Power Dynamics In Negotiation

She grilled me for 90 minutes. Argued on price, terms, and payment. Then signed a $120K deal the next day. The negotiation call was scheduled for 30 minutes. It lasted 97. Our first deal of the quarter, and it was going terribly. The VP challenged everything: – Demanded 90-day payment terms when we needed 30 – Pushed for a 22% discount on already-tight pricing – Questioned our data retention periods line by line – Asked for custom SLAs we'd never offered before My palms were sweating. At one point, she said: "This is simply too expensive for what you're offering." I almost caved. Almost offered that extra discount. Instead, I took a breath and asked: "Can you help me understand what specifically your team is trying to build?" What followed was a 40-minute deep dive into their actual problems. The real cost of missed insights in their customer calls. The manual work their team was doing. The tone completely shifted. She ended with: "Let me think about this overnight." I was sure we'd lost it. But at 6:42 AM the next day, the signed contract hit my inbox. With a note: "Thanks for taking the time yesterday. Your team clearly understands our challenges." One year later, they've renewed twice and expanded to a $340K account. That day changed how I view "difficult" negotiations: When someone pushes this hard, they're not trying to kill the deal. They're trying to make it work so that they can buy. Now when negotiations get tough, I see it for what it really is: Not resistance. Commitment. What's a deal you thought you were losing... that became your best customer?

For the last part of my Energy Resilience series, we have to talk about the worst-case scenario – when the lights actually go out. Earlier this year we saw that happen in Spain and Portugal. A major blackout left millions without power. Trains stopped, shops couldn’t take card payments, hospitals and factories switched to backup. A wake-up call that modern life depends on electricity in ways we often forget until it is gone.   This is what happens when grids are pushed to the edge by fast-moving disturbances or extreme conditions. A couple of years ago, South Australia experienced a state-wide blackout after severe weather took out multiple transmission lines. Investigations showed the system lacked enough inertia to stay stable through the shock. Part of the solution was to install synchronous condensers – giant flywheels that give the grid “weight” and stability. Siemens Energy delivered two of them as part of the response. Not the only measure of course – adapting regulation is also essential – but it showed something important: without resilience in the system, recovery is slow and uncertain. So what do we actually need if we want a fast ramp-up after a major incident? From my perspective, it comes down to three things. 1️⃣ Standardize before the crisis: When parts fail, every minute spent interpreting drawings or debating specifications is a minute the lights stay out. Standard equipment and uniform processes mean teams can move quickly because they are working with tools they already know. Recovery begins long before the fault happens. 2️⃣ Design power plants with failure in mind: A fast restart depends on assets built to recover quickly, not just run efficiently. That means black-start capability, smart redundancy where it matters and systems that can restart without waiting for the wider grid. In the U.S. for example we supported a power plant with a battery system that enables multiple restart attempts within one hour – resilience designed into the plant itself. 3️⃣ No improvisation in the dark: A blackout is the worst moment to negotiate who does what. Good restoration plans spell out which assets come back first, how to stabilize small sections of the grid and when to reconnect them safely. Regular drills with operators, authorities and major customers turn these plans into routine rather than theory. These steps matter because in any major incident skilled people are often the scarcest resource – grid operators, field crews and technical specialists. That is why preparation matters so much. Clear roles, common standards and trusted partnerships mean limited teams can do more in less time. Because when the worst happens what people remember is how long it stayed dark. I hope you have found this mini-series useful. I know social media is often about speed and short takes but sometimes – especially on important topics like this – I find it worthwhile digging into the detail together.✍️ I’d be interested to hear if you agree.

