Let me introduce you to someone who has mastered the game of negotiation.
Giuseppe Conti is ranked the number one global negotiation guru, bestselling author and the man trusted by the world's top universities and Fortune 500 companies to teach the art of influence.
For more than two decades, Giuseppe has been shaping deals across continents, showing leaders how to win agreements without losing relationships.
And today he's here to share the exact strategies that can change the way you negotiate at work, at home and in life.
This isn't theory.
This is battle-tested wisdom by the top of the field.
And by the end of this conversation you'll see negotiation not as a fight to be feared, but as a skill that can transform your confidence, your career and your future.
I hope you're ready because you're about to learn from one of the best negotiators on the planet.
Tell us about the new book.
I'm very excited about this.
Okay.
So you know the idea of the book.
Of course you know we're going to talk a bit today, but really the idea of the book is that you know there are already so many books about negotiation theory.
So there's difficult to add something about negotiation theory that has not been said and done by other people.
So my goal was to write a book that will be simple for people to read and to understand.
So I made the 68 short chapters.
Each one can be read in three minutes on average, let's say.
And I talk about one topic.
And I give maybe three lessons about what can you do.
So you know anything about.
You know team negotiation, dealing with overconfidence or asking your boss for a raise.
You know, there is a very concrete approach, set of advice that we offer and some real life example, right?
You know, I think you know, the beauty of having worked in corporate for 25 years is that you know I do have a wealth of real life advice.
So that's the way I did it.
And then you know the other thing that I did, since I recognized that, you know, each section is short and may leave people a bit, you know, disappointed because they were hoping to get more and they can't.
Then, for each paragraph I have also identified a good video and a good article.
So if I am particularly interested to know more about framing, then I have a video and I have an article that I can refer to and get more in-depth kind of content.
So short for the people that just want to have a bedtime reading and just dedicate three minutes and an opportunity to go more in depth with the additional resources.
Giuseppe, that's so smart.
That is really smart because you're following the trends of the attention span of humanity, right?
This is really great, because I feel like people no longer have the capacity for anything that could take, dare I say, four minutes to consume.
And so I think this is such a smart way to do it, because the i'm thinking about every other book.
We have our big chapters.
They're very lengthy, but and especially when you think about the studies of how many people finish books versus how many people begin or how few people even start I think what you've done with this is you've taken something that can be really complex and scary and intimidating and made it bite sized and more likely for people to actually consume it.
That's the idea, right?
You know, that's really the goal, right?
You know, that actually people read it and use it.
Yeah, that's what I'm aiming to do.
So now I want to know.
68 is a very specific number.
And so for me, with my negotiation nerdiness, I'm saying, hmm.
Is that a specific marketing move to make sure that we have an imprecise number to show that there's a lot of specificity?
Or was it like you just picked your 68 favorite topics to consider?
Yeah.
In fact, the book is made of 12 chapters.
And then, you know, for each chapter...
So the chapter are things like creating value negotiation, claiming value negotiation, influencing career matters, those kinds of you know there are a lot of chapters like this.
And then you know, for each chapter then you have five six, eight paragraphs, So a total of 68 paragraphs is the addition of the different pieces of information that I put in each chapter.
In fact, the 68 is not even mentioned, let's say, on the book in any way.
It's just the result of how the book came out.
Very, okay, very, very cool.
And I said to him, only time you have to stop, right?
You know, you can always say, oh yeah, I could talk also about this.
Oh yes, but why not?
And then I said, okay, listen.
The editor already said, well, you're a bit over in terms of the number of words.
You should make it shorter.
You should make it shorter.
So I had to go the opposite way.
And, you know.
That's the hardest part.
That is the hardest part.
Just trimming things that you know are good in order to meet that.
Something else I thought was really interesting about this is because there are – we see books on negotiation as a genre.
Then we see books on influence as a genre.
But yours is unique because you put those two together but separate them in the title.
So negotiation plus influence equals success.
So I think a lot of people might be surprised to see those two things separated.
And when you were in the process of writing and when you look at the book.
Can you help people to understand the distinction that you're making between negotiation as a skill set and approach versus influence?
Yes.
Now, it boils down to our two best-selling workshops.
The two workshops that we sell the most are Leading Edge Negotiation and Influencing with Integrity.
And the way those two books are made is.
Negotiation is mainly focused on the external side, And influencing with integrity is more focused on the internal side.
Now, of course, you know, we know that there is influencing internally and externally and negotiation internally and externally.
But you know, just to clarify the message also to the potential customer that asks me what kind of training I want, then you know a good way to start is what are the biggest challenges, internal or external?
