Start with No – Notes

  1. Have your own calculation ?
  2. Dont show “Neediness “ .
  3. Slow down … To be in control during negotiation..
  4. Don’t worry about Rejection . Rejection is a cause for neediness. It also means trying to be likeable. But also There cannot be any rejection; rejection means your adversary need something from you. If they do not need , then how can there be a rejection.
  5. In Labor Management Dispute – Find a union member who has a big ego , and wants to be liked . Use it ..
  6. It all because team gets killed when the chief negotiator has the neediness to be known as smart, to be liked, to feel important, and urge them to compromise.
  7. Wanting is fine, Needing is not.
  8. You do not need to close ; Your adversary needs to.
  9. In Japan, It is said that make decision through stomach; Not head nor Heart — But with Stomach.
  10. Forget “Yes” and Forget “Maybe” –
  11. Make them Say No.
  12. Negotiation means that Both parties have right to veto . Which is to be the case. And then it would be the idea.
  13. How will they like me; or How they will perceive my company ?
  14. Never, “Save the Adversary” or “Save the Relationship”.
  15. Un – “Qualified” adversary.
  16. Respect, Not Friendship, What you want ?
  17. More important then Friendship is “Effectiveness” and “Respect”.
  18. Why would you want to load down a business relationshipwith a lot of emotional baggage, including guilt, which can bethe by-product of “friendship”? It doesn’t work. It doesn’t pay.
  19. “Lieutenant Camp, you sure make some bad decisions in this air-plane, but don’t worry. As long as you at least do make decisions,we can fix the bad ones.”
  20. Understand the power of “No”.
    1. If you do not accept No, you are going to burn too many bridges
    2. No is not rejection; but a honest decision that can be discussed and reversed.
    3. No will bring you respect
  21. How to build “No” ?
    1. It needs a valid “Mission” and “Purpose”.
    2. Its an Airtight guide to effective decision making.
      1. Typical Conversation
        1. “Why take this deal?”
        2. “The whole thing sounds too good.””Maybe I can win even more.”
        3. “Why are they making this so easy?””What do they know that I don’t know?””This can’t be right.”
        4. “How can I get out of this?”
  22. If your negotiation serves a valid missionand purpose, you don’t have to worry about whether you getevery last dollar or concession out of the deal, or whether you
  23. gave enough dollars and concessions. You don’t worry about thelong-term relationship. You are not responsible for the otherparty’s decisions. You don’t care whether this contract is win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose. Such scorekeeping is sud-denly seen for what it is: arbitrary, empty, meaningless. You don’thave to worry about it anymore, and this freedom will liberateyou in a negotiation, believe me.
  24. If you’re not working on be-half of your own mission and purpose, you’re working on behalfof someone else’s.
  25. Problem is not to have an “I-Centered” mission
    1. The essential problem is that they are I-centered. They are set in the world ofthe individual building the mission and purpose.
  26. Money for money’s sake does corrupt; power for power’s sake does corrupt.
  27. Another problem with concentrating on money and power asa mission and purpose is that you’re scorekeeping, and score-keeping means you’re thinking about results over which you have no real control.
  28. W i n -ning isn’t everything, but the will to prepare to win is everything.”
  29. Having Valid M&P ?
    1. It must be set in the “Adversary World” ?
  30. You do not go anywhere without an adversary
  31. Likewise, the mission and purpose of the booking agent for the dance company in the negotiation with the program director was not to secure another week of touring for the company and increase its earnings. It was not to secure a commission for the booking agent and in-crease her earnings. It was to get this director to see and decide that presenting this particular dance company would bring cultural richness to her organization’s audiences and community,and to help the program director fulfill her organization’s ownmission and purpose.
