Skip to main content
managing books

Deepak Malhotra’s new book uses a deal between the NFL and its players association to illustrate how reframing can be used in negotiations to create room for a mutually beneficial solution.Mark Zaleski/The Associated Press

Negotiating the Impossible: How to Break Deadlocks and Resolve Ugly Conflicts (without Money or Muscle)

By Deepak Malhotra

Berrett-Koehler, 212 pages, $39.95)

In 2011, the NFL and its players association were deadlocked in negotiations over revenue sharing. The owners wanted $2-billion (U.S.) off the top to support investments in the game, with the rest shared between the two parties, the players to receive about 58 per cent. The players insisted on a 50-50 split of total revenue.

A breakthrough occurred after it was decided to split revenue into three buckets, with players receiving 55 per cent of revenue from TV rights, 45 per cent of revenue from related businesses of the NFL and 40 per cent of local stadium revenue. Overall, players were getting about 47.5 per cent of revenues.

But the three buckets allowed each side to return to their constituents and declare victory, with the owners gaining more money where their investments are greater, the stadium rental, and the players raking in more when fans click on to see them on the tube.

It's an example of reframing – stepping back from the normal negotiating framework and developing a new way of looking at issues that creates room for a solution. And it's one of three key levers to improve your negotiating, according to Harvard Business School professor Deepak Malhotra. The other two are the power of process and the power of empathy. Using those levers can help you achieve a solution in tough, deadlocked negotiations or ugly disputes without resorting to money or muscle.

"When the NFL negotiations were deadlocked, either side could have tried to make the deal more attractive to the other by reducing their own revenue demands. But this would have been a costly concession. As the solution they reached shows, you do not always have to throw money at the problem to move things along. Sometimes wise concessions on style and structure can solve the problem more cheaply than costly concessions on substance," he writes in Negotiating the Impossible.

In framing, he stresses paying attention to the optics of the deal. Too often negotiators are obsessed with the substance, but it must be presented in an acceptable way. "The role of optics is especially pronounced when there is an audience. The audience can be voters, the media, competitors, future negotiation partners, a boss, colleagues, or even friends and family. We are usually aware of our own audience, but we pay insufficient attention to theirs. In fact, their audience is just as important to consider as ours, especially if we are asking them to back down or make hasty concessions," he says.

Indeed, he urges you to go further and help the other side sell it, echoing negotiating guru William Ury's advice to "write their victory speech." Prof. Malhotra says if you can't think of a way they can construe the agreement as a "win," you may be in trouble. Avoid one-issue negotiations since that can create a zero-sum situation in which at least one of you is going to look like or feel like you have lost.

Instead, negotiate multiple issues – simultaneously – so there can be trade-offs and the risks reduced that concessions won't be reciprocated.

The second vital area requires developing a strategy for how the process of negotiations will unfold. How will you get from where you are today to where you want to be? How long will negotiations last? Who will be involved and in what capacity? Who will draft the initial proposal? Will negotiations be public or private? When and how will progress be reported? Given multiple parties or issues, will there be one negotiation track or many? Will all the parties be in the same room at the same time? How will major deadlocks or other problems be managed? Who are the parties that need to ratify the deal, and how much support is sufficient for passage?

"While getting the substance right is essential, getting the process wrong can be fatal," he warns.

He turns to the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962 to highlight the power of empathy. Much has been written about the team of advisers president John F. Kennedy set up and his decision to remove himself at a crucial time so his advisers could freely debate.

But Prof. Malhotra points to the unusual perspective the president took: "What made the difference was JFK's willingness to consider [Soviet leader Nikita] Khrushchev's point of view, and to investigate precisely why the Soviet Union felt compelled to transfer nuclear weapons to Cuba, even when it risked starting a war. There were, it turns out, a number of such reasons – and understanding them was pivotal."

Empathy expands the options you have for resolving the conflict. The better you understand the other side's perspective, the more likely it is you will forge a solution.

This book was an unexpected gem. The three elements – framing, process and empathy – seemed unconnected and somewhat abstract initially. But each of the short, tidy chapters features an illuminating example of a negotiation where one of the factors was critical and Prof. Malhotra follows up with clear-minded suggestions to improve the chances your negotiations will be successful.

Harvey Schachter is a Kingston, Ont.-based writer specializing in management issues. He writes Monday Morning Manager and management book reviews for the print edition of Report on Business and an online column, Power Points. E-mail Harvey Schachter

Follow related authors and topics

Authors and topics you follow will be added to your personal news feed in Following.

Interact with The Globe