And the people say oh, you know, I spent so much time, you know, persuading my internal stakeholder because you know they're pushing back.
They don't want to change.
It's so frustrating, et cetera, et cetera.
Then we say, OK, maybe, you know, the influence with integrity is going to be there.
And, by the way, you know, the first chapter really talks about the fundamentals here which are common to both.
Right, you know, focusing on the other party preparation, you know, question listening, you know these are the kind of things that are relevant for both negotiation and influencing.
But i will say, you know, to make it clearer in the mind of the listener, of the readers, then I'm really talking about negotiation externally and influencing internally.
Interesting.
It makes so much sense.
And I also think too, when it comes to whether or not people are willing to adopt what it is that we're teaching.
Thinking about it internally as influence, I found is a little bit more palatable too.
Like, I don't want to negotiate with my colleagues.
I don't see it that way.
Even though we, as negotiators, see everything as a negotiation, sometimes there's that resistance.
So influence, I found, is a much more palatable word for some of those interactions that aren't often explicitly labeled as negotiations, even though they pretty much kind of are.
I think that's a really smart way to connect to the audience in a way that it would instantly resonate, without running into that friction.
Yeah.
And also, you know, one of the things that I experience very often when I run workshop with procurement people that tend to be negotiator is that they approach internal discussion too often with the same mindset that they approach the external negotiation.
So then they use a push energy and they try to persuade and say no listen, I'm right listen, but you know, you should believe me, you should trust me.
This is the way, and And one of the mindset shifts by also calling them with two different words is to make them realize that whenever you are dealing with internal stakeholders, there are a few things that need to be done differently.
And one of them is to use more of a pull strategy, which is about asking questions listening, asking for help, create a common vision, set values and those kind of things.
I suppose then, you know, trying to go the hard way.
It may work with suppliers, especially if you're working in a giant company with lots of leverage and everybody wants to work with.
Your push approach may still be successful with most of the suppliers, but with internal stakeholders not much.
No, and you're absolutely right because, especially when you think about the way that people within procurement negotiate a lot of times, if you are in a company that has a procurement category, like a procurement department you are – already a very sizable institution.
Small businesses don't have procurement teams, but procurement teams will negotiate with smaller businesses and smaller suppliers.
So a lot of times procurement has a substantial amount of leverage in these conversations.
But then when you – so you can have a bit more of an assertive, heavy-handed kind of push negotiation strategy.
But then internally –
The dynamics shift completely.
And the push mentality is, first of all, not as effective.
Let's put that aside.
Let's stipulate to that.
But also it hurts the relationship.
They're like, you think you're going to just do this to me?
Okay.
Well, that's not the way this works here.
And then they run into those challenges because they are not only not being effective in these conversations but also damaging the relationships in the process.
Exactly.
And too often procurement is seen as a service function.
Yeah.
So then you even have a misbalance there, right?
You know, in the sense, that the other is seen as the one that contributes to the results, and you are a service provider.
So that's...
Certainly going for a push energy may not be the wisest thing.
Right.
Oh, this is good.
So, when you think about the book and all the 68 short chapters that we have, what do you think is the thing that people struggle with the most, as it relates to negotiation and influence?
Okay well, even if it sounds obvious, the biggest is probably lack of preparation, in the sense that we all heard that preparation is so big that 90 of the success may be the preparation, or whatever kind of number you want to put there.
Preparation is a proactive kind of activity.
And if you're familiar with Stephen Covey and his matrix about, urgent is important, it's something which is important, but it's not urgent.
Yeah.
And so, you know, you have to be proactive to do it.
Now certain company demanded from people and then okay, you know, if it's really a requirement that you have to prepare, you have to put things in writing and for any spend above a certain amount, et cetera, then people do it.
But if people have the freedom to do it or not to do it and recognize it that you know all of us have too much on our plate then one of the simple things that you do is you cut the preparation, which is probably the biggest mistake.
Yeah, you're so right.
And this is.
This is one of these things I think for for us as negotiation trainers people who talk about this is one of the biggest annoyances, because we say it all the time.
Every single negotiation expert will reinforce this all the time, and it doesn't change the fact that people just don't do it.
I've been negotiating with packaging suppliers all my life.
I know it inside out.
I don't need to prepare it.
I have everything in my head.
That's what they always say.
And then there are surprises and they're not ready.
So OK, when you've been working with teams, what has been the thing that helps them to actually take this and actually put it into the practice?
Is it just saying, OK, talking to the leader and institutionalizing it?
Or has there been something that really resonated with people, that actually got them to buy in and actually say yeah, even though it's inconvenient, I'm going to do it.