"I have a bone to pick with you." That's how I opened a recent conversation with an executive. Spoiler: It didn't land well. 🫠 (𝘐’𝘮 𝘴𝘸𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘰𝘯 𝘓𝘪𝘯𝘬𝘦𝘥𝘐𝘯, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘐 𝘣𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘷𝘦 𝘪𝘯 𝘯𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘻𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘮𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘬𝘦𝘴, 𝘴𝘰 𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘪𝘵 𝘨𝘰𝘦𝘴.) I came in with a strong point of view, ready to advocate for my position. It was in opposition to a decision she made but that could still be changed. "She'll appreciate that I have conviction!" I thought confidently. But instead of sparking a productive debate, I miscalculated. The executive gently stopped me. She offered advice I'll never forget and have been thinking about days since: "Consider the context around how I made this decision." In that moment, I realized I'd skipped a crucial step: curiosity before challenge. Here's what I learned about challenging up, why my approach was all wrong, and what you can learn from my mistake. This advice is great if you're a current or aspiring #chiefofstaff but also applicable to anyone working to improve their persuasion skills. 1️⃣ 𝗟𝗲𝗮𝗱 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗰𝘂𝗿𝗶𝗼𝘀𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗯𝗲𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘃𝗶𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻. Instead of jumping in with a firm stance, start with, "I'm curious how you landed on this decision." This simple shift creates space for dialogue. It might even change your perspective before you voice your challenge. (In my case, as soon as I had more context, I changed my tune. If only I had led with curiosity...) 2️⃣ 𝗞𝗻𝗼𝘄 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝘁𝗼 𝗯𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮𝗻 𝗶𝗻𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗲𝗱 𝗼𝗽𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝘃𝘀. 𝗮 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗻𝗴 𝗣𝗢𝗩. Here's how I think about the difference: An informed opinion means you've thought critically but remain open to learning; a strong point of view (POV) usually means you've already decided the best course of action and are looking for buy-in. Generally, if the decision is in your domain/area of expertise, it's good to have your recommendation (POV) ready. For broader strategic decisions, almost always seek to understand first. 3️⃣ 𝗙𝗿𝗮𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗺𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘀 — 𝗮 𝗹𝗼𝘁. Compare "I disagree with this approach" to "Here's something I've been thinking about. Could I share my perspective?" Both convey your conviction, but one does it WAY more effectively. The former shuts down dialogue; the latter invites discussion. This experience taught me an important truth: The most effective persuaders aren't just those with strong convictions. They're the ones who master the dance between inquiry and advocacy. 💃 And even in an AI-driven world, persuading other humans will continue to be an in-demand skill. Whether you're early in your career or sitting at the executive table, understanding this balance can transform how your points are received. It might even change some strong opinions you thought you had. It did for me. (𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘸𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘯 𝘣𝘺 𝘢𝘯 𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘩𝘶𝘮𝘢𝘯, 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘈𝘐.)

A man was hired over a woman. Following 7 rounds of interviews. When the woman (my friend) asked why she missed out on the role, she got a vague response: → They were equally qualified → Both performed well → It was neck and neck So… what tipped the balance? Eventually, she got the answer: He asked for more money. That’s it. They said his negotiation showed “Commercial instinct.” “Confidence.” “Leadership potential.” They didn’t offer him more because he was better. They decided he was better because he asked for more. Her hesitation was seen as a lack of belief in herself. That’s why when clients ask me, “Should I negotiate?” I say: Always. Not just for the money but for what it signals. And here’s why it matters: 🔹 Only 34% of women negotiate their salary, compared to 61% of men (Source: LinkedIn Gender Insights Report) 🔹 The gender pay gap is 14.3% (and it widens dramatically for women over 40.) Ladies, it's time to close that gap: 1. Don’t pitch a number first. Pitch your value. → Frame the conversation around impact: → “Here’s what I’ve delivered…” → “Here’s the commercial value I’ve driven…” 2. Price your potential not your past. → You’re not being hired to repeat what you’ve done. → You’re being hired for what you’ll do next. 3. Do your research. Then ask for more. → Benchmark your role, level, and industry. → Use tools like Glassdoor. 4. Use the ‘Bracketing’ Technique. → Offer a range so you can negotiate. → "I’d expect something in the $150–$180K range.” 5. Own your worth. Out loud. → If you downplay your value, people will believe you. → Negotiation is not arrogance but it takes practice. It isn’t just about pay. It’s about perception. And perception shapes outcomes. Have you ever wished you asked for more money?

