Don’t negotiate with yourself
Woulda, coulda, shoulda mind games will drive you over the edge.
By Michael Feuer
March 2008
Everyone who is anyone
has a top 10 list of this or
that. So why should I be any different? At the top of
my list of the biggest time
waster is, “negotiating with
yourself.” It’s superfluous and
an exercise in futility. The
only good news is if you’re an
investor in the makers of
Maalox or Valium, it is a
proven revenue enhancer.
Asking yourself repetitive
and numerous rhetorical questions will thrust you into a
vicious cycle on a road to
nowhere. It’s much like playing pingpong with yourself:
There is never a winner.
From time to time, we all
engage in this exasperating
process. However, when
negotiating with yourself
becomes a habitual routine
for you, you’re well on
your way to diluting your
effectiveness and driving
the people around you to
distraction or worse.
Do not confuse this negative mental gymnastic with
the more productive process
of playing “what if” games.
The difference is with “what
if” scenarios you should
deal with a series of facts
to which you can add various suppositions to predict
the most likely outcomes. This
is simply good business and
prepares you for whatever
battle you’re about to embark
upon, such as buying a competitor or making almost any
type of deal. A thoughtful and
reasoned negotiating strategy
is loosely similar to the lessons of physics, which teaches
us that, “For every cause,
there is an effect; for action,
there is a [predictable]
reaction.” On the flip
side, it’s of no value
to negotiate with yourself, without concrete facts,
trying to guess what someone
is going to say or do.
Negotiating with oneself can
migrate from the subconscious
to the conscious and then
erupt into a full-fledged traumatic episode. After submitting
your proposal and before you
receive any feedback, you conjure up myriad responses that
you think you might receive,
engaging in a second-guessing
game of woulda, coulda, shoulda. In the cross-examination of
a witness, attorneys call this
“asked and answered.” This
may play well on the TV show
“Boston Legal,” but in real-life
business, it’s a waste of energy.
In essence, under the majority
of circumstances you can predict with a relatively high
degree of certainty how the
other side will respond. As a
way of an example, let’s examine the key factors in a typical
acquisition by one company of
another. First, Company A
decides to buy Company B
because there are management, market and/or economic
synergies. Company A makes
its offer and the decision usually gets down to three fundamental considerations.
First, what is the price, as in
“show me the money?” Is it
fair or a low-ball offer?
Moreover, who gets how
much and when? Secondly, at
the end of the day, which side
will get to call the shots in the
newly configured venture?
Combining management
teams and calling it a merger
of equals and keeping everybody happy is about as likely
as finding peace in the Middle
East in the next 30 days. It
sounds great, but, unfortunately, the desired results are usually nothing more than a PR
spin based on fairy tales.
Thirdly, which side will be perceived as the winner in the
public’s eye? This is particularly significant in public company transactions. Keep these
types of predicable formulas
in mind because, based on
empirical results, they are
good antidotes for negotiating
with yourself.
Here is a simple preventive
method to avoid endless self-doubt during the downtime
between when you make
your offer and when you get
that first response. After you
fire your opening salvo in the
form of whatever you’re
offering, then stand down
and wait until there is something to respond to other
than your own self-doubts
and negative thoughts.
Although it will take a herculean effort and willpower,
refrain from questioning your
proposal and always give the
other side first opportunity to
respond. This will eliminate
or, at least, dramatically
reduce your own internalized
histrionics. You’ll not only be
more productive, but you’ll
be a better leader and possibly a happier executive.
Remember, there are a lot
better ways to get your exercise other than playing a game
of pingpong with yourself.
MICHAEL FEUER co-founded OfficeMax in 1988 with a friend and partner. Starting with one store during a 16-year span, Feuer, as CEO, grew the company to almost 1,000 stores worldwide, with annual
sales approximating $5 billion before selling this retail giant for almost $1.5 billion in 2003 to Boise
Cascade Corp. Feuer immediately launched another start-up, Max-Ventures, a retail/consumer products
venture capital operating and consulting firm headquartered in suburban Cleveland, Ohio. Feuer serves
on a number of corporate and philanthropic boards and is a frequent speaker on business, marketing and
building entrepreneurial enterprises. Reach him with comments at mfeuer@max-ventures.com.
