Selling Yourself in Negotiations 177
A basic principle
Some “posturing” may be necessary in your camp or in the
opponent’s camp in order to keep the “troops” happy, but each of
you should be prepared to acknowledge and accept it as part of
the negotiating process.
It’s remarkable that after a long, acrimonious strike, as the
settlement is announced, each side feels obliged to talk about how
good the contract is, how happy both sides are with the settle-
ment, and how much this means to everyone involved.
Why, oh why, couldn’t they have gotten there before the strike?A personal situation
I vividly remember an adversarial contract negotiation I was
involved in many years ago—at least it seemed adversarial to me
because I didn’t understand that I was part of a “game” being
played by two opposing attorneys.
Each side wanted to reach an agreement.
Each side saw terrific possibilities arising from the proposed
relationship.
Lots of the details had been hammered out between the attor-
neys on the telephone before this meeting ever took place. In fact,
the contracts were drafted, and supposedly all that remained was
for the signing to take place.
My attorney and I flew from New York to Chicago to “final-
ize” the deal. Three hours after the meeting began, the lawyers
were shouting at each other. The final numbers were conflicting.
My attorney slammed shut his attaché case, angrily said, “Come
on, Arch We’re walking,” and stormed out.
I had no idea what I was supposed to do. I’d never been in-
volved in a contract negotiation like this before. So I followed like
a newborn calf. By the time we reached the receptionist’s desk,
my lawyer winked at me as the other attorneys called us back into
the conference room, and we finalized the deal within minutes. It
was the “obligatory scene.” It was the expected tantrum. It was
high drama.
I hope those days of contract negotiations are over, but I fear
not. That was the way those particular attorneys felt they were