I built an animation of Spain's post-blackout grid recovery. Quite fascinating to see the nodes and lines being energized one by one. Just to be clear: it's not 100% accurate and for illustrative purposes only. But I think it highlights some important points: ▶️ Without interconnections with France and Morocco, the restart would've been much more difficult ▶️ Not all black-starts succeed so you need a lot of redundancy. Several hydro plants were black-started to create electrical islands and support the start of thermal power plants. But you'll notice in the animation that some frequency islands disappear. Plus there were 3 more attempts that aren't shown on the map because the islands never propagated. ▶️ Hydro power was key in the restoration process. Countries without hydro need a good alternative. On the two last points, the Expert Panel recommends adding battery storage to black-start tests. This would provide an additional safety layer in case some restart attempts fail / if there is limited hydro availability. Link to the map and this week's substack post on blackouts in the comment below.

Most negotiation advice is written for men. Here's what works for women. Last week in Marrakech, I led a session on negotiation and tested every principle in the souks, where nothing is fixed and every price is a dialogue. If you want to understand negotiation as a living practice, you watch it unfold a thousand times a day in those narrow alleyways. Most advice says to anchor high and never move first. That logic, built for dominance, teaches women to defend positions before understanding what's on the table. The result is predictable: assertiveness gets labeled aggression, and we miss the strategic, relational approach that actually works; at work, at home, anywhere two people are trying to find common ground. Women are socialized to gather information, read context, and ask about others' needs before our own. The backlash for being too direct has forced us to master this. We learn more in five minutes of inquiry than in thirty minutes of persuasion. We've been taught to do this everywhere except at the negotiation table. The shift is simple. Start your next negotiation with curiosity. Ask what matters most to the other side before defending your position. Diagnostic questions reveal what people truly want, position you as collaborative rather than adversarial, and uncover options neither party had considered. I saw it work last week. Ask first. Listen longer. Shape agreements with information, not assumptions. I'll share the specific moves in future posts. For now, try one genuine diagnostic question before you state your position in your next negotiation. See what you learn.

“Silence won me the deal.” It was during a high-stakes negotiation workshop. A long polished table stretched across the room, the faint hum of the air-conditioner mixing with the nervous tapping of pens. Coffee cups steamed gently, untouched. Two teams sat facing each other—one eager to sell, the other skeptical, guarded, holding their cards close. Every sentence from the buyers was sharp, deliberate. Every counter from the sellers was rushed, almost pleading. And then came that moment. A buyer leaned forward, narrowed his eyes, and asked: “So… what’s the absolute lowest you can go?” The sellers scrambled. Voices overlapped. Justifications poured out. In their rush to fill the silence, they gave away more than they should have. That’s when I stopped the roleplay and said to the leaders in the room: 👉 “Did you notice what happened? You lost not because of what you said, but because you couldn’t stay quiet.” Silence is uncomfortable. It makes palms sweat. It makes eyes wander. It feels like an eternity. But in negotiation, silence is not empty—it’s pressure. It’s the pause that forces the other side to reveal what they didn’t plan to. Later, I demonstrated. I role-played the seller again. When the buyer asked the same question, I simply looked at him, leaned back, folded my hands… and said nothing. The room went still. Ten seconds of silence felt like a minute. The buyer shifted in his chair, cleared his throat, and then—spoke again: “Well… we could increase the volume if you hold the price.” And just like that, silence unlocked a better deal. After the session, one participant came to me, wide-eyed, and said: “I’ve spent 15 years negotiating. No one ever taught me that my best weapon could be saying nothing.” 🌟 Lesson: Sometimes the most powerful sentence… is silence. Great leaders don’t always win by speaking more. They win by knowing when to let silence do the talking. #Negotiation #ExecutivePresence #LeadershipDevelopment #SoftSkills #CommunicationSkills #Boardroom #Fortune500 #Influence #BusinessGrowth #Leadership

