• Is Resistance Futile
• The Top Ten Negotiation/Sales Objections 
• The Top Ten Rules for Active Listening: Giving Feedback 

As excellent problem solvers, we precisely design the content of our presentations, negotiations, and sales talks to address every possible objection from our audience. We may even develop personality profiles of our prospective patrons so that our message can be doctored with just the right spin.  "Is this a numbers person?  Be sure to present the logic." "He is a big picture type; just focus on the strategy."  Or, "She seems like a reasonable sort;  let's just be straight with the facts."  We seek to develop defense plans that are impenetrable to attack even by our most learned opponents. 

In fact,  if our audience has any questions or objections, we always have the answer.  Yet we are surprised and even annoyed that our counterparts do not immediately fold when we respond with our well-developed, pre-formulated response. We are confused by their resistance. With the same questions repeated, we ask ourselves: "How many times do we have to reword the answer before it sinks in?  What is it going to take?  Don't they know that resistance is futile and it's only a question of when they'll be assimilated by our belief system?" 

Resistance - futile or not - is predictable, and managing it well is critically important to the process of changing minds.  People must be allowed to defend their present  belief system before they can integrate another.  It's a matter of either throwing out the old belief system because they discover a problem with its logic, or finding some way to integrate the new with the old.  Our job as problem solvers is to build a bridge between people's old beliefs and the new ones being offered, to facilitate the process of entering each other's world. 

"People need acknowledgment  of their thoughts and perspective before they allow themselves to change."

One of the major barriers to interpersonal communication is our natural tendency to address people's resistance with  reassurance, persuasion, advice or analysis. I'll illustrate my point with a simple example.  During a negotiation, your counterpart says, "I don't feel very confident about my ability to do this deal."  Now how do you respond?  Almost invariably you will reply by projecting your beliefs onto them. "I know you can do it if you really try," or perhaps you'll reply,  "Well, have you considered bringing in some other people to help?" Your first reaction is to evaluate based solely on your own frame of reference and your first action is to try to fix the problem by presenting a solution. 

Another typical example can be found in a sales meeting.  Your customer states, "I do not think that the market is at a point where it will accept this type of product."  What is your instinctive response?  The overwhelming likelihood is that you will evaluate whether you agree or disagree and follow that up with some judgment about the beliefs of the other person.  We interpret others' behavior,  what we see, what we hear and feel, and then based on a quick analysis, plan a response.  In fact, we often pride ourselves in our ability to process this information into a rapid retort. 

The result is that we communicate internally, from our own perspective, often trying to solve the wrong problem with incomplete data.  Our counterpart provides content, but the focus of the discussion is typically our understanding of them and our understanding of ourselves.  The challenge is to break free of self-contained conversation.  Real communication involves hearing more than words.  We have to actively discover what our counterpart intends to say and not make assumptions as to the meaning of their statements. 

Think about what you do naturally when you're trying to convey genuine empathy, and use these skills in negotiations.  Anything that communicates a genuine effort to understand, whether we call it active listening, empathic listening, or reflective consideration, qualifies as effective negotiating. 

The core skill involved is giving feedback. Feedback involves taking a thoughtful guess at your counterpart's underlying thoughts, feelings and motivations.  It doesn't matter whether you guess right or wrong, your desire to understand will be clear. Your counterpart will stop trying to defend his or her point of view when it is apparent that you're trying to understand, not placate.  They will either agree with or correct your interpretation (one of the great things about being wrong is that people will correct you).  Either way, they will be drawn out as they build faith in your interest and empathy. 

Examples:
 

Many people effectively use probing questions such as, "Can you explain that further?" or "Why?" as a form of understanding an underlying concern. This is a serviceable approach, but it may result in your counterpart feeling "put on the spot" or challenged, thus establishing an adversarial dynamic.  If your customer says "Your price is too high," and you reply either "No, it's not," followed by a bunch of facts, or "Why do you think that?", not only does the customer feel unacknowledged, but you have created a debate in which no one can "save face." When you confirm a counterpart's thoughts or feelings, you provide strong evidence that your attempt to understand his/her world is real.  "You seem concerned about the value of what we offer," opens conversation and establishes a safe environment to share view points, build common beliefs and go deeper than the price position. 

