I recently watched a TV show on the History channel called American Pickers. It’s about two guys that drive around looking for old junk, or rather what they call “rusty gold.” When they find an antique they think they can resell for a profit, they begin negotiating for a price. And as suspected, they want to pay less than the seller wants to sell for. You could call this a conflict. This is where the negotiating begins, to understand why someone places a different value on something from the value you place on it. It would be easy to start saying things like “you are being greedy” or “you are being cheap.” Or it could get even more personal with attacks like “you are a thief” or “you are a pig-headed…”, well you get the idea.
But instead of saying what someone is being like, or worse, saying what you think they are, they use a language that describes “where” they are. Instead of visualizing themselves as enemies, they visualize where they both are on the same map. So you hear a negotiation that sounds something like: “you are at $35 and I am at $25.” When they can both see where they are on a common map, it helps them find a way to meet in the middle. Is there something here that leaders can learn from pickers?
But instead of saying what someone is being like, or worse, saying what you think they are, they use a language that describes “where” they are. Instead of visualizing themselves as enemies, they visualize where they both are on the same map. So you hear a negotiation that sounds something like: “you are at $35 and I am at $25.” When they can both see where they are on a common map, it helps them find a way to meet in the middle. Is there something here that leaders can learn from pickers?
RSS Feed