No, I think institutionalized is, in my opinion, the most effective strategy.
So what I do recommend to my customer is, is to put something in place like this.
Above this threshold, people need to prepare in writing.
Above a threshold a bit higher, people need to prepare in writing and role-play it with a colleague.
This is another powerful tool that increases our ability to deliver.
That's good.
That's very good because then you build in that accountability so it's harder to hide.
That's really smart.
What are your thoughts as it relates to preparation?
What thought have you given to AI and preparation for negotiation?
Now, of course, there is already uh, the possibility to get help from ai in the preparation phase.
So you know all those things, like you know the argument that you're gonna ask the question that you can ask, the question that you can get how you manage this objection, and those kind of things.
These are all things that you can do with ai.
Now, The additional piece that we have done is having AI directly filling our preparation template the one of my company, right.
So that... then there is a possibility to have immediately the help.
Of course, you know, it doesn't mean the TI has all the answers, right?
You know there is still a call for the procurement person to review the things and to use their judgment and to make the right adjustment.
But I think you know The mindset, that you know the simple things.
The image that I like to give is AI is a very smart intern is not an executor.
He has a lot of capabilities, very fast.
He has access to a lot of information.
He can use maybe the technology much better than you do, but he's an intern right.
You know, he's not somebody who has been there doing real life deals for 25 years.
And that's where we have to be sure that the human intervention is there to complete.
But I think it's certainly a powerful tool.
That can help us in preparation, can help us during the worship, can help us after the worship to analyze what we have done and what we could have done better.
I like that.
I think you're spot on, because what I'm seeing is there are times where people use it to the point where it becomes a crutch and then their actual skills start to erode.
So it's good to use it, like you said, as an insert to help us to get organized, help us to organize our thoughts and think through some things we might say.
It's been very helpful, especially for me when I'm prepping for meetings in general.
Just saying, all right, here's the scenario.
What are our 50 questions that I could potentially ask during this.
And that's been really helpful, just kind of getting an idea of all the questions that I could ask.
Because, even if I don't ask those same exact questions, just being able to review some of them and going through it helps me to be more creative in the moment.
So it's about recognizing how you can utilize AI to amplify your humanity without eroding your skills in the same way.
Absolutely.
Yeah.
No, that's really good.
When you think about your vision for the book, especially when you consider it in the totality of your thought leadership, with everything that you've done what – hope do you have for the book in terms of like the impact and who it reaches?
And, and essentially, how does this fit within your overall legacy of thought leadership, within negotiation now um, I think, of course, putting something in writing is important to make sure that there is a trace of what they've done.
And so that's good.
Right.
You know, there are articles, webinar, podcast, et cetera, et cetera.
But I will say certainly the book is a powerful effort.
Also, one of the reasons that I decided to write a book is I wanted to bring some of the changes in mindset about how the people look at negotiation and influencing, for instance.
You know, one of them is that negotiation and influencing, when done well, are enjoyable process.
Right, you know?
What we know is that too often people, when you mention the word negotiation and influencing, they think about zero-sum game.
The famous study at Carnegie Mellon with women associated negotiation with going to the dentist.
You know, not exactly.
You know the most exciting image you know influencing in a number of culture is confused with manipulation, so it's seen as something unethical.
So if with my book I managed to change some of those perceptions, that already would be something good.
Also because what the research tells us is that good negotiators are more satisfied and less stressed at work.
So, you know, they're very useful skills to do.
And now, of course, you know, if you imagine negotiation like OK, I'm going to have a fight and, for you know, divorce negotiation.
Yeah, of course you know, if all the negotiation were like divorce negotiation probably you know it will not be the most fun kind of things.
But hopefully in most of the commercial negotiation, then we are not going to approach it with the same kind of mindset.
It's not a conflict.
It's about trust.
It's about having a learning attitude, using question, active listening.
It's about thinking creatively.
And making sure also that the other party is satisfied.
See, this is an important segue because I want to spend some time talking about the mindsets around negotiation, but also the biases against the term and the activity.
Even before people understand what negotiation truly is, I'm recognizing that there is some resistance to it.
They might admire people who can do it well, but they themselves never aspire to say you know, what would be a fun thing for me to do at some point is to engage in negotiations.
And that holds people back forever from even learning about it, because that study that you referenced is so it makes so much sense.
When you talked about they equate it to going to the dentist.
I love my dentist, but I'm not excited to see it on the calendar, you know.
So how much of the resistance to effective negotiation do you think it could be attributed to the biases people have against the concept in general?
Yeah.
I think a big chunk.