Like patients who refuse to consider treatment until they believe they have been accurately diagnosed, people are unlikely to open their minds to new ideas until they believe that they've been heard and understood. The less people are heard, the more angry, obstinate, or disinterested they become. The argumentative, lecturing responses that most of us rely on in negotiations serve to misinterpret or judge our counterpart's intent and shut down our opportunity to get further insight into interests, motivations, needs, and ways of thought.  This is where many negotiations stall or deadlock. 

Remember that people who become hostile, seem bent on creating problems, or resort to negotiation games may be resisting your interpretation of their interests or may simply not feel heard.  Giving feedback is your tool for uncovering the real problem behind this resistance.  By focusing on acknowledging each person's unique world, feedback opens a faucet of information that facilitates accurate diagnosis.  In the process, you build a working relationship that turns your adversary into a powerful partner in problem solving. 

Sometimes your counterpart may be bent on playing games or using other hard ball tactics (to lower your aspiration levels), regardless of how well you have worked to understand their perspective.  In this event the best approach is to discontinue active feedback of the emotion and content of your counterpart's statements.  Instead, try projecting the logical or even ludicrous consequence of their statements. 

For example, what would be the logical next step your counterpart could expect you to take if they say, "Take it or leave it."  Logically, you should either give in or leave.  They just said they're unwilling to participate in further discussion. But do they really want you to walk out? If you've tried active feedback of the emotion and content of your counterpart's statements without success, try stating the logical consequence of their game. 

Example: 
 

Another example:
 

As in all skills, mastery of using feedback takes practice and forces you to change old habits.  Perhaps the best place to first experiment with these techniques is in safe relationships where trust has been established. Please bear in mind that just telling someone that you know exactly how they feel is an assumption on your part, not reflective feedback. People prefer to find their own solutions to problems instead of having their problems fixed by others. They do, however, want people to help facilitate, not act as problem solvers or solution givers. These techniques will help you in this process. 

1. The goal of active listening is for you to hear and understand other people - their words, thoughts, and feelings; to let them know you have heard and understood them, and to go beyond their stated positions and assertions. 
2. You are best positioned to change someone's mind after you have listened to that person.  People tend to close down and stick to their position until they feel heard.  Trying to convince someone of the strength of your case at a time when they are feeling unheard is like trying to paint a canvas that already has a brightly colored painting on it. 
3. Acknowledge others' motivations, feelings, and point of view, even when you don't agree with what they are saying.  Your goal is to understand the message, not judge the veracity  of what they say. 
4. Talk about things they have said that you can agree with.  Focus on shared viewpoints as a way of building common ground.  This is the basis for your final agreement. 
5. When listening, resist the urge to defend yourself or to disprove what the other person is saying. 
6. Listen like a student.  Assume there are things about the situation that you don't understand.  Even in the areas that you are confident you do understand, listen for data that undermines rather than supports your beliefs, under the assumption that you could be wrong or only partially right. 
7. Listen more than you talk.  As a listener, you are gathering information that can help you figure out which of the other side's needs must be met for an agreement to be considered acceptable, and to what degree those needs will have to be met. 
8. Listening gives you the advantage.  The better your understanding, the more flexibility and creativity you'll have as you create options.  Talking gives this advantage to the other side. 
9. Find your own listening style.  If you are sincere about understanding what someone is saying & feeling, your concern will come across & you won't sound mechanical. 
10. Don't use active listening when you're unwilling to put aside your point of view.  Forced responses that feign interest are worse than no responses at all.  People will see through your act.  Hostility, instead of communication, will result. 

The first response in each example represents possible feedback of emotion and content; the second represents a logical extension of the assertion made.  See above Is Resistance Futile.