Tag Archives: William Ury

“Everything is Negotiable”: Prepare, Ask, Revise, Ask Again

Women have negotiated less effectively for salaries than men in a number of studies. The real-life consequences of this trend is a persistently lower salaries than men   throughout women’s working lives.

Linda Babcock

The lifetime salary gap for women MBAs was estimated at USD $500,000 – USD $2 million when compared with male classmates, according to Carnegie Mellon’s Linda Babcock.
She linked this difference to men’s greater willingness to negotiate salary and promotions.

Catherine DesRoches

This salary difference also exists for women in academic medicine, who earned about 80 percent of their male peers’ compensation in a salary study by Harvard’s Catherine DesRoches, Sowmya Rao, Lisa Iezzoni, and Eric Campbell with Darren Zinner of Brandeis.

Babcock, with Sara Laschever, suggested that these negotiation differences are linked to  gender socialization practices.

Sara Laschever

They observed that many parents encourage boys to take risks, earn money, and participate in competitive team sports.
These activities can prepare people to negotiate, compete, and tolerate disrupted interpersonal relationships.

In contrast, they suggested that parents may encourage girls to play collaboratively and value interpersonal affiliation instead of getting part-time jobs and participating in sports teams.

John List

John List

Women’s avoidance of salary negotiation and preferring less competitive work roles, was also reported by University of Chicago’s John List, Andreas Leibbrandt, and Jeffrey Flory.

This team’s research studied respondents to two identical “job ads” on internet job boards with different wage structures.
One position offered hourly pay whereas the other role’s pay depended on performance compared with coworkers.
More women than men applied to the hourly wage role.

Andreas Leibbrandt

Andreas Leibbrandt

Men were 94 percent more likely than women to seek and perform well in competitive work roles among nearly 7,000 job seekers across 16 large American cities.
This gender wage gap “more than doubled” as performance-linked compensation increased.
Women in these studies were significantly more likely to choose less competitive employment options.

Jeffrey Flory

Jeffrey Flory

Women were also more likely to apply to jobs in which the performance required teamwork rather than individual accomplishment.

Likewise, women favoured flat fee compensation that was unrelated to   performance.

Men did not wait for an invitation or permission to negotiate.
They were more likely to negotiate even when there was no explicit statement that wages were negotiable.

When there was a specific invitation to ask for higher salaries and job titles, women negotiated as frequently as men 

Babcock and Laschever noted that negotiation practices considered “acceptable” for men may be unfavourably viewed when women use them.

They advised women to adopt several changes in negotiation mindset and behaviours:

  • Consider that “everything is negotiable,”
  • Research personal “market worth” using online resources like Salary.com, Payscale.com, and Glassdoor.com,
  • Consider oneself worthy of higher salaries and job roles,
  • Examine self-limiting beliefs about negotiation,
  • Plan negotiation talking points, including accomplishments, results, impact,
  • Practice negotiating the salary proposal, suggest timing, set an ambitious anchor point, prepare for objections,
  • Plan counter-offers and practice self-regulation (such as through intentional breathing) to maintain negotiation position and interpersonal rapport.

Roger FisherHarvard’s Roger Fisher and William Ury added recommendations for Collaborative Negotiation that enables both people to derive value from the negotiation conversation through preparation, proactivity, and persistence while reaffirming the negotiation goal’s value for all parties.

Ohio State’s Roy Lewicki, David Saunders of Queen’s University, and Vanderbilt’s Bruce Barry of Vanderbilt contributed additional research-based guidance on effective Negotiation.

Leigh Thompson

Leigh Thompson

Related research by Leigh Thompson of Northwestern, found that more than 90% of negotiators neglect to ask “diagnostic questions that reveal the negotiation partner’s most important needs, priorities, preferences, and even fears.
When negotiators elicited these “wants,” they achieved significantly improved negotiation outcomes.

Pat Heim

Pat Heim

Women’s reluctance to negotiate may be related to gender differences in attributions of success and failure, suggested Pat Heim

Women often attribute failures to themselves (“internalizing”) whereas men identify external factors (“rationalisations”l, “excuses”) associated with their shortcomings.
Women are more likely to attribute success to external factors (“deflection of merit”), whereas men typically attribute their effective performance to themselves (“self-bolstering”).

Men are often promoted because they are seen to have “potential,” but women are  more likely to be promoted based on their results and accomplishments, noted Heim.

Even factors like attire can influence perception of authority:  Men judged women as less authoritative when wearing “business casual” attire.

These studies encourage women to develop skills and behaviours required to close the wage gap between professional women and men.

-How do you prepare for negotiations and overcome objections during negotiations?

Related Posts:

©Kathryn Welds

Nothing to Lose: Effective Negotiating Even When “Powerless”

Michael Schaerer

Most negotiators prefer to have a “fall back position.”
However INSEAD’s Michael Schaerer and Roderick Swaab with Adam Galinsky of Columbia found that having no alternatives and less power than co-negotiators can improve outcomes.

A weak alternative can establish an unfavourably modestanchor point,according to Hebrew University’s late Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman of Princeton.

Adam Galinsky
Adam Galinsky

These “lowball” first offers usually undermine a negotiator’s final outcome.

Professional athletes and their agents provided examples of negotiating better deals when they had no “back up” offers and “nothing to lose.”  They set more ambitious anchor points, and often negotiate a more favourable settlement.

Amos Tversky
Amos Tversky

Schaerer and team asked a hundred people whether they would prefer to negotiate a job offer with a weak alternate offer or without any alternative.
More than 90 percent of participants preferred an unattractive alternative offer, confirming that any alternative is usually seen as better than no alternative.

Schaerer asked volunteers to sell previously-owned music when they had:

  • No offers (no alternative),
  • One offer at USD $2 (weak alternative),
  • A bid at USD $8 (strong alternative).
Roderick Swaab
Roderick Swaab

Volunteers in each group proposed a first offer, and rated the degree of power they felt.
People with the “strong” alternative felt most powerful and those with no alternative felt least powerful.

Volunteers with a weak alternative felt more powerful than those with no alternative, but they made lower first offers.
This indicated that they had less confidence than participants with no alternative.

Conclusion: Having any alternative can help people feel powerful but can undermine negotiation performance.

Schaerer’s team asked a volunteer to “sell” a coffee mug to a potential “buyer,” who was a confederate of the researchers.

The volunteer “seller” received a phone call from “another buyer,” who was a confederate of the researchers, before the volunteer seller met the original potential buyer.
When half the “sellers” met the original purchase prospect, the “buyer” made a low offer.
The “buyer” declined to bid for the other half of “sellers.”

Daniel Kahneman
Daniel Kahneman

Sellers without an alternative offer said they felt less powerful, but made higher first offers and received significantly higher sales prices than negotiators with an unattractive alternative.

In another situation, half of the “sellers” concentrated on available alternatives (none, weak, or strong) and the remaining negotiators focused on the target price.

Volunteers with unappealing alternatives negotiated worse deals than those with no options when they focused on alternatives.
“Sellers” avoided this pitfall by concentrating on the target price.
Conclusion:  Focus on the goal when alternatives are weak.

Negotiators with non-existent or unappealing alternatives can set audacious goals and make an ambitious opening offer because they have “nothing to lose.”
This strategy usually renders better results for the disadvantaged negotiator.

  • How do you overcome lowball anchoring when you have few negotiation alternatives?

RELATED POSTS:

©Kathryn Welds

Mastering the Power Sandwich with Skillful Upward Influence

David Bradford

David Bradford

Employees’ advancement in organizations is based on preventing problems before they develop, and pre-emptively uncovering opportunities to add value, according to Stanford’s David Bradford and Allan R. Cohen of Babson College in Influencing Up.

Allan Cohen

Allan Cohen

Complementing their Influence without Authority, they distilled common-sense win-win approaches to influence those over whom one has no formal authority or control: one’s manager and others higher in the hierarchy.

Influencing UpOrganizational power discrepancies can be accentuated when the employee is female or a member of a minority group.
Cohen and Bradford’s suggest six elements to reduce power differences, and improve influence and negotiation outcomes:

  • Clarify needs and priorities
  • Consider others as potential partners rather than adversaries
  • Establish trustworthiness by sharing information and develop understanding of the other’s perspective, concerns, and “care-abouts” — empathy in a business setting
  • Determine reciprocal value exchange in “currencies” that matter to others: information, budget, removing obstacles, brokering agreements, support
  • Gain access to others by showcasing your potential value exchange
  • Negotiate a win-win outcome

Robert Cialdini

Robert Cialdini

Bradford and Cohen’s work complements influential research by Stanford colleagues Margaret Neale and Deborah Gruenberg, as well as Robert Cialdini’s classic investigation of influence.

Roger Fisher

Roger Fisher

William Ury

William Ury

Their emphasis on crafting a win-win negotiated outcome echoes earlier work by Roger Fisher and William Ury in Getting to Yes and Linda Babcock’s consideration of negotiation challenges faced by women and minority group members in the workplace.

-*How do you manage the Power Sandwich, requiring skillful 360 degree influence in your organization?

Related Posts:

Twitter:  @kathrynwelds
Google+:
Blog: – Kathryn Welds | Curated Research and Commentary
LinkedIn Open Group
Facebook Notes:

©Kathryn Welds