Table of contents
...
| Child pages (Children Display) |
|---|
Negotiating with people from different cultures
Exploding Offers
Sam Altman (YC) - Exploding Offers Suck
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8285994
http://blog.ycombinator.com/exploding-offers-suck
...
algorithms 289 days ago | parent
A dear friend and excellent negotiator told me that when he gets any kind of short-term exploding offer, the first thing he does is verbally reject the deadline. And the second thing he does is ignore the deadline and offer feedback only after it has passed.
I've seen him employ this many times in practice and it has always worked out. I don't want to be responsible for anyone losing a deal, but remember: when someone offers you an exploding offer, it's because they really, really want you to take it. If anything, it should be a sign there's (a) more time to be had, and (b) plenty of room on the terms.
Any deadline claim has to be concrete and believable. The start of the YC program is a good example.
[...]
wycats 289 days ago
Whenever I've offered an exploding offer in the past, it's because I had several candidates: an extremely strong candidate and several strong but somewhat weaker candidates. In general, all of the candidates have a limited timeframe to make a decision, and there's a risk of losing all candidates if I waited for an indefinite time on the strongest candidate.
In other words, candidates sometimes also need an answer within a certain timeframe (often for very legitimate reasons; a job change can often be a life-changing event) and that means that there are some real time-limits across all of the candidates (in both directions).
A dear friend and excellent negotiator told me that when he gets any kind of short-term exploding offer, the first thing he does is verbally reject the deadline. And the second thing he does is ignore the deadline and offer feedback only after it has passed.
I've seen him employ this many times in practice and it has always worked out. I don't want to be responsible for anyone losing a deal, but remember: when someone offers you an exploding offer, it's because they really, really want you to take it. If anything, it should be a sign there's (a) more time to be had, and (b) plenty of room on the terms.
Any deadline claim has to be concrete and believable. The start of the YC program is a good example.
[...]
wycats 289 days ago
Whenever I've offered an exploding offer in the past, it's because I had several candidates: an extremely strong candidate and several strong but somewhat weaker candidates. In general, all of the candidates have a limited timeframe to make a decision, and there's a risk of losing all candidates if I waited for an indefinite time on the strongest candidate.
In other words, candidates sometimes also need an answer within a certain timeframe (often for very legitimate reasons; a job change can often be a life-changing event) and that means that there are some real time-limits across all of the candidates (in both directions).
...
Articles / Videos
...
Quote:
...
...
- Here's what he said broken into separated lines:
- It is generally better to deal by speech than by letter; and by the mediation of a third than by a man’s self.
- Letters are good, when a man would draw an answer by letter back again; or when it may serve for a man’s justification afterwards to produce his own letter; or where it may be danger to be interrupted, or heard by pieces.
- To deal in person is good, when a man’s face breedeth regard, as commonly with inferiors; or in tender cases, where a man’s eye upon the countenance of him with whom he speaketh may give him a direction how far to go; and generally, where a man will reserve to himself liberty either to disavow or to expound.
- NW: The classic example of the first case ("when a man's face breedeth regard") is LBJ intimidating people by leaning over them.
- In choice of instruments, it is better to choose men of a plainer sort, that are like to do that that is committed to them, and to report back again faithfully the success, than those that are cunning to contrive out of other men’s business somewhat to grace themselves, and will help the matter in report for satisfaction’ sake.
- Use also such persons as affect
- Here's what he said broken into separated lines:
...
- [enjoy] the business wherein they are employed; for that quickeneth much; and such as are fit for the matter; as bold men for expostulation, fair-spoken men for persuasion, crafty men for inquiry and observation, froward
...
- [stubborn] and absurd
...
- [stupid] men for business that doth not well bear out
...
- [justify] itself.
- Use also such as have been lucky, and prevailed before in things wherein you have employed them; for that breeds confidence, and they will strive to maintain their prescription.
- It is better to sound a person with whom one deals afar off, than to fall upon the point at first; except you mean to surprise him by some short question.
- It is better dealing with men in appetite, than with those that are where they would be.
- If a man deal with another upon conditions, the start or first performance is all; which a man cannot reasonably demand, except either the nature of the thing be such, which must go before; or else a man can persuade the other party that he shall still need him in some other thing; or else that he be counted the honester man.
- All practice
...
