Foad Forghani: Satellite Negotiations
Managers rarely have to conduct just one negotiation. Most of the time, they are surrounded by multiple negotiation threads: Negotiations with suppliers, negotiations with the works council, negotiations with customers, department and division managers, authorities, partner companies, and with other entities and partners. The more responsibility a person carries, the greater the number of negotiations they have to conduct. If each negotiation thread surrounding the negotiator can be considered and conducted in isolation, a normal negotiation constellation is present. However, often the negotiation threads interact with each other. For example, the tug of war with the customer over their requirements has an effect on the discussions that need to be held with the sales department in this context. The confrontation with the works council and especially its outcome influences coordination talks that subsequently take place with department and division managers. In such a negotiation environment, negotiations are interdependent. The outcome of one negotiation influences the framework conditions as well as the result of the other negotiation. Thus, a political negotiation environment is present. It would be amateurish to consider each individual negotiation thread in such a constellation in isolation and autonomously. Such a situation requires first recognizing the dependencies between the various negotiations. For this purpose, the negotiator must assume a meta-position, a so-called satellite position. From the bird's eye view of the satellite, all affected negotiations must be prioritized, their dependencies recognized, and their importance and urgency, and especially the impact on other negotiations, analyzed and taken into account. Only then can decisions be made on which goals to aim for in each individual negotiation case and which strategies and tactics to choose. Anything else, such as attempting to maximize the outcome in each individual negotiation case, is doomed to fail. This can have a devastating effect on other negotiations that are interdependent. To illustrate satellite negotiations vividly, one can imagine a chessboard in their mind's eye, where the pieces are connected with threads. If one piece is pulled too strongly or too far, the other pieces fall over. Satellite negotiations must always be viewed in their entirety. Anyone who wants to maximize the outcome in these negotiations must have an eye on the total sum of all affected negotiations, not the maximum in each autonomously considered negotiation.
