VERBIAGE FRIDAY!: tools for weekend negotiations with brokers on the other side of the table...

The difference between being assertive and arrogant is in the delivery of the message.

When we communicate, the experience for our colleagues and clients is impacted more by our tone and body language than our choice of words.

Those two components make up for 93 percent of how we are received.

Only 7 percent of the experience of dialoguing for our target audience is said to be a result of what we say.

Does that mean we can use condescending language with a smile and expect to have a favorable response?

No. : )

With a snarky tone and a smile...we are almost always piloting the passive aggressive plane to "destination confrontation".

No… Confrontation Island is not where you want to find yourself landing your client passengers.

It is not a vacation spot, and there are far more arrivals than connecting departures.

In order to avoid the productivity killer Island of Confrontation in a deal, we have to navigate our route carefully.

In short, that means never letting someone else drive your plane a.k.a your path to a fair deal.

This gets tricky when someone on board is distracting you by making ultimatums and unnecessary remarks.

Remarks that are clearly indicating this will not be a win-win situation if you heed their demands and give up the pilots seat.

People that end up doing this mid-air usually appeared at the start of the trip to be team players.

Then somewhere in the thick of the flight, they changed their trajectory without considering all of the parties involved.

In other words, they stopped co piloting and decided to take over the plane--aggressively, and with out any noticeable regard for all of the passengers.

At this juncture in the flight you know you have to stop the attempt of changing course...but how?

The instinct to react in these moments is strong!

Don't.

Aggressive people have usually practiced longer than you have.

But that is ok because you can practice not falling victim to aggression right now.

Assert yourself by being respectful and clear.

The best strategy to get back on track is to present a clear path of options for how the other party can concede without feeling defeated.

Limiting options, but still giving them to convey a sense of empowerment for the other person—a choice.

Options are a way to let an aggressor maintain a sense of control by retaining the right to decide without letting them run over you by dictating a command.

Make it a habit to never follow a command.

Respond to every command with: “this is what I CAN do, I can do X or I can do Y…which of those options are you ABLE to do?”

Deliver the options with a respectful tone; reminding them this is not personal.

Below is actual verbiage when the “other side of the table” is asking for concessions and they have not listened to you:

 “this is not personal” needs to be conveyed by you… not said verbatim using those word, but that is the tone. Use a tone of admiration and say you know that what they really want is for both parties to agree to a deal where everyone wins.

If they do not acknowledge that they agree, then they will be acknowledging they want one side to lose.

Your side!

NO MATTER WHAT THEY SAY…if they do not acknowledge that they want both parties to win, they are saying they want one party to lose—it is just logic working in your favor.

So LISTEN for the acknowledgment.

If you do not get it (the acknowledgement-the proof they have listened to you), say something to the effect of:

 “My clients can not see how this deal is fair to them, if they could understand how this ends in a fair deal they could better consider your requests…In order for them and myself to better understand what is in this for them, can YOU explain how this is fair? I am trying to come up with reasons but I need your help. You have spoken from the perspective of your clients and you are good at representing their opinion but my clients are the ones who need to be convinced to move forward and make these concessions, not yours.  Your clients have been heard, their side of the story has been heard from you multiple times. And again, you have been excellent at conveying their requests.  Their wants are not enough to convince my clients it is worth it to give more concessions as of now. I can not advise my clients to take action because I do not see their upside at this point.  If we are going to close this deal we need your help understanding how your clients terms leave mine with gaining as much from this as your clients. Based on what you just said… you are indicating you want a deal where the result that is not equal, you did not verbally confirm for me your intention is to make all parties happy,and you stepped over my question with further demands and explanations so I must not have been clear.  This is your opportunity to help us see from your perspective what my clients have to gain by working with your clients further…we need you to provide us with a reason because I can not come up with one. I am hoping you can help because other wise we can not expect my clients to engage on something they see as a one sided win...”

If the rogue co-pilot choses again to not acknowledge after you have been clear to this extent…

You have to be ready to make an emergency landing.

Land decisively.

Cordially let them off of the plane.

Wish them well.

Then find another group of passengers who are interested in all parties being happy with the destination.

Yes, you risk losing passengers from time to time.

But it is better to stop the flight for the wrong person to exit than it is to go off course and end up somewhere you can't get back from.

If you can make a win-win situation out of the current transaction after your best efforts then go make a better deal.

The main reason to do this assertively rather than reactively with aggression...

Because aggression clouds your judgement.

Because you are your client’s pilot, a professional, and most importantly...

Because you are decent.