If You Don’t Cultivate Alternatives Until You Need Them, It’s Too Late.
At Conlego, we believe negotiation is a problem-solving exercise that, when done well, unlocks greater collective value than could be achieved independently. Over the decades, we’ve facilitated truly paradigm-shifting negotiations. As singular and unique as each one of these breakthrough deals was, our experience teaches us that certain truths transcend nuance and context. Indeed, we’ve taught thousands of professionals across disparate disciplines how to apply “The Conlego Five” to great effect in negotiation. And yet, these tools are feckless if not accompanied by a willingness to develop and use leverage.
What can a Himalayan expedition from over 50 years ago teach us about negotiation?
In his National Book Award-winning masterpiece The Snow Leopard, Peter Matthiessen chronicles his 1973 expedition with field biologist George Schaller through the Tibetan plateau in Nepal. Tibetans believe that obstacles encountered during an arduous journey are the work of demons, eager to test the sincerity of the pilgrims and eliminate the fainthearted among them. Demons certainly haunted Matthiessen and Schaller; their passage was made unusually difficult by a monsoon season lasting weeks longer than typical. Not only did this slow their progress, but it also threatened to seal off with early-season snow the very mountain passes that serve as the gateway to the highlands where Schaller’s blue sheep hid.
Several weeks into their journey, with supplies dangerously depleted from delay and a support team thinned from abandonment, Matthiessen and Schaller wake to find the owner of their horse team has arrived overnight to reclaim his animals for fear they would not survive the early snowfall.
Pinned down by deteriorating conditions and now without any horses to do the rucking, the exasperated explorers’ luck finally improved the morning after the horse repossession when a group of travelers arrived, taking shelter in a nearby cave. Like Matthiessen and Schaller, they, too, were bound for Tarakot, and their leader, who was the headman of that village, agreed to let his men serve as porters.
“This miracle comes slightly tarnished,” Matthiessen cautions, “since the headman is demanding and receiving three times the normal porterage.” Schaller didn’t flinch, acknowledging, “‘They know we are stranded, and they have us against the wall, it’s perfectly natural!’” There was no appetite for failure and no alternatives. No leverage. If they wanted to continue in pursuit of their chief interests behind the expedition, they must accept the headman’s terms.
How can we apply this 50 years later?
I have yet to be called to negotiate a porterage rate across the most distant reaches of the Himalaya, but Matthiessen and Schaller’s experience provides useful insight nonetheless. Thankfully, it is easier to find and cultivate alternative partners in retail negotiations than it is to replace a truant sherpa mid-expedition.
We know that preparation should account for 70% of the negotiation lifecycle. However, we often limit our view of preparation to mean only reviewing our data points and rehearsing our talking points. Both are vital to winning in negotiation. However, Conlego’s more expansive definition of preparation includes long-range thinking, contingency planning, and diversification. Negotiators must internalize their own interests and do everything they can to ascertain the interests that motivate their counterpart. Simultaneously, maestro negotiators develop alternatives, build contingencies, and intentionally cultivate leverage.
This broader view of preparation is unbiased towards immediacy and less dependent on circumstance. In fact, unanticipated circumstances are exactly what this view considers. In addition to improving leverage, qualifying viable alternatives provides a measuring stick negotiators can use to better contextualize and evaluate the cost of potential concessions in comparison to the value they might unlock.
To summarize, including an honest assessment of alternatives as part of your preparation does three things:
- It hardens a defensive strategy rooted in leverage.
- It encourages scenario-planning for a variety of potential outcomes.
- It helps you understand the value of your position and your concessions.
In sport, the best offense is a good defense. This can also be true in negotiation. We all need viable, vetted alternatives to reduce our vulnerability and strengthen our leverage, even if we do not anticipate an immediate use for these options. Partners go out of business, get acquired, change strategies, and flail about in shifting economic winds. Matthiessen and Schaller had no plan when the notoriously capricious sherpa abdicated their duties, the core vulnerability exploited by opportunistic travelers who offered an expensive lifeline in their moment of helplessness.
Embrace an expanded view of preparation. One that includes the deliberate nurturing of alternatives. Set a defensive strategy that future-proofs against an overreliance on a limited number of partners. Build your leverage before you need it. It’s too late to look for alternatives when you already need them.