  32. This is the day and age of teamwork in business, and the teammust have its own mission and purpose that is..
  33. In his excellent book Management: Tasks, Responsibilities, and Prac-tices, Peter Drucker dedicates many pages to the issue of under-standing what it is you really do—your mission and purpose. Hewrites, “Your business is never apparent. It requires in-depthquestioning that gives you a process that provides constant refo-cusing of what you do.” You must continuously analyze and ask yourself: What is my business? What is my mission? What is my purpose?
  34. My clients do not set sales targets, quotas, num-bers, percentages. Never. Instead, they set goals they can control…..
  35. Negotiation never ends.
  36. In a negotiation, nurturing will keep the negotiation going through thick and thin. Your ability to nurture will be the key tobringing the negotiation back to the table after a breakdown.Your ability to nurture your adversary, to put him or her at ease,is the key to assuring her that you are listening and that you valuewhat she has to say. Nurturing is also just another way to allowyour adversary to feel okay.
  37. Your job is to get informationfrom the adversary by asking questions, not to provide informa-tion by answering questions.
  38. Blank State
    1. For the negotiator, even a positive attitude is dangerous. Yes, it’strue. It can devolve quickly into neediness, into positive expec-tations. When I teach blank slate, I mean blank slate. And it’shard.
  39. Neither positive nor negative expectations have a place in mysystem. You blank slate and you negotiate, that’s all. When youhave a mission and purpose in place, when you have behavioralgoals in place, when you’ve established your plan to solve the realproblem, when you have laserlike focus—when you have all thisgoing for you, why would you want to climb on any kind ofemotional roller coaster of expectations?

Rhetoric of Motives – Kenneth Bruke – Summary

  • Persuasion (classical) vs identification (using pretext to gain individual advantage)
Part I: The Range of Rhetoric
  • “Rhetorical” – written for a purpose with an audience in mind
  • Analyzing poems by Milton and Arnold – trying to bring them together as instances of the same motivation
    • Also insisting that the unique context of each makes the motive itself different
    • To connect to Coleridge as well, need a motive that can serve as ground for “both choices” – can ambiguously contain both
  • Poets identify themselves with their characters and ritualistically transform their texts
    • IE: “desire to kill” someone is the desire to transform the principle they represent
  • The “logical idea of a thing’s essence can be translated into a temporal or narrative equivalent by statement in terms of the thing’s source or beginnings”
    • Puns (?) of logical and temporal priority
    • Can also use “an ultimate of endings” – depict a thing’s end to identify its essence
  • Must consider “proportions of a motivational recipe”
  • Rhetoric is the region of insult, injury, bickering, squabbling, malice, lies
    • Killing, enmity, strife, invective, polemic, eristic, logomachy – all aspects of rhetoric
    • Also includes resources of appeal: sacrificial/evangelical love, sexual love, neutral communications
  • Imagery leads to transformation, and transformation leads to ideas and imagery of identification
    • IE: killing (imagery) something changes it (transformation), and the things nature before/after change (transformation) is an identifying of it
  • Where interests are joined, A identifies with B – or A may identify himself with B, even if there interests aren’t joined
    • They are simultaneously distinct and consubstantial
  • Identification is indicative of division – if there were not division, we wouldn’t need identification – identification proclaims unity in the face of division
  • Ethos: the properties (qualities) someone surrounds themselves with to establish identity
  • Invitation to rhetoric: place where identification and division come together ambiguously
  • The rhetorician and the moralist come together where the attempt is made to reveal identification in accordance with property
  • Even if an activity is reduced to intrinsic, autonomous principles, it could still be influenced by external motivation and thus subject to identification
    • Identification is for the autonomous activity’s place in the wider context
  • “Belonging” to a group via identification through a specialized activity is rhetorical
    • Science is not autonomously good – it is identified with motives and ethical attitudes
