How the Strategic Negotiator Controls Outcome
By Rowen Untivero
 
It is undeniable that humans are on top of the food chain. We are aware that humans dominate not because of sheer physicality otherwise any number of wildlife predators would be lording over us. Well, yes we have to acknowledge that some world leaders are wildlife predators indeed. Seriously, however, the question to ponder is: “what capabilities do human beings have that are superlative tail-of-the-tape-wise versus other assertive species?”
 
Well for one, human beings albeit proven to be adaptive to a lot of environments, more importantly are capable of changing conditions to whatever they want instead of merely adapting to it. Human beings observe, analyze, solve problems, create, develop, experiment and arrive at conclusions on how to change the environment to one more suitable to their needs and preference.
 
Secondly, human beings are able to cognitively anticipate, plan, program and act on multiple possibilities over and beyond the limiting instincts of fight, flight or freeze courtesy of the primal amygdala bondage.  Thus in the subject of negotiation,  only untrained negotiators still fall for the “take it or leave it” fear factor-injected gambit by nego-predators using a primeval methodology to secure concessions. Unbeknownst as well to such gambit users, success in sowing fear in one round would leave bitter vestiges of remorse and will predictably elicit some form of future vendetta to be staged by the aggrieved party.
 
Similarly, when humans go against fellow humans, whether at war or in commercial dealings, the party more capable of controlling both the environment as well as anticipating the other party’s moves, will have the advantage in influencing the outcome of events.
 
To illustrate, when epitomized generals like Sparta’s Leonidas, Macedon’s Alexander the Great, Carthage’s Hannibal, Rome’s Scipio Africanus, Russia’s Zhukov, Germany’s Erich Von Manstein, America’s  Patton won their many battles, all of those victories  required knowing and controlling their theaters of battle and thereafter marshalling forces to overcome anticipated deployments and actions by their antagonists. Some of these generals won their battles using smaller forces but with better control of environment, while others used superior forces over open battlefields to swiftly quell their opponents. Nevertheless, each one of those victories have been carefully planned, based on reliable intelligence and clear understanding of their opponents’ strengths, weaknesses and propensities.
 
In negotiations, significantly gaining control over outcome requires managing pretty much the same elements the generals did. Environment control and knowledge of what the counterpart’s cards have and how they will behave relative to negotiation atmospheric conditions and stimulus.
 
For purposes of ease and practicability, this article contributor has developed over the last couple of decades, a system of tools to help manage the critical elements that can influence negotiation outcome.
 
The first tool is a Mansmith Nego-mapping tool which is used to determine possibilities, probabilities and intended eventualities as well as how to protect the critical pathways to the said preferred outcomes. Optionally, this can be complemented by the Tactical Concession Management Tool that uses the world’s only Negotiation Mathematics to determine win-win values in order to sequence them optimally, maximizing “takes” and minimizing “gives”. 
 
The second tool is an Octagon–Cross Negotiator Mode Determinant, which may be used in conjunction with Influencing Analytics to determine expected behaviours of players during execution and how to manage them.
 
The third tool is the Mansmith Nego Atmosphere Matrix, which similar to a sound mixer, is used to pre-calibrate the various Nego-Atmosphere Elements, to dynamically arrive at an optimal negotiating environment favourable to attaining preferred outcomes.
 
Then nego-sphere strategy is further translated to actual meeting tactics where physical environment components that influence human behaviour are skewed towards helping secure preferred outcomes.
 
In combination, the system of strategic and tactical tools provide a kind of “slingshot” effect, where some effort  is needed to pull the slingshot (preparation), but in the end, greatly improves projectile velocity and precision (execution), as contrasted to just throwing the stone by hand. 
 
Despite so much power on the strategic negotiator’s side, unless of course the respective counterpart is also well-equipped with a similar system of tools from Mansmith, a win-win outcome, albeit optimized on one end, is imperative to be sought and reached. Why so? Only win-win is sustainable over the long term, unless of course the deal is a one-off and never to be repeated. More often, most dealings do come full circle and ensuring mutually beneficial outcomes is always ideal to keep relationship bridges open. Because unlike the generals at war, who seek victory at the expense of their enemy’s loss, in negotiation, the strategic negotiator gains control to ensure both sides win whilst maintaining good standing relationships. And finally, one should not forget the importance of quality tactical execution, so as not to squander strategic advantage.
 
* * *
Rowen Untivero is a Partner and Chief Sales Strategist of Mansmith and Fielders, Inc., the country’s leading marketing, sales, strategy and innovation training company. For more than 3 decades, Untivero has injected much science into negotiations by having developed the world’s first Nego-Math and Planning Tool to compute for win-win, the Strategic Nego-Mapping Tool, among many others. Please send your questions, comments or feedback to mentors@mansmith.net. You can also visit 
www.mansmith.net.