Finding Common Ground with Difficult Negotiators

I once asked a prosecutor about a client who had used a blowtorch to break into a T-Mobile store and steal 100 phones. His case looked hopeless — until I asked one simple question. When negotiating with prosecutors, I don't start with what I want. I start with: "What's most important to you in this case?" That question changed everything for my client. The prosecutor told me he needed two things: • The store owner wanted significant jail time • He needed to show the victim justice was served My client had one priority: avoiding deportation. These interests seemed incompatible until I proposed an unusual solution: • My client would serve 8 months in jail (more than typical) • We'd modify the charge to avoid triggering deportation The prosecutor got his jail time to satisfy the victim. My client avoided deportation. Everyone walked away satisfied. After 16+ years defending cases, I've learned that effective negotiation isn't about threats or posturing. It's about creating an environment where both sides can openly share what they truly care about. This approach works because: • It calms everyone's defensive reactions • It reveals interests beyond stated positions • It creates space for creative solutions When someone feels threatened, they can't think clearly about potential overlaps in interests. My job is to make the opposing side comfortable enough to share what's really driving their decisions. Sometimes there's no overlap of interests. That's okay. You can't manufacture common ground where none exists. But when that overlap does exist — like in my blowtorch case — finding it can create outcomes neither side thought possible. What's your approach to difficult negotiations?

When I'm negotiating, I tend to AGREE with the other side. Sounds counter-intuitive. But it's enabled me to close 7-figure settlements. Most lawyers think negotiations are about being tough, standing your ground, and not giving an inch. I take the opposite approach: tactical empathy. Here's how it works. When opposing counsel says something like, "That's a ridiculous settlement demand. We can never possibly pay that much," I don't fight back. Instead, I validate them: "I can see why you would say that. I'm sorry for that. What can I do to come up with an offer that makes sense for you? My client is unfortunately stuck here." Their reaction? Complete confusion. They're prepared for a fight. They've got their counterarguments lined up. But when I validate their feelings instead, their entire script falls apart. The best part? They start giving me information I can use to negotiate against them. When faced with validation instead of opposition, lawyers suddenly start explaining their real constraints, their client's actual position, and sometimes even what number they might actually be able to get approved. All because I didn't argue. I've found this approach works especially well on lawyers because they don't even know what's happening. They're so used to adversarial negotiations that genuine validation short-circuits their usual approach. The key elements: • Validate their emotions • Acknowledge their position • Ask questions instead of making demands • Keep validating even when they try to be difficult This isn't just about being nice – it's strategic. By removing the confrontation, you force them to either engage constructively or look unreasonable. Next time you're in a difficult negotiation, try validation instead of opposition. It feels counterintuitive, but the results speak for themselves. After all, the goal isn't to win the argument – it's to get what your client needs.

The Art of Professional Disagreement — Turning Conflict into Collaboration Too often, I am sat in a meeting where two senior people start going at it and will not back down. As voices rise, body language stiffens, and the room gets awkward. The message is lost. This reminds me of something simple yet really powerful: how you disagree determines whether you divide the room or drive it forward. FIVE Steps you can start using today 1. Start with Alignment Before you disagree, find common ground. It signals respect and lowers defensiveness.
Example: “I completely agree that we need faster delivery times. Where I see it differently is how we get there.” Tool: The “Yes, and…” Framework — From improvisation, this replaces “No, but—” with “Yes, and—.” It reframes disagreement as collaboration, not competition. 2. Ask before you ARGUE Curiosity disarms tension. Before countering, ask questions.
Example: “Can you help me understand how that would scale with our current resources?” Tool: Socratic Questioning — Explore assumptions through thoughtful inquiry. It shifts focus from who’s right to what’s right. 3. Separate People from Problems Challenge the idea, not the individual.
Instead of: “That won’t work.”
Try: “I’m concerned this might stretch our resources — what could we adjust?” Tool: Nonviolent Communication (NVC) — Observe without judgment, express needs clearly, and make requests rather than demands. It preserves trust while addressing issues head-on. 4. Use Data, Not Emotion Facts are neutral. Emotions aren’t.
Anchor your disagreement in data and shared goals.
 Example: “The data from last quarter suggests this approach didn’t scale — could we test a smaller pilot first?” Tool: The Pyramid Principle (Barbara Minto) — Lead with your key point, support it with logic, and finish with evidence. It helps your disagreement sound reasoned, not reactive. 5. End with Collaboration Every disagreement should move toward a solution.
Example: “What if we combine both approaches and test results over two weeks?” Tool: Plussing (used by Pixar) — Build on ideas rather than tearing them down. “I like that — what if we also tried…?” This keeps momentum positive. Learning Moment Professional disagreement isn’t about being right — it’s about getting it right. People remember not what you said, but how you made them feel in the process. 
When you disagree with empathy, structure, and curiosity, you don’t just contribute ideas — you elevate the entire conversation. How do you handle disagreement in meetings? What techniques have helped you turn tension into teamwork?