I think a big chunk because yes, now of course you know, there are sharp cultural differences and sharp gender differences.
So, by the way, in the same study, where the female associated negotiation with going to the dentist, the male-associated negotiation with going to a ballgame, which is a much more positive image, right.
So already that gives you one of the differences.
But we also know that the way to approach a negotiation changes substantially from one country to the other.
And we will talk about you traveling to Europe next week.
So yes inevitably, when we have been negotiating across many continents, then we have seen that the way you negotiate in serbia is a bit different versus the way you negotiate in japan, or the way you negotiate is within is different versus the way you negotiate in india.
So yes, there are.
There are a different way to look at negotiation and, as a result, you know, the process may be more or less fun, more or less enjoyable, more or less based on trust.
But if we are able to implement those things I mean we are not saying that we are being naive and that We are going to split the pie 50 50 and everyone will be happy.
I think you know our goal should be to make the best possible deal for us, which is acceptable for the other party or otherwise stated.
Make it good for them and great for us.
There you go enlarge the pie, without forgetting to claim a big chunk of this pie, And while making sure that the other party is satisfied.
You know, just a small piece of research that I personally run.
You know, I asked a group of over 100 procurement people with at least five years of experience to rank 20 key behavior of effective negotiators.
And clearly last, clearly last was the satisfaction of your counterpart.
Procurement people do not care whether the salesperson is happy or not.
Now we both know that if the other party is satisfied, then of course you know if there is a problem, they're more likely to come and help.
If the other party satisfied, you can trade the satisfaction today for a better deal tomorrow.
Okay kwame, this time i help you out, but next time you're gonna do something for me.
If the other party satisfied, you're going to have a better reputation in the market, more people want to work with.
You, will end up having a better button over time, etc.
So there are lots of benefits of having the other party satisfied.
But people say oh, To make the counterpart satisfied, I should give them a good price, which is not what my boss wants.
But the satisfaction of the other party is more linked to the process than to the outcome.
And so, you know, how you get the result that really makes the difference.
You know, if you give good explanation, if you listen to them, if you treat them with respect.
And but of course you know there are also some purely negotiation kind of things, like you know.
Give yourself room for negotiation, make them work for every concession they get and also make a concession, because making concession, you know, increases the satisfaction of the other party.
So you know there are plenty of things that you can do to ensure that The subjective value is high.
Now there is a great study called by Professor Curran from MIT, which talks about objective and subjective value.
The objective value is what gets measured inside the companies.
The price, the payment terms, the volume, the delivery, etc.
But then there is also the subjective value.
How people feel about the process, how people feel about themselves, etc.
How the people feel about the relationship.
And guess what the study demonstrated?
It's that the willingness to do business with the other party is more linked to the subjective value than to the objective value.
You know if I translate this, you know just.
You know, every time I did the podcast with you, I had a great experience right.
I hang out with you.
We had a great laugh, a great smile.
And, you know, I want to continue to do business with you.
Now Frankly, I never checked how many views my podcast has and whether this has ever brought additional business to me, etc.
But, you know, the simple fact that I have a great experience working with you makes me want to do it more.
You see?
And then, you know, I don't know, maybe there is another podcast that could have brought me more business, etc.
But my willingness to do business is very much related to the quality of interaction that I have with the person I'm working with.
This is so true.
First of all, true because I love hanging out with you too.
And your episodes always outperform everybody else's.
So this is great business for me too.
But this is really important for us to remember too, because this really substantiates so many other parts of negotiation that people are saying but I don't think we often make that connection right.
Because we have the whether or not the person feels satisfied.
We have the objective and we have the subjective.
We focus so much on the tangible part and the specific numbers.
And that's where we feel like we get kind of stuck in the positional bargaining.
I can't let them feel satisfied and also give myself a good deal.
And we just stop at that surface level calculation, without digging deeper to recognize that the process is part of that subjective feeling of value.
I remember when I was doing mediations obviously as a mediator with people who are in litigation.
It's not their favorite day of the year, surprisingly right.
Not everybody's having a great time and they don't always get what they want.
And the thing that I really really love the most, the piece of feedback that I appreciated the most is is when somebody goes in.
They didn't have high expectations and then the thing didn't go their way because they were in a tough situation.
But they would look at me and say, hey, at least I feel like I was respected through this process.
And I appreciate the way that you treated me and handled it.
And we can take that same thing to these tough negotiations too and make sure that the people feel respected in the process.
And then it also substantiates, and now we're getting a little bit more technical, because I'd love to hear your thoughts on this.
It seems like it also substantiates the art of anchoring with empathy as well.