  • To sympathize with people greatly different from us, we need “imagery of a richly humane spontaneous poetry”
  • Ends justify means – politician can still be “rhetorically honest” if he lies, but means to do well – only thought he could get votes via the lie
  • Poetic language is a symbolic action (for itself and in itself); rhetoric is inducement to action
  • Rhetorician’s “tricks of the trade” are an art, not a science
  • Nothing is more rhetorical than deliberation – controversy = rhetorician’s forever “proving opposites”
  • Rhetoric is an art of persuasion, or means of persuasion available for any given situation
  • Realistic: when one symbol-using entity uses symbols to induce action in another; idealistic: consubstantiality established between being of unequal status
Part II: Traditional Principles of Rhetoric
  • Persuasion: choice, will (insofar as a person is free); rhetoric: formative effect on attitude
  • Range: rhetoric as “art of cheating” to rhetoric as power
  • The kind of opinion with which rhetoric deals is not contrasted with truth
    • Opinion is the moral order of action, not “scenic” order of truth
  • Topics must be timely
  • Tradition evidences of rhetorical motive: persuasion, exploitation of opinion, a work’s nature as addressed, literature for use, verbal deception, the “agonistic” generally, words used “sweetly,” formal devices, the art of proving oppositions
  • Most thoroughgoing rhetorical device is amplification
  • Three purposes of audience: 1) hear advice for future, 2) pass judgment on past, 3) or general interest in subject at hand
    • As such, Aristotle’s 3 kinds of rhetoric: deliberative, forensic, epideictic
  • “Titles”: ideas and images – rhetoric uses titles to identify someone/thing with whatever will call forth the desired response – select titles with bias of intention and opinions of audience
    • Image uses imagination to “contain a while bundle of principles”
  • Ideology is a kind of rhetoric – have led to social/political choices
  • Associating an idea with an image is mechanical, a conditioned reflex
  • Nonverbal elements persuade via symbolic character – “paper need not know the meaning of fire in order to burn” – the “idea” of it is persuasive
    • Thus, rhetorical motive lurks in every “meaning”
  • Rhetorical persuasion and identification: relies on social implications of the enigmatic
    • Acceptance of “enigma” as element in symbol’s persuasiveness leads us to note the place of “magic” or “mystery” as a passive reflection of class culture and an active way to maintain cultural cohesion
  • “Infancy” – empirical objects treated as symbols of a generating principle
  • An idea comprises personal, sexual, social, and universal promises
  • With symbol-using animal: logic of symbols must be “prior” to the effects of any “productive forces” in the socioeconomic meaning of an expression
  • Language can be used to deceive: rhetorical analysis seeks to expose mystifications
  • Theology is implicit in persuasion: it is the ultimate reach of communication between different classes of being
Part III: Order
  • Positive terms: name the things of experience – visible, tangible existence located in time and place
  • Dialectical terms: competing voice talk/argue with each other
  • Ultimate terms: competing voices placed in a hierarchy – arranged developmentally with relation to one another
    • Guiding idea/unitary principle behind diversity of voices
  • Bias is false promise, but still promise – if you eliminate all bias, you deprive society of its primary motive power
  • “Principle of courtship” – the use of suasive devices to transcend social estrangement
  • 3 motives: the order, the secret, the kill
  • “Pure persuasion”: saying something for the intrinsic satisfaction of saying it – not for extraverbal advantage – in fact, may seem to go against aims
    • IE: puzzle solver: either gives up or solves the puzzle – either way, is no better off than before – the value of the puzzle is intrinsic
  • Hierarchies:
    • 1) Constructed on basis of numerous negatives to the degree to which they are followed
    • 2) Hierarchic principle is inevitable, but no particular hierarchy is inevitable
    • 3) Hierarchies serve as motives – IE to rise or maintain socioeconomic position
  • Mystery – Three ways to create mystery via physical/experiential separation of individuals
    • 1) Occupational psychosis: particular way of thinking adopted from long term pursuits
    • 2) Terministic screen: specialized vocabulary that reflects selective view of reality
    • 3) Trained incapacity: development of limited view of reality via training/experience
  • Functions of mystery?
