We all know the power of saying "No".  It can keep you from accepting a bad deal. From allowing others to take advantage of you.  It can save you enormous grief from accepting deals that are simply not in your best interest.

Is there an alternative to saying "no"?

Is there something better than that powerful two-letter word?

You bet there is...

Why are some of the reasons that we would say no?  I think it's because the proposal or position presented to us as part of a negotiation is simply not in our best interest.  It IS a good idea to know how to say no and how to use it to your advantage.  

But let me suggest this:

It's likely that when you say "no", it's because your conditions to the negotiation are not met.  In fact, they are so far away that you are ready to walk away.  You are ready to terminate the negotiation and move on.  But it may not be your best move.  In fact, because you have already decided to walk away, you now have an enormous edge over the party you are negotiating with.  You simply won't accept the position they are offering, and that is powerful.

So what is your option if you don't walk away?

Simple.  Figure out EXACTLY what you want.  Not just what you think the other party will accept, but what YOU want.  Complete wants. No limitations. Crystal clear objectives. 

Then present...

Life is one big negotiation. Negotiation interactions are about getting something.  It may be permission.  It may be a raise. It may be a purchase. It may be ... anything.

During that interaction for permission, there are two sides to the negotiation.

The "Asker"

First is the person asking.  They have a requests, demand or need that they are looking to have fulfilled.  It's what they want.  Behind each of those requests, there is a reason for it.

The "Giver"

The second party to this conversation is the person being asked for fulfillment of that item.  They have the ability to say yes or no to the person asking.  That doesn't mean that they always have the final or ultimate arbiter of the decision, but they have a significant amount of influence and/or authority over it.  For them, there is a reason behind their ultimate decision.  That reason why they will grant, or refuse such a request. It's a simple rule: They have to be better off after they give you what you are requesting...than before. If they have no benefit, there is no motivation for them to say yes.

It's Not About You

When  you are asking for something in the negotiation, the discussion shouldn't be about you.  It's about the "giver".  If it's their permission that will get you what you want, you have to provide them with an "after" status that is better...

I agree.

Two simple words.

Two words that can start building the bridge between opposing parties. Between opposite viewpoints.  Between adversaries.

If I remember correctly, those words were used a lot  ... many years ago.  But it seems that lately the words "I agree" have come to signal a position of weakness. Of giving in.  Of acquiesence. 

But it wasn't always that way.  I don't know what happened, but it seems that every position lately has been "for" or "against" something or someone.  Forget the middle ground.  Forget compromise.  Forget about what is right.  Just dig in your heels and never admit that you agree.

But let's face it.  Most of the time, regardless of how much we dislike a position, a person, an ideology, there are often some aspects of the opposing viewpoint that we can agree with.  That doesn't mean we are giving in.  It doesn't mean that we are "on their side". It doesn't mean that our position on other elements isn't as strong.

But what it does mean is this:

We agree on SOME things...so let's spend our efforts on working out those elements that we don't agree on...

Think about it.  If we only have so much time, energy and stamina, then why spend it on arguing over things we already agree on.  It's not just stupid ... it's insanity.  

Common Ground

How often...