Tough tactics

Andrea Reynolds discusses the similarities between commercial dealings and hostage negotiation

Having a father in Special Branch proved useful while researching the differences between hostage and commercial negotiation. A review of both revealed a number of similarities.

For example, at the beginning of a negotiation the other party needs to be categorised so an appropriate strategy can be pursued. From a purchasing perspective this could mean using a tool such as the Kraljic matrix to determine the importance of the supplier, whereas a hostage negotiator needs to gauge the type of hostage taker – are they, for example, politically motivated, mentally disturbed or aggressive? In both, the higher the risk, the more likely it is that an integrative (collaborative) negotiation approach will be adopted.

Early in a negotiation rapport needs to be built. This is particularly important when negotiating with hostage takers because it is thought that the longer the situation goes on the more likely it is it will end peacefully (except for ‘barricades’).

Guidelines for this include expressing empathy, displaying calmness, finding opportunities to work together, not lying but being empathic when possible, encouraging the other party to do the talking, effective listening, and helping to save face where possible.

Many of these pointers could also be applied to commercial scenarios. Buyers are frequently taught to get the supplier to do the talking and to demonstrate effective listening in return. William Ury, of the Harvard Negotiation Programme, advocates “looking for occasions when you can say ‘yes’ without making a concession” because this will reduce the overall opportunity for conflict.

Indeed, negotiation dialogue is an important factor in bringing about a successful outcome. It sets the tone, direction and behaviour of the participants. In transactional analysis terms, hostage negotiators use ‘adult to adult’ communication – they talk as equals, rather than taking a dominant or subordinate position. They are trained to develop a ‘we/they’ relationship so that they might deepen their bond. In collaborative buyer/supplier negotiations ‘adult to adult’ conversations tend to naturally occur, although where the buyer has more power, the approach can become distributive (competitive) and a ‘parent to child’ mode can develop.

Diminishing returns

When it comes to the negotiation phase, in both cases initial demands are normally unreasonable, such as the release of terrorists, large sums of money or overpriced products. These are diminished through the process of bargaining, for instance the hostage negotiator will chip away at the situation by offering minor concessions such as food/water in exchange for hostage. President Sarkozy, when mayor of a Paris suburb, had to negotiate with a hostage taker holding a nursery class and their teacher for several hours. He is recorded as requesting ‘two children for two bags of dough’. The siege ended successfully.

However, in a negotiation there is always a limit on trade-offs, and hostage negotiators will aim to convey that each concession needs to be sanctioned by a higher authority, thereby distancing themselves from the ultimate decision maker and enabling them to retain rapport. This can also happen in commercial negotiations where the partnership dynamics need to be protected in ‘bottleneck/strategic’ relationships.

Much research has been carried out into the sequencing of the hostage negotiator’s requests and resulting compliance by the hostage taker. It would seem the best approach is to ask several ‘high probability’ requests (a high probability that the hostage taker will agree) first and then a low probability request shortly thereafter. The theory is that a pattern of consensus and agreement can start to shift a defensive mindset. Likewise, many commercial negotiators prefer to demand small concessions early on while working towards the deal breaker for the finale.

One of the toughest challenges in any negotiation is when one party imposes a deadline. It’s a form of threat that needs immediate evaluation: can it be moved, broken or ignored? More often than not a hostage taker likes to lay down a number of deadlines at the outset as a show of force. Trained hostage negotiators will talk through them as if they don’t exist, and only when mentioned a second time are taken more seriously. Police records reveal that in the main deadlines turn out to be flexible, which is worth bearing in mind by buyers who feel pressured into sewing up a deal.

A hostage negotiation is an extremely difficult situation to navigate. The nearest parallel might be a supplier holding an organisation to ransom when market forces are constrained, for example a monopoly or duopoly. The classic negotiation continuum doesn’t adequately account for this because it presupposes a willingness on both sides to negotiate. However, the framework can be adapted to allow for such commercial hostage situations (see diagram at foot of page).

There are elements of the hostage negotiation process and in particular the relational aspects that buyers could consider when dealing with dominant, unwilling entities. At least if one party is willing, an attempt can be made at behavioural change through a long-term plan focused on positive and firm action. It’s not the easiest of negotiations, but at least it’s savings targets and pride that are at stake, rather than someone’s life.

Lastly, in commercial negotiations we are unlikely to suffer from Stockholm Syndrome, where hostages start to sympathise with their captors. Or are we?  The three tell-tale signs are: hostage takers have frequent contact with hostages, interaction is positive, and the hostage situation is lengthy. Maybe we should bear this in mind when dealing with some of those long-term strategic suppliers that we come into daily contact with, lest we start to go ‘native’ in supporting their business drivers more than our own.

☛ Andrea Reynolds is director of Cordie and a CIPS senior assessor for effective negotiation and lead tutor at the CIPS Henley Crammer programme