and mature professionals to greatness. His areas of expertise include strategy, leadership, personal and professional development. Rabison is married to Jackie, and they have two daughters. They reside in Harare, Zimbabwe. http://www.greatnessmanual.com or http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/rshumba
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Rabison_Shumba
Negotiation SKills Training Courses in Hong Kong HK