Because if we think about starting a negotiation off with a firm anchor, at an advantageous position, and then we utilize empathy, while still adhering to that anchor, still promoting that, still substantiating it, but also giving space for the other person to feel seen and heard and appreciated, and then giving meaningful concessions, but making them work for it, even if the person doesn't end up in the most objectively advantageous position.
They feel respected through the process.
So the anchoring plus empathy helps them to feel better in the process and a little bit of the outcome.
I think that's a valid point.
Now, my views on this topic…
How can you ensure that you make an aggressive anger which is not disrespectful to the other person right?
And then think about what is the more aggressive number that you can justify with a straight face.
You know, this could be a simple rule to say OK, I want to make something aggressive, but how can I justify it?
I mean, because if I just tell, well, sorry, the price is 100.
Then most of the people say, oh, no, 100 is no good.
You say well listen, you know, take into account factor A, factor B, factor C.
We have analyzed the data.
We have looked at the trend.
We have looked at the plus indicator.
Then you know we came up with a number of 100.
Then of course, it's something that comes through as much more acceptable by the other party.
Yes.
And that anchoring is really powerful and can be really bad when done incorrectly.
Because if you have an anchor that is unjustifiable and it's just a wish number that is substantiated by nothing but hope, right then you're in a position where it does way more harm than good, especially when you think about the quality of the reputation and the relationship too.
It's like either there are two assumptions and neither of them are good.
It's either, wow, Kwame is a jerk.
He's trying to clean my clock.
Or, wow.
Kwame does not know this industry at all.
And I don't take him seriously.
Either one.
Pick your poison.
Are you evil or dumb?
Those are the options and neither are good.
So when you're anchoring, you have to do so with a lot of intentionality.
Do your homework because you're right.
It has to be substantiated by something legitimate. or it could do way more harm than good.
Let me give you a pro tip on this one.
Now, if you want to do even better at anchoring, then use multiple equivalent, simultaneous offers, which means, rather than making one offer, make three offers.
Now, the dynamics of making multiple equivalence simultaneous offer are a bit complex.
You know there are a few good articles where you can go into the details, but let me explain it, you know, to our listener in a simple way.
What you do is you have a scoring system which enables you to compare different things.
Even in a divorce, right?
Even in a divorce, where you are comparing things like you know, the amount of money, the alimony that I have to pay to my partner versus the amount of time that I spend with the kids, versus who is going to stay in the house versus you know all kind of very different things, often emotional kind of topics.
Now there are tools out there that enables you to create a scoring system that you can compare apples with beers with bananas.
A check, for instance, there is in my book.
There is a The exact reference I don't remember, but it's an article from Columbia Business School which gives a good methodology on preparing a scoring system.
Once you have a scoring system, you understand what is the value of the different things.
And then you make three aggressive offers to the other party, but with different factors.
Listen Kwame, you can choose.
You can have this price with this type of volume, with this type of agreement on intellectual property, or we can have this one with this type of thing, or we can have this one with.
So you know you play with different numbers.
But all three offers are very aggressive, are very much in your favor.
But because you make three offers, you look like a flexible guy.
Yes.
Not only, but because you made three offers, then the discussion is not about whether we use your offer or mine, but which of my three offers we're going to look at.
Brilliant.
There is lots of power into this one as well.
I love this approach and it's not utilized enough, because it's not just that you could use it as a really powerful anchor, because all three options work exceptionally well for you.
You're just using this as a tool to see, okay, well, now I can tell what's most important to them.
Because if I have something with different timelines on here versus there, right?
And now I can say all right, based on which offer they choose, I can see what their interests are too.
This is so powerful because it sets a really strong anchor and also gets you really great information at the time.
While, like you said, we cannot overlook this part.
It makes you look really reasonable.
It's like, hey, I've done some research.
Here are some options.
Which do you like best?
It's so strong.
When you think about all of the negotiation strategies and tactics that you've used over the course of your years, like actually practicing yourself and then with your clients.
What are the things, the negotiation tactics and strategies that keep on coming up most frequently as the ones that get the best returns or are most likely to succeed in the actual real world?
Now, I think that…
If I may, rather than talk about a specific strategy, let me start with a mindset which is equal to both negotiation and influencing, which is the focus on the counterpart.
Right.
You know, looking at the deal. from their point of view.
And this happens both in the preparation, right?
You know when you start thinking about, you know what's the interest and priority of the other party, and then you start making your initial hypothesis.
But then during the discussion, there are plenty of things that you can do to go more in depth.
Of course, the obvious one is a ask open-ended question.
It's a good starting point.
But there are plenty of other things that may go from.
Active listening may check in the body language.
