別被強勢對手逼到談判死角

In this case, one party is seeking to control a negotiation by challenging the other party’s claims to legitimacy and credibility. To advocate for your interests and concerns, you need a framework to help you understand what is happening.

One such framework is the shadow negotiation-the underlying relationship that develops and evolves whenever people bargain. Whether parties are discussing price or performance, they’re also negotiating their relationship. To focus on the shadow negotiation is to examine how parties manage impressions, claim and maintain legitimacy and credibility, assert power and influence, and shape perceptions.

At the heart of the shadow negotiation lie moves, or techniques for challenging the other party’s legitimacy as one makes the case for one’s won. The following are standard fare in any negotiation-and, indeed, in many other communications:

1. Challenging competence or expertise. Such moves devalue the other party’s opinion, position, or service. In a contract negotiation, for instance, the move Your fees are way out of line with what you deliver derogates the value of the provider’s product or service as a way to get a lower price.

2. Demeaning ideas. Ideas are attacked in ways that leave their proposer little room to respond. You can’t be serious about this project plan makes the plan seems so ridiculous as to not be worthy of consideration.

3. Criticizing style. The other party’s emotions and behavior are called into question. Even such a statement as Calm down can be subtly unsettling-few of us like to think of ourselves as unreasonable.

4. Making threats. Cut your rates or there is no deal. These assertions of power back the other party into a corner, making it risky for him to propose some other solution.

5. Flattering or appealing for sympathy. A marketing director schedules a meeting to negotiate her salary and bonus with her boss. Times are tight, the boss says, I know I can count on you to drop this for now.

Being on the receiving end of a move can be unpleasant, and it’s tricky to know how to respond. Recognizing a move for what it is allows you to respond deliberately and strategically with a turn. These are the five types of turns:

1. Interruptions. Even the shortest break can disrupt a move, because afterward, no one will be in precisely the same position as before.

2. Naming. By signaling that you recognize the move for what it is, you let it be known that you have not been taken in. When the independent service faced with the threat, he can name the move-You and I both know that would create more work for you-thereby neutralizing the threat.

3. Questioning. A question throws the burden back on the mover by conveying that the move seems puzzling or unprovoked. In the salary negotiation, the director might approach her boss with a questioning turn: If you were in my position, I wonder how you would respond to the request you just made?

4. Correcting. A correcting turn refuses to rise to the bait and instead relies on a strategic substitution to deflect the move. In the service provider example, by producing similar firms’ fee schedules, the service provider is rejecting the implication that he is a price gouger and affirming himself as a competent professional whose fees are competitive.

5. Diverting. A diverting turn ignores the implication of the move and shifts the focus to the problem itself. In the salary negotiation, the director might try using a diverting move:I’d like to explore some other ideas with you.

根據最佳談判原則，經理人在談判時應該專注於利益，才能量身打造出滿足雙方需求的協議。但是，這個原則忽略了談判中的強弱勢關係，這會影響在談判中所提出的想法如何被解讀、評價、納入協議之中。先看看下面這個情境：

一位個人工作者正與他的重要客戶商談續約，他很驚訝的聽到客戶指出，他所收取的費用遠超過他所提供的服務，客戶還威脅要換人做做看。

在這個例子中，客戶這一方試圖以挑戰對方的合理性與可靠性來主導談判。在這樣的情況下要維護自己的利益，就需要一套架構，幫助自己瞭解談判到底出了什麼狀況。

這套架構就是「影子談判」，也就是雙方在協商談判中所發展、形成的一種看不見的關係。其實，不論是談判價格或是商議績效表現，其中都涉及雙方的強弱勢關係。要掌握影子談判的精髓，就要檢視談判雙方如何塑造印象與主張、如何維護合理性與可靠性、如何彰顯權力與影響、以及如何引導觀感。

影子談判的核心，就在於動作與對策，也就是一方為了自己的利益而用來挑戰對方的合理性的技巧。下面就是常見的影子談判的技巧，其實，這些技巧也常見於其他形式的溝通之中。

1.挑戰能力或是專業。這個動作就是貶抑對方的意見、地位或是服務。例如在上述的續約談判中，「你的收費遠超過你所提供的服務」這句話，就是在貶損對方產品或服務的價值，來談判更低的價格。

2.貶損構想。也就是攻擊對方提出的構想，讓對方幾乎沒有回應的餘地。「你提出的專案時間規劃是開玩笑的吧。」這句話讓對方的規劃顯得非常可笑，而沒有被考慮的價值。