Negotiation success: Think smarter, not argue harder. How to use De Bono’s Six Thinking Hats. In my 30 years as a negotiation consultant, Edward de Bono’s Six Thinking Hats combined with state-of-the-art Negotiation principles have often been the difference between success and failure. Especially in extremely challenging negotiations. These thinking styles unlock clarity, creativity, and stronger relationships, even in situations that initially seemed hopeless. Edward de Bono’s Six Hats represent distinct thinking styles crucial for effective negotiation: → White Hat: Facts and objective information. → Red Hat: Emotions and intuition. → Black Hat: Risks and critical judgment. → Yellow Hat: Optimism and positive outcomes. → Green Hat: Creativity and innovative solutions. → Blue Hat: Process control and management. Here’s how I’ve effectively applied these hats in difficult negotiations: 1️⃣ Focus on Interests, Not Positions → White & Red Hats • Clarify underlying facts and interests objectively (White Hat). • Empathize with emotional motivations behind positions (Red Hat). e.g., Employees demand permanent remote work; management wants office return. Objective questioning (White Hat) reveals productivity metrics and workspace usage. Empathy (Red Hat) uncovers emotional interests like flexibility and family time, leading to a hybrid solution. 2️⃣ Invent Options for Mutual Gain → Green & Yellow Hats • Generate creative solutions (Green) highlighting mutual benefits (Yellow). e.g., Companies negotiating resource sharing creatively design a joint venture benefiting both economically. 3️⃣ Use Objective Criteria → White Hat • Anchor negotiations in data-driven benchmarks and unbiased facts. e.g., Parties reference market standards and independent appraisals in lease negotiations, agreeing on fair terms. 4️⃣ Prepare Your BATNA → Black Hat • Critically assess risks, alternatives, and consequences of no agreement. e.g., A buyer evaluates alternative suppliers’ costs and reliability, clearly identifying the best fallback option. 5️⃣ Build Relationships → Red Hat • Recognize and address emotional aspects to build trust. e.g., In heated negotiations, acknowledging frustration and validating concerns reduces tension significantly. 6️⃣ Separate People from the Problem → Blue Hat • Objectively manage the negotiation process to minimize personal conflicts. e.g., A good negotiator sets clear agendas prioritizing shared goals, preventing personal grievances from derailing talks. Next time you’re stuck, pause and ask, “Which hat am I wearing?” Switching hats can open unseen doors.