But, for instance, one of the things that people often forget is be prepared to share some information.
You see, too often people forget.
Okay, you know, they told me that I have to ask a question and then I do a police interrogation.
You know, guess what?
And when they ask you a question, then you're not going to say, sorry, I cannot disclose this.
You know, guess what?
If you want to know everything and then you don't want to give anything back quickly, the exchange is going to stop.
So if you want to discover the interesting priority of the other party to make a better deal, then you also have to be prepared to give some information away.
Another typical mistake, for instance, is making assumptions.
While I say, make hypothesis and test your hypothesis.
Well, I believe this customer may want this, this and that.
Maybe you're right.
Maybe you're wrong.
Test it during the meeting and then you go there.
And then you know another classic probably to discover this more is go more in depth with our questions.
One of the mistakes that too often people make and I see it in real life negotiation a lot is that I have prepared my list of questions.
And I go through my checklist.
So I get a reply from my counterpart and then I move to the next question.
Now, guess what?
The first reply that you're going to get from your question is more likely going to contain a vague, incomplete answer answer to the topic.
So if you're not able to go and ask follow-up question gomor in depth, use the funnel approach right, you know where you go and try to look for the jews information.
Then you will just say okay, I asked a lot of questions, but you will end up getting a lot of superficial answers.
There's so much to explore.
I think one of the things that I want to hammer home, based on what you said, I think that point of focusing on the counterpart.
When you tell that to somebody, they'd say, oh, of course, of course.
But the key part that you said was focus on the counterpart throughout the conversation.
Because what often happens is, going in, you say yep.
What are the things I need to do as a good negotiator?
Okay, focus on the counterpart.
Great.
And then you go in and then your adrenaline spikes immediately.
And you forget about all of that.
You just focus on yourself.
So the key is to maintain that focus throughout and then going deeper with the questions.
This is so important because I remember reading a book.
One of the FBI or CIA agents said when you're.
Creating an alias for yourself, you have to go at least three to five layers deep.
So if you say where you're from okay, you have to anticipate three or five follow-up questions and have backstories for that.
And we're making it really easy for people to get away with either deception or just conveniently leaving things out because we just say oh, I need to ask a topic on their delivery dates.
I ask one question.
They give one answer.
I'm like, that seems 100% truthful.
No.
We have to go deeper with our curiosity.
Exactly.
So much good stuff.
And then the last part is essentially strategic vulnerability, because we have the questions that we want to ask and the information that we want.
And then, like you said, we just go down like with a clipboard saying hey, give me this, give me that, and I'm not going to give you anything in return.
We need to think beforehand about what we can share and what we can't share, and then just drip out those parts about what we can share at strategic moments that trigger the reciprocity that makes the other person feel safe enough and vulnerable enough to share that information back.
So this was uh, in a very short period, you gave us an, a really great master class in some real, in some things that are very easy to overlook in negotiation.
Yeah yeah, isn't it?
No, If I continue regarding this story about focusing on the counterpart, and I move it into the influencing part, one of the things that even the more senior people do not do is profiling their stakeholders.
I'm going to meet the senior vice president and most of the people do says okay listen, I'm going to go there.
I'm going to have a rational explanation about why this project makes sense for the business, et cetera, et cetera.
And, uh, We spend a lot of time into writing the factual, the data-driven kind of things, etc.
But very, very often I don't spend the time to do a bit of research about the person I'm dealing with.
And of course, there are a number of information which are available inside the company.
There is an intranet.
You can check their LinkedIn profile and those kind of things.
But through your network where you get really the juice information about their hobbies, about the preferred communication styles, but also maybe about the hidden agendas inside the company.
Now, if I know that John is competing with Margaret to become the next senior vice president, then probably I'm not going to suggest that.
You know listen John, Margaret told me this.
So, you know, you should really believe it, right?
You know, because if Margaret say A, then John for sure has to say B.
So you know, or maybe you know there may be things.
You know, I discover all kind of things.
You know, maybe the person is going through a divorce and so at this moment you know they just want to be left alone and they can dedicate little time to certain kind of things.
Or you know the timing of making the right request.
And this can be done if we take the time for doing the research, etc.
Oh, this is so good.
I think that piece of advice is getting more important as the years go on because the...
We are so reliant on the internet and AI, or whatever it happens to be, for information that we forget that there is some information that only exists within the confines of the minds of another human being.
And they won't give it to you unless you ask for it.
And so when it comes to preparation, we forget about the ground game.
That is so important to be able to just ask about the people that we're going to negotiate with.
I don't want to say against.
We're being collaborative.
So the people we're negotiating with or influencing.