- [scheming] is to discover [reveal / do recon],
...
- or to work
...
- [manage / make use of / take advantage of recon].
- Men discover themselves in trust, in passion, at unawares, and of necessity, when they would have somewhat done and cannot find an apt pretext.
- NW: I don't understand this. I'm guessing "discover themselves" means "tell the truth" or "reveal some truth about themselves". I don't what he means by "would have somewhat done".
- If you would work any man, you must either know his nature and fashions, and so lead him; or his ends, and so persuade him; or his weakness and disadvantages, and so awe him; or those that have interest in him, and so govern him.
- In dealing with cunning persons, we must ever consider their ends, to interpret their speeches; and it is good to say little to them, and that which they least look for.
...
- In all negotiations of difficulty, a man may not look to sow and reap at once; but must prepare business, and so ripen it by degrees.
...
...
...
...
...
...
- You need to get a sense of how strong the other side's need is. If they need what you have, you can ask for a lot and they'll still pay. "Their need outweighed my greed."
- You need to get a sense of how strong the other side's need is. If they need what you have, you can ask for a lot and they'll still pay. "Their need outweighed my greed."
- 2010 - Difficult Conversations (book)
...
...
...
...
...
- Related discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5600674
- Related discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5600674
...
- I thought the article was pretty interesting. I'm not sure if the technique described would always work, though.
- 2018.01.09 - FreeCodeCamp - Ten Rules for Negotiating a Job Offer
- Summary:
- Get everything in writing
- Always keep the door openq
- Information is power
- Always be positive
- Don’t be the decision maker
- Have alternatives
- Proclaim reasons for everything
- Be motivated by more than just money
- Understand what they value
- Be winnable
- Summary:
Quora - Why are some people better negotiators than others?
http://www.quora.com/Negotiation/Why-ar ... han-others
...
Quote:Yishan Wong:
I'm not a great negotiator myself, but this is what I observed from carefully watching the best negotiator I've ever known:
Most "okay" negotiators are simply good at talking a lot. I've observed this in a lot of BD people. They just talk to fill the empty air, and by doing so they blot out your mind from thinking critically and manage to get you to agree with them that way. Some of them may be charismatic, and apparently research shows that charisma can help shut off the parts of a brain responsible for skepticism and vigilance (see http://www.newscientist.com/arti...), so maybe they exploit this.
However, the best negotiator that I've known (and this guy was better than all the others, by a long shot) operated completely differently. When you met with him, he really didn't talk much. He would just ask you questions about what you wanted and listen really carefully. He would then follow up with more questions trying to get at how you felt about different possibilities or formulations of what you'd just told him. People like to talk about what they want and how they feel about it, so they will tend to go on about things if you let them, and he would just let them do that, all the while listening really carefully. By doing this, he'd gain this unusually detailed understanding about their core motivations and what they personally wanted, specifically, from a potential deal or in general (like, from life) as well as their disposition towards how offers would ideally be presented. He would then sort of go away for awhile and figure out how to structure the right deal given the resources/abilities at his (or his company's) disposal, and then present them with a deal. He didn't seem to need to "talk them into it" very much, the key seemed to be all about carefully using his data to get into their heads to find out what kind of deal would be most appealing to them.
I personally had the experience of being interrogated (gently) by him once when I first met him, which I considered a non-threatening enough experience, and then later to have worked with him on the same side where he remarked on some of these things and I got to observe him in action. Later I put it all together and realized what he was doing with me the first time we met. I think what's most interesting to me is that he was so different from all the other guys and (I think as a result) far more effective.
It also gives me hope, personally, that I can become a better negotiator, because I'm not really one of those endlessly blathering individuals (I can talk good, but not forever), but I am reasonably good when it comes to listening carefully.
Props
2015.09.29 - Donald Trump’s first Cabinet pick is just as controversial as he is, and a lot richer
Mark Stevens, the CEO of marketing strategy firm MSCO.com and the author of a biography called "King Icahn," who lived near Icahn and played tennis and vacationed with him, recounts a meeting between TWA executives and Icahn. Icahn had an egg in his pocket, and he took it out and held it extended in his hand, Stevens said. "He points to his hand, and he says, 'This is me.' And then he points to the egg and says, 'This is you. So you decide in our negotiation right now whether I squeeze you,'" Stevens recalled.