Building rapport

After you have actively listened and shown empathy toward the other party, you want to build rapport and influence through open communication in order to move up the stairway as quickly as possible.

One of the ways to do this is to open the real negotiation from a sensible and realistic position. Better still, offer the other party something that they find valuable or useful.

A classic example of this is when you are discussing the allocation of resources with another Project Manager. If they demand the exclusivity to a key and in-demand developer for a long period without considering your project's needs, it will instantly alienate you. In response, if you offered them a viable alternative solution, such as bringing your need for the same developer forward in time without risking your project. Then that's a great response that will make a mutual compromise more likely, or maybe even a win-win. At the very least it will create a happy-enough outcome for both parties.

From the consumer side, the key concept we will focus on is BATNA and WATNA, which are acronyms for Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement and Worst Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement.

In layman's terms, BATNA is the point at which you should consider accepting the offer on the table – your best-case scenario. For example, the car dealer has matched the best offer you've seen elsewhere. WATNA is the point at which you should decline and walk away from the deal – your worst-case scenario. In an auction, this is the price at which you would stop bidding.

The terms BATNA and WATNA were coined by Roger Fisher and William Ury in their book called Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. BATNA/WATNA often refer to a higher meaning than a simple bottom or top price point. It has built a methodology around the concept, which has a large following in negotiation theory circles.

The deep psychology behind negotiation theory is beyond the scope of this book, but the key point in a software project context is that you should have a set of reasonable BATNAs and WATNAs. The value in learning about BATNA/WATNA, as opposed to the simpler best- and worst-case scenario, is the focus on alternatives.

Focusing on alternatives highlights the need for comparison and perspective, and the bigger picture, based on actual reference points, for example, using the example I mentioned earlier with BATNA, whereby the car dealer matches an offer that was better than theirs. It also emphasizes and encourages looking for different solutions altogether. For example, in the process of finding the best deal for a car, you may see a different model that is actually more suitable.

If both parties take this approach, the likelihood of a more mutually beneficial outcome is much more likely. You may well find that the other project doesn't actually need the in-demand developer for all of that time after all, and there's someone else the developer knows that can do the job!

One piece of advice I would give you is this: always bear in mind your project's triple constraint, which itself is an interconnected trade-off, but don't compromise on your BATNAs and WATNAs when negotiating.