And not doing it in a gossipy way like hey, tell me about this person's weaknesses and all the salacious details of their lives.
No, it's like, tell me about this person.
Tell me what is important to them.
How do they like to communicate?
One of my favorite ones is just anything I should know before meeting with them.
That's almost like a Rorschach test, you know, the inkblot tests.
Like, what do you see?
You get so many interesting responses when you just leave them with that question, because it allows them to paint the picture themselves.
And they'll share those types of details that might feel awkward for you to ask.
But if you just give them the space, they'll share more than you would anticipate.
I love it.
I love it.
Anything.
I should know.
That's what now, by the way, you do get this information from your network if you build trust-based relationship with the people, right?
You know, and you know, one of the things that is close to my heart is really the importance of relationships In the business world, right?
You know it starts from making good first impression, building rapport and, over time, building trust.
Yes.
And sometimes, you know, we overlook the human component.
Now research indicates that 82 of what people make their judgment in an internal meeting is on two factors warmth and competence.
Now, we focus a lot on the competence. but not enough on the world.
Yeah.
So if I am able to be perceived not only as somebody who knows what he's talking about, but also as the kind of person I would like to work with, that makes a huge difference.
Yes.
And and also think about this.
I don't know if you've had this experiment, this experience, but a lot of times, if you can hit them with the warmth and they start to like you, they will then assume competence, even without you having to show it.
I remember there have been so many conversations I've had Giuseppe, where I just I'm curious, I ask questions, I point out areas of similarity and that's it.
And I just do that for like 45 minutes.
And they're like, man, I love talking to you.
You are brilliant.
I was like, I said nothing to you.
I said absolutely nothing.
But listen, if that's the conclusion you came to, let's roll with it.
I like it.
And to your point, we focus so heavily on being competent and showing that we're intelligent.
But if we just get people to like us and vibe with us, then they'll just assume that we're intelligent.
Exactly.
Now, let me try to say the same word. based on the theory of Daniel Kahneman, right?
Daniel Kahneman, he wrote a great book, Thinking Fast and Slow.
He won the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2002.
And his work is very popular about the system one and system two, right?
You know, we have one system which is uh slow rational, that requires effort, and another which is fast emotional, that he makes a instant decision, and you see what, of course, is very difficult to estimate, But researchers believe that between 85 and 95 of what we do is just system one, the emotional fast, automatic type of decision.
We focus, we assume that the person we are dealing with is purely rational.
So, you know, we are just focusing on the facts, on the data, on the things, etc etc.
But we should also not forget that there is a lot which happens automatically, and one of the things indeed, that has an impact on the system one you know, the emotional one is the relationship piece.
And so yes, even something as basic as appearance, you know, is not a politically correct kind of word, and people say, you know appearance, you know I'm busy and I should not make it.
But, you know, that's the reality.
I don't know if you are familiar with the study that was made in the US when they asked people to look at the photo of two persons and in one second They had to say which of those two persons will you trust the most?
And they did it many times and many times.
I know they just showed a photo without saying anything.
But in fact, the photo they were showing were the people that were going for Congress.
So they were just looking at what the people liked, just looking at appearance.
It's not only about beauty, right?
Appearance is also how you dress having the shoes polished, the right, the right jewellery, a dress which is a fit with the context that you're doing, and all those kind of things.
But I will say, you know, just looking at appearance, there was a 70 correlation between the people that people chose and the people that got elected.
Now even more striking.
My colleague John Antonakis at the University of Lausanne in Switzerland did a similar study with kids.
And even with kids, 70% appearance made.
And in fact, what people will do.
I tell you, because it's important.
It's so important for us to understand this.
And and just accept it.
You don't need to like it.
We have to accept it.
I might not know, but I feel like we're the only animal that just constantly laments characteristics of ourselves.
Like we don't judge a book by its cover.
Well, that's a nice thing to say, but that's what humans do.
Right.
Don't make an assessment in one second.
That's just what we do.
It's not even it's not even a choice.
Right.
I should be able to look and act however I want.
And people should judge me on the content of my character and the content of what it is that I'm saying.
The what is logical and rational about it.
Okay, that's nice.
That's just not how people operate, right?
And think about what you said with the thinking fast and slow.
85% to 95% of our decisions are made automatically.
And then think about the people that we train.
So many times.
People are are struggling because they say the person that I'm talking to is irrational.
They're always emotional.
This is just what it means to be a human.
But I think it's the resistance that we have to this simple fact that holds us back from doing the things that matter and really move the needle in these conversations.
And of course, we cannot, you know, without surgery, beautify our face.
