Those of you who follow my articles know that I admire Ichak Adizes. He is an international lecturer & consultant with not only great insights, but values.
He was lecturing recently about trust in the marketplace. He had emphasized a tough but fair approach, and one that would truly be a win-win for each party. You'd expect this of him, but what was unique, was that at the end of the talk, he was approached by a man who gave him an interesting thought: Shouldn't give and take be give and receive?
This was very fascinating to Ichak, and is so to me as well.
Certainly, we would agree (on paper at least) that we shouldn't, in good faith, just grab what we can, if we can. Rather, it might be inferred, might we expect to receive something in return, IF we are gracious in our approach? This makes sense, but it might be a bit soft for some of us when in tough negotiations; would we really get what we expected in return?
However, this wasn't the man's point. He said that taking is easy (probably for we type A's), but receiving is hard. Hmm, something to think about. One has to be willing to acknowledge what was given. There is emotion in receiving, and perhaps even a concession that the other has been fair, or even compassionate with you.
How do your challengers (negotiators) feel about you? Does it matter? Are you a better of worse negotiator for receiving rather than taking?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment