Whenever I mention that the ability to negotiate is critical to success as a salesperson, I am almost always met with raised eyebrows.  And the reason for this is that negotiation is probably the most misunderstood concept in North America.  Most people tend to view negotiation as some sort of semi-ethical process that is designed to con, manipulate, or intimidate another person into saying yes when they really want to say no.

In order to clear up this misunderstanding, when I’m conducting a seminar or giving a speech, I usually put the attendees through a short exercise.  I describe some situations to these people and I ask them to tell me which of the situations involves negotiation.  When I ask them if they think the reaching of a labor agreement between the United Auto Workers and Ford Motor Company would involve negotiation, all of the hands in the room go up.  Similarly, when I ask if the working out of the final details of the Free Trade Agreement between the United States, Canada and Mexico would involve negotiation, everyone raises their hand.  When I ask them if getting their children to make their bed or clean their room involves negotiation, I get a few laughs, but again, all raise their hands.

At this point, I tell the attendees that what they have just indicated, by raising their hands, is that nearly all human interaction involves some element of negotiation.  Furthermore, their success in any of these situations is directly related to their ability to negotiate with these different people.  It is now obvious that a person’s ability to negotiate plays a key role in determining his or her level of success.  The problem, however, is that if I were to poll any 100 people and ask them their personal definitions of negotiation, chances are I would get 100 different definitions.  This definition issue is precisely the stumbling block that prevents people from achieving higher levels of success.  Indeed, it’s very difficult to do something well if you’re not quite sure what it is you are supposed to do.

In order to clear up this definition problem I fell back on my ten years’ experience as a professor.  One of the things I learned early in that career is that whenever confusion exists concerning what something is or should be, it’s very helpful to go back and take a look at the origins of the word itself.  In doing this, very often what you find is that the original meaning of the word and what has subsequently evolved are often two entirely different things.  It turned out that this was also true for the word negotiation.

If you take a look at any standard dictionary, you’ll find that the root word of negotiation is the Latin word otio.  Otio means that a human being is at a state of leisure.  When you are on a vacation or otherwise relaxed and enjoying yourself, you are at otio.  As far as the Latin language is concerned, human beings can only be at one of two states.  They are either at otio, meaning they are relaxing and enjoying themselves, or they are at the opposite state from otio: conducting business.  The way you would write the opposite of otio in Latin is simply neg otio.

So, literally translated from Latin, negotiation means “not leisure”, or “to conduct business”.  It is interesting to note that “to conduct business” is the precise definition of negotiation that you will find in any dictionary, but very few people have ever bothered to look it up—even people teaching workshops and seminars on negotiation.

The reason for taking you through the above analysis is to point out two very important aspects of negotiation.  First, negotiation does not mean a process whereby you try to manipulate, con, or intimidate someone into saying yes when they really want to say no, although this is one of the more common misconceptions about the negotiation process.

Second, negotiation is a people process.  People are the only entities capable of promising things to each other and they are the only entities capable of following through on those promises.  Companies do not negotiate with companies.  For example, a company like IBM does not negotiate a sales transaction with a company like Exxon.  For such a transaction to occur, someone or a group of people representing IBM would negotiate with someone or a group of people representing Exxon.  The quality of the agreements themselves, as well as the quality of the follow-through on those agreements, would be directly related to the quality of the personal relationships between the people involved.  People do things for people, they don’t do things for companies or agencies.  Furthermore, people are very willing to go the extra mile for people they like and trust, but they rarely, if ever, stick their necks out for people they don’t like or trust.  As one very successful businessman said when he was addressing a roomful of branch managers from Bank of America, “You people have to remember that people don’t bank with banks, they bank with people.” He went on to say, “To the average consumer, banks all look the same.  What makes one bank stand out from the others is the quality of the personal treatment you get from the people with whom you come into contact.”

Therefore, the definition of negotiation that I will use for the rest of this book is a basic process of getting what you want from other people.  If you want your children to make their beds or clean their rooms, that’s getting what you want from other people.  Similarly, if you want other people to stand in line just for the privilege of doing you a favor, that’s getting what you want from other people.  Most important, if you want your customers to remain loyal, give you lots of repeat business, and refer their friends to you, that’s also getting what you want from other people.  As such, negotiation is the fundamental activity involved in the sales process.  Thus, in order to achieve a high level of success as a salesperson, you must become an effective negotiator.

Now that we understand what negotiation is, let’s take a look at the two basic philosophies that people utilize to get what they want from other people.  The first of these philosophies is the Win-Win Philosophy and the other is the Win-Lose Philosophy.