But there are certain things that we could do, just taking the time to be intentional about the way that we look and sound.
Those little things.
They actually do matter when it comes to our presentation and our ability to be persuasive.
I think when we start to just accept those realities of humanity and start to lean into it and make decisions because of it, then we can be a lot more effective in these conversations.
Really insightful questions that he jumps in with.
So, Simón, any questions coming to mind for you?
In this case, now that I have Giuseppe here, I want to talk about negotiation in a different language, because I am from Venezuela.
And I host a podcast in Spanish about negotiation.
So I have an audience.
And the biggest pain point is not fear of negotiation.
It's nothing like that.
It's trying to negotiate in English because...
In Latin America.
Many people try to do businesses with the US, with Canada, with Europe, and they struggle a lot not to negotiate the salary because that's once in a year.
But how to convince someone of an idea, because maybe in South America we have the right idea but we don't have the right words.
And we lose confidence when we're speaking in English.
And many people, especially procurement people.
They tell me that they don't know how to convince people in Europe, convince people in the US because, as they don't have the language the language is not the first one they hesitate, they look insecure, so they lose confidence.
And you are the big exponent that it is possible, because i think that uh, maybe you have negotiated some agreements in your life so, so how do you do it?
I, i want to ask about so, to give us some words.
Uh, because there's many people listening this, listening to this podcast, Because they want to learn English.
And that's my case.
That's why I'm working here.
So I want to listen to your thoughts about that.
I mean, I know why you've chosen me.
You know, the top 30 guru with the strongest accent.
Yeah.
And I think we should separate between having an accent and not finding the words, right?
If your level of English is such that you cannot convey the message in a strong way, then of course, this has a bigger impact.
Now, do accent have an impact as well?
Let's be honest right, you know, And I experience it, by the way, all the time, right?
Because the person I'm teaching the most with is Owen Derbyshire, the Oxford professor of negotiation.
You know, he speaks with an Oxford accent.
So you know, when Owen says something with his Oxford accent, people immediately believe oh, that must be good stuff.
You know, and i have to work twice as hard in order to convey the same message.
But of course you know, the accent is not is one of the many elements which has an impact.
I would say that if you have the good ideas and if you are able to convey them, then if you convey them with an accent, it's not a problem.
I would even say it becomes a good excuse if we reframe it.
It will become a good excuse to be better prepared.
In the sense that okay, I know that my English may not be totally fluent, So let me research upfront which are the right keywords.
Let me write down, you know, some of the key sentences that I'm going to mention, so that I can be more effective.
So then it becomes an opportunity to be superior to the mother tongue people because of the work that you've done up front.
That's good.
Thank you.
That's really good, because essentially it's not just You didn't approach it from a deficiency perspective where it's like oh, this is like a liability.
And now this is how you cover up the liability.
You say no, this is how I actually flip it into an advantage, because I'm going to be more intentional about the things that I do say.
And that helps you to speak with a lot more precision.
Yeah.
Oh, that's good.
And honestly I, because I'm really thinking about it, because I know in with the way that I negotiate, I try to get the other side talking more than I am.
And I also know.
For me, when I was studying abroad in Ecuador, one of the challenges was it's like I have more to say, but I don't even have the capacity to say it.
And so maybe this is actually an advantage, because the little things that we would say more to either entertain ourselves or to inflate our ego, to demonstrate intellectual superiority of other people.
We don't have the capacity if you're speaking in your second language or third or fourth.
You don't even have the capacity to do it quick enough for it to make sense in the context, which means that everything that you say is driven toward a very specific goal, which actually might make you better.
That's such a great way to think about it.
Wow.
I don't know, Simone.
I think this guy needs to write a book or something.
Maybe teach at a university.
Oh, man, this is so good.
Giuseppe, man, I always love chatting with you.
This is really great.
Before you go, just remind the listeners again about the book and about your programs and how they can get in touch.
Okay, fantastic.
Well, the book is called Negotiation Plus Influence Equal Success.
And the idea is really that And negotiation and influencing are really powerful tools to succeed.
You know whether you are asking for a promotion or a raise, whether you are wanting to get the buy-in from a senior internal stakeholder, or you know progressing your career in a different way, but also in daily life.
You know whatever you're doing, whether it's family, friends or anybody else which is important to you.
So that's the title of the book.
Now, I also have a company.
It's called cabl.ch.
The website is called cabl.ch.
It's a company that specializes in negotiation and influencing.
And we serve customers on a worldwide basis.
I think we serve the people from 145 countries.
At least we kept track.
We kept track of 145 countries, probably more.
And in fact, in September, I'm going to be in nine different countries.