𝐈𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐮𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐝𝐨𝐞𝐬𝐧’𝐭 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐞, 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐞 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐟. Ever tried moving someone who won’t budge, like my Terracotta Warrior opponent? You explain, persuade, negotiate… and still, nothing changes. The truth is, you can’t move a statue. But you can change your stance. Here are three moments that taught me that lesson. 𝑭𝒓𝒐𝒎 “𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒗𝒊𝒏𝒄𝒊𝒏𝒈” 𝒕𝒐 “𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒏𝒆𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒏𝒈” Years ago, I worked with a client who shut down every new idea on team development with “We tried that before.” I countered with more case studies, data and logic until I realised, I wasn’t being logical; I was being salesy. Finally, I said, “𝘐𝘵 𝘴𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘴 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘪𝘵’𝘴 𝘣𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘦𝘹𝘩𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘺𝘰𝘶. 𝘞𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘩𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘢𝘧𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘢𝘪𝘭𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘷𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴?” He talked for 15 minutes. I barely said a word. After that, he started offering solutions to start the project instead of blocking them. That moment taught me: people rarely resist your idea; they 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘪𝘴𝘵 𝘧𝘦𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘶𝘯𝘴𝘦𝘦𝘯. Validation isn’t fake diplomacy; it’s 𝘵𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘧𝘶𝘭 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘵. 𝑭𝒓𝒐𝒎 “𝒑𝒖𝒔𝒉𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒎𝒚 𝒔𝒕𝒂𝒏𝒅𝒂𝒓𝒅” 𝒕𝒐 “𝒉𝒐𝒏𝒐𝒖𝒓𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒔𝒐𝒎𝒆𝒐𝒏𝒆 𝒆𝒍𝒔𝒆’𝒔” I once worked with a boss who prized punctuality; to him, five minutes late was five minutes too many. At first, I found it rigid. Until I saw his intent: he associated punctuality with respect and readiness, and this is a discipline we must inculcate. One morning, the team arrived late after working till 11 pm, perfecting a presentation deck. I could see both sides, their fatigue and his frustration. So I said to him, “𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘶𝘱 𝘳𝘦𝘧𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘭𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘮𝘦𝘦𝘵 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘲𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘢𝘳𝘥. 𝘠𝘰𝘶’𝘷𝘦 𝘣𝘶𝘪𝘭𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘤𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘦𝘹𝘤𝘦𝘭𝘭𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘤𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘪𝘵 𝘵𝘰𝘰.” He paused. Then nodded. That small bridge changed the tone completely. When I aligned with his 𝘷𝘢𝘭𝘶𝘦 of quality rather than his 𝘳𝘶𝘭𝘦 about time, we found common ground. 𝑭𝒓𝒐𝒎 “𝒎𝒚 𝒘𝒂𝒚” 𝒕𝒐 “𝒐𝒖𝒓 𝒓𝒆𝒍𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒔𝒉𝒊𝒑” At home, I used to insist that my children go to bed early and join me for breakfast and lunch on the weekends. They preferred staying up late and sleeping in, which meant I only saw them at dinner. It frustrated me. Then one night, while they were still awake, I sat with them instead of nagging. We shared stories, and I realised something simple: The quality of our relationship isn’t measured by 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘯 we connect, but 𝘩𝘰𝘸 we connect. I learned that if the situation doesn't change, I have to change myself. 𝘞𝘩𝘰’𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘛𝘦𝘳𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘰𝘵𝘵𝘢 𝘞𝘢𝘳𝘳𝘪𝘰𝘳 𝘪𝘯 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘭𝘪𝘧𝘦 𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘯𝘰𝘸, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘮𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘵𝘳𝘺 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘧𝘪𝘳𝘴𝘵?

When we broker across divides, we help people work through differences rather than erase them. And that’s what transforms opposition into opportunity. Here is a story I wrote about that shows this. It took place in Durham, North Carolina, in 1971. Ann Atwater, a Black civil rights activist, and C.P. Ellis, the local Ku Klux Klan leader, were asked to co-chair a committee on school desegregation. Atwater once admitted she had come close to killing Ellis at an earlier meeting, enraged by his constant use of racial slurs. Ellis, for his part, despised everything she stood for. But broker Bill Riddick saw something others didn’t: that if these two could sit down, work side by side, and share responsibilities, they might just find common ground. Over ten grueling days, Riddick structured conversations, shared meals, and everyday tasks that forced Atwater and Ellis to see each other as people. Against all odds, they emerged with mutual respect—and Ellis publicly tore up his KKK membership card. That’s the power of brokering: creating conditions where people who see each other as enemies can work through differences to find shared purpose. And here’s the practical side: brokering is something we can all do at work. Some evidence-based strategies: (1) Set aside judgment. When we encounter difference, notice the assumptions we’re making, and suspend them. (2) Channel emotions productively. Strong feelings signal what matters, but they can drown out dialogue. A good broker acknowledges them without letting them take over. (3) Take a learning stance. When something surprises you, get curious instead of defensive. Ask: What am I missing? (4) Focus on the bigger picture. Step back from the immediate disagreement and remind everyone of the overarching goals that unite you. (5) Work with people you don’t like. Collaboration is about progress, not affinity. Value the contributions, even if the personalities clash. In a recent session on collaboration, this story sparked an eye-opening conversation about how we can broker across divides in our own teams. The next time you’re caught between “us vs. them,” pause, get curious, and focus on the bigger picture. You may find common ground you didn’t think existed. #differences #conflict #leadership #brokering #collaboration #learning #curiosity #judgment Case here: https://lnkd.in/ePqhsMUB

