Plausible Deniability is Not Sufficient Excuse
It can be easy when negotiating to be taken in by arguments containing slim content items allowing ‘plausible deniability’. Indeed, such arguments encourage more generous negotiators to give the person the benefit of the doubt.
Those with long memories will recall a similar argument, now almost amusing in retrospect, being taken to its extreme. This was when US President Richard Nixon claimed over the Watergate scandal ‘if the President does it, it’s not illegal’. Maybe this will be the argument proffered by our political leaders to negotiate their way out of claims of wrongdoing. Of course, in the meantime, they know nothing…
To counter the impact of such tactics, skilled negotiators need to be able to stand back sufficiently far from the substance of what is being denied. The influencing process that lies behind it will then become apparent.
Stand Back from The Substance and See The Process
This requires that you become good at negotiation process observation and diagnosis. Until you have that capability you will ‘know nothing’!
Question: when did either your own, or neighborhood children last use ‘plausible deniability’ tactically?
And when did you…?
Tips on Countering Tactics
In our ENSI negotiation training we help participants become proficient in identifying the tactics being used by the other party, and then from our ENSI lists select the most effective counter-tactic by which to redress the balance of power.
The easy three step process is to:
- Identify the tactic – prior to negotiating anticipate what tactic/s the other party might use to influence you
- Review what process (not content) options you have for countering each tactic the other party may use
- Select the counter move – again, prior to negotiation, consciously choose the most appropriate counter-tactic for the outcome you wish to achieve.