Same message. Two totally different reactions. One person felt seen. The other felt attacked. Why? 𝗠𝗶𝗻𝗱𝘀𝗲𝘁. I can say the exact same words. But what they 𝘩𝘦𝘢𝘳 depends on what mindset they’re in. Most people stay at surface level: → Numbers, terms, blame. Some go deeper: → Relationships, expectations, emotion. But only a few know how to drop beneath it all, to the real issue: “𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝗶𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗮𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗵𝗼𝘄 𝗜 𝘀𝗲𝗲 𝗺𝘆𝘀𝗲𝗹𝗳?” That’s where the 𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗹𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗹 mindset kicks in. It’s where negotiations collapse. Or transform. - They’re not rejecting our offer,  they’re defending their status. - They’re not resisting feedback, they’re protecting their dignity. - They’re not being difficult, they feel unseen. In negotiation, we don’t just manage the message. We manage the mindset it lands in. The issue isn’t always the issue. The mindset is.

Mastering Organizational Savviness: Navigating office politics means winning the game of influence without direct clashes. 𝗛𝗲𝗿𝗲’𝘀 𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝗱𝗼: ↳ Avoiding Engagement: Office politics are inevitable. Embrace them wisely to navigate your career. ↳ Misreading Power Dynamics: Understand who influences decisions. Align your strategies accordingly. ↳ Ignoring Allies: Build relationships across the board. Allies in all corners strengthen your position. ↳ Overplaying Your Hand: Subtlety is key. Balance assertiveness with diplomacy. ↳ Neglecting Feedback: Adapt based on observations. Learn from every interaction to refine your approach. ↳ Ignoring Organizational Culture: Don't overlook the unwritten rules. Adapt your strategies to fit the cultural context. ↳ Failing to Communicate Clearly: Ambiguity can breed conflict. Be direct and transparent in your interactions. ↳ Forgetting Long-Term Goals: Short-term wins are tempting. Focus on strategies that benefit your long-term career. ↳ Underestimating Emotions: Office politics isn't just strategic; it's emotional. Recognize and respect the emotional dynamics at play. Be the leader who excels in organizational savviness. 𝗪𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗲𝘅𝗰𝗲𝗹 𝗮𝘁 𝗼𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗰𝘀: •  You navigate challenges with insight •  Your influence grows within the organization •  Relationships become strategic assets •  You foresee shifts and adapt quickly •  Your career trajectory accelerates You are more than a participant in office politics. 𝗔𝘀𝗸 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿𝘀𝗲𝗹𝗳: 1. Are you aware of the real motives behind office politics? 2. Can you align them with your values and goals? 3. Got a strategy for managing conflict in office politics? 4. Does it strengthen or weaken your position? 5. Are you reacting, or actively influencing? 6. How are you improving your political intelligence? 7. Learning from each encounter? 8. How do you balance integrity with political maneuvers? 9. Are your actions true to your leadership style? You are a strategist shaping your path. Act accordingly.

Have you noticed that there is not a single woman involved in any of the so-called peace negotiations currently underway in the Middle East? Not among the heads of state. Not among the special envoys, military commanders or lead negotiators. Not among those signing agreements or setting the terms of what peace looks like and for whom. The research on this is not ambiguous. Women's participation increases the probability of a peace agreement lasting at least two years by 20%, and lasting fifteen years by 35%. The participation of civil society groups, where women already do much of the actual conflict resolution work at community level, makes a peace agreement 64% less likely to fail altogether. These are not advocacy statistics. They come from peer-reviewed studies and UN data spanning three decades of peace processes across every region of the world. And yet here we are. Every decision-maker in this conflict, every person setting the terms, signing the agreements, defining what comes next, is male. Not by accident. By design, by default. It is worth remembering that UN Security Council Resolution 1325, adopted in 2000, formally recognised that women bear a disproportionate burden in conflict; as civilians, as displaced persons, as those left to rebuild communities when the fighting stops. Twenty-six years later, the gap between that commitment and the reality has not changed. So why not try something different? The data already tells us what the outcome could look like: agreements that last, processes that address root causes rather than paper over them, and settlements that the people who actually live with the consequences might recognise as their own. But the question is: is peace the desired outcome? #sustainability #esg #sdg16