    • 1) Maintenance and preservation of hierarchy – encourages obedience
    • 2) Instrument of governance, cohesion, and preservation of the nature of a hierarchy
Things Which I Found Online but Are Important To Know
  • Rhetoric of Motives: showing that rhetoric exists in literature not purposely intended to persuade
    • Identifying real people with characters in literature story may be seen as an argument about how we can/should understand that person
  • “Wherever there is persuasion, there is rhetoric, and wherever there is ‘meaning’ there is ‘persuasion’”
  • “You persuade a man insofar as you can talk his language by speech, gesture, tonality, order, image, attitude, idea, identifying your ways with his”
  • Aristotle: persuasion is ethos, pathos, logos
    • Burke: new ways to see persuasion and identification (a broader process), not just gaining audience assent
      • Primary aim of rhetoric is to win an argument (Aristotelian) – it’s to make a connection – Burke shifts imagery of the persuasive encounter from a duel to a courtship
      • Goes both ways: audience to speaker, speaker to audience, but still audience-centered (New Rhetoric)
      • Individuals who try to form themselves in accordance with the cooperative communicative norms of society are also concerned with identification – individual must act upon him/herself
      • No use for rhetoric by yourself – need an audience, even if it’s only yourself
    • Booth: rhetoric is finding good reasons to change minds and being open to them
      • Booth also uses Burke’s Pentad – I think to argue against rhetoric of doubt
    • Pentad: Act, Scene, Agent, Agency, Purpose
      • Way of analyzing any rhetorical statement
      • Ratios: relationships between elements of pentad – examining ratios aids the critic in discovering which term in the pentad receives the greatest attention by the rhetor
    • Substances (common images, ideas attitudes) create acts – a process of acting-together
    • Substance: stands under the word (medieval in origin) – distinguishes substance (what holds up a word) from accidents (what you sense) – substance cannot be sensed by definition
    • Goal of rhetoric: consubstantiality – the substance that is you united with the audience
      • Consubstantial – individual, but part of a group by similar experience
      • Substance of acting together = consubstantial experience
      • Science can be perverted by consubstantiality (Nazis)
    • Most serious problem of humanity: alienation/separation – rhetoric find a common ground and brings people together
    • Identification – imaginary act in which you assume someone else is standing in your shoes
    • Identification: three ways it functions:
      • 1) means to an end (politics), 2) antithesis (creating identification via opposing entities through basis of common enemy), 3) persuasion on unconscious level (convincing someone to agree with specific action so they do not appear negatively
    • Identification is possible because we share consubstantiality – commonality of substance – physical body, aspirations, language)
      • Recognizing and building on this becomes a rhetorical possibility because it heals the wound of separation
    • Motive: motif, reason why, and something that moves along
    • Magic and socialization: to live in a social condition, you need rhetoric (Lanham)
      • Socialization means learning some kind of rhetoric to keep communication lines open
    • Terministic screens: set of symbols that becomes a grid/screen of intelligibility through which the world makes sense to us – we see the world as our symbol systems allow us to
      • Socrates: man as symbol using animal is unique
      • Weaver: calls these “god terms” – words that conceal the meaning and values behind them – words you don’t want to argue with
        • Culturally reflective: every culture has a terms that “screens out” differences you might attend to
      • Words and ideas are not tangible – refer to collection of ideas we have about the specific word (Kant, Saussure [1906-1911], Derrida)

Crucial Conversation

If we take control of our stories, they won’t control us.
* Winning. This particular dialogue killer sits at the top of many of our lists
* Punishing. Sometimes, as our anger increases, we move from wanting to win the point to wanting to harm the other person.
* Sometimes we choose personal safety over dialogue.
* First, clarify what you really want.
* Second, clarify what you really don’t want

* You know what? We need to talk about this. I’m glad you asked the question. Thank you for taking that risk. I appreciate the trust it shows in me.