I once had a supplier who was constantly difficult. Calls turned into arguments. Emails were blunt, sometimes outright RUDE. Every small request became a standoff. At first, I assumed he was just being combative. He ran a logistics company, moving high-value goods across Europe, and every conversation felt like a clash over rates, SLAs, and timelines. One day, after yet another tense call, he let his guard down a little and became more 'human'. His company had just lost a major client, and on top of that, his father was seriously ill. He wasn’t just fighting over contracts, he was fighting to keep his business (and personal life) intact. It reminded me of The Anger Volcano - a framework often used for children. It explains that anger is what we see, but beneath it are deeper emotions like stress, fear, and frustration. Procurement, negotiation, and supplier relationships are no different. When people push back or react badly, it’s rarely just about the deal. It’s about what’s brewing beneath the surface. This is how to negotiate when emotions run high: 🔹 Listen beyond the words What’s really driving their reaction? 🔹 Acknowledge emotions: A simple “I can see this is frustrating” can defuse tension. 🔹 Ask, don’t assume “What’s the biggest challenge for you right now?” shifts the conversation. 🔹 Slow it down Giving space can lead to better outcomes. 🔹 Find a win-win It’s not about winning, it’s about solving the problem. --------- Once we actually talked, we found a way forward that worked for both sides. And from that day on, negotiations became conversations, not battles. Everyone’s fighting a battle you know nothing about. Be kind, always.

Let me share a story from early in my career, which I often reflect on when facing disagreements at work. It was during a team meeting at my first serious job, and I found myself in disagreement with a proposal put forward by a senior leader. The stakes felt high, and the room was tense. Here’s how I navigated the situation: 1. Seeking Clarification: Instead of jumping in with a “that won’t work,” I paused and said, “I see the direction we’re heading, but could you help me understand how we arrived at this approach?” This opened up the floor for the manager to explain their reasoning, and it gave me valuable insights into their thought process. Sometimes, understanding the ‘why’ can change your ‘no’ to a ‘maybe’ or even a ‘yes.’ 2. Expressing Experience: Once I had a clearer picture, I shared my perspective—not as a direct opposition but as an insight. “From what I’ve seen in previous projects, we might encounter some challenges with this strategy. For instance, last year we tried something similar, and we had to pivot because…” Sharing from my experience, rather than imposing my views, made the conversation more about learning from the past rather than confronting the present. 3. Finding Common Ground: Before diving into my reservations, I acknowledged the merits of the proposal. “I agree that targeting this demographic is a smart move, and I see how this strategy aligns with our goals. However, I’m concerned about the scalability based on last year’s metrics.” This not only showed my support for parts of the plan but also softened the introduction to my concerns, facilitating a more receptive discussion. Why This Matters: That day, I learned that disagreeing doesn’t have to be about conflict. It’s about fostering richer discussions that can lead to better decisions. By seeking to understand before being understood, sharing experiences, and finding common ground, we turn potential conflicts into opportunities for growth. It positions us as thoughtful contributors, valued for helping navigate complex decisions. 🔥 Pro Tip: Keep your tone positive and aim to build, not break. It’s about progressing together towards the best outcomes for everyone involved. 👥 Over to You: Have you found certain approaches more effective? #LeadershipSkills #ProfessionalGrowth #WorkplaceCommunication #Teamwork

𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝘁𝗼 𝗗𝗶𝗽𝗹𝗼𝗺𝗮𝘁: 𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝘁𝗼 𝗕𝗲 𝗮 𝗠𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗡𝗲𝗴𝗼𝘁𝗶𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿 𝗪𝗶𝘁𝗵𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝗦𝗰𝗿𝗲𝘄𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗣𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝗢𝘃𝗲𝗿. 𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝗬𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗗𝗲𝗮𝗹-𝗖𝗹𝗼𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗧𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗰𝘀 𝗠𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁 𝗕𝗲 𝗕𝘂𝗿𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗕𝗿𝗶𝗱𝗴𝗲𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝗗𝗼 𝗜𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗮𝗱 Negotiation isn’t about winning. Not really. Sure, you might think you’ve crushed it if you walk away with the deal of the century. But if the other side feels they’ve been duped or strong-armed, you haven’t won—you’ve just planted the seeds of resentment. And resentment has a nasty habit of coming back to bite you. I’ve seen it plenty of times. At best its awkward. At worst, it can be really damaging. The biggest mistake you can make in negotiation is trying to win. Here’s the thing: life (and business) is long. 𝗣𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗺𝗯𝗲𝗿 𝗵𝗼𝘄 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗺𝗮𝗱𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗺 𝗳𝗲𝗲𝗹. Deals done with bad faith or zero regard for the other party’s needs might get you short-term gains, but they destroy trust and can torch relationships you might need later. So, what should you do instead? ✨ Think like a diplomat. Diplomats negotiate for a living in high-stakes situations where mutual trust and long-term relationships are everything. Here are their secrets: 1. 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝗿𝘁 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗲𝗺𝗽𝗮𝘁𝗵𝘆. Understand what the other side wants—and why. What’s at stake for them? What pressures are they facing? If you don’t know, ask. Negotiation isn’t a guessing game; it’s about discovery. 2. 𝗟𝗼𝗼𝗸 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘄𝗶𝗻-𝘄𝗶𝗻. Forget about “winning” and focus on finding common ground. What solutions could work for both sides? Start by agreeing on a mutually acceptable outcome and then work backwards. What’s the overlap between what you need and what they need? 3. 𝗣𝗹𝗮𝘆 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗹𝗼𝗻𝗴 𝗴𝗮𝗺𝗲. Ask yourself, “How will this negotiation look in a year? In five years?” If the answer is “messy” or “regretful,” take a step back and rethink your strategy. The best negotiators know that a good deal is one both sides can walk away from feeling respected and valued. 𝗙𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗧𝗵𝗼𝘂𝗴𝗵𝘁𝘀: So, next time you’re in a tough negotiation, remember: trying to screw someone over isn’t just unethical; it’s also incredibly shortsighted. Instead, aim for connection, respect, and outcomes that work for everyone. Because in the end, the strongest deals aren’t just made—they’re built to last. What’s your go-to negotiation tip? Drop it in the comments—I’d love to hear!

If you want to close more deals: Stop fighting with difficult people. - Some buyers are aggressive. - Some sellers are stubborn. - Some people just make deals harder. But the truth is that: Most people aren’t difficult for no reason. I worked on a deal with a buyer who kept saying, “Delays kill deals.” He wanted everything, contracts, due diligence, meetings immediately, even nights and weekends. At first, I thought he was wrong. His urgency frustrated the seller and their attorney. It was doing more harm than good. I was ready to push back. But then I asked: Why does he feel this way? Turns out, his last deal fell apart because the seller dragged things out, and then picked another buyer. He wasn’t being unreasonable. He was reacting to past pain. Once I reassured him he was the only buyer, everything changed. The tension disappeared. The deal moved forward. And that’s when I learned something crucial: Difficult people aren’t always difficult. They’re protecting themselves from something you don’t see. Here’s what I took away: 1) You don’t have to like their approach to see where they’re coming from. 2) You don’t have to agree with someone to understand them. 3) You don’t have to prove them wrong to move forward. Success isn’t about being right. It’s about listening, adapting, and seeing the bigger picture. Next time you’re in a conflict, ask yourself: Am I reacting, or am I actually listening? It might just save your deal or a relationship.