Quit complaining - become a leader anyway.

I've felt frustrated many times when younger, or in new roles, about not being heard.

I felt I had valuable ideas to help the organisation - but was often cranky at lacking the chance to sell my ideas.

Best tip ever - dress for success. Act the role you want - don't wait to be asked or invited. The tips here are classic reminders of the basic plan to pre-position.  It's almost pure Dale Carnegie.

Try - and hold on it so those around have time to take in what's happening, the new you you've become.  

Dignity ? Over rated.

Getting the result you want from a negotiation? Brilliant

How well do you understand the difference between 'content' and 'process'?

The Greek Prime Minister gets it - by swapping out a negotiation team member (process) in their negotiations about their debt (content)

Be clear in critical negotiations between WHAT you are discussing and HOW you go about it  - e.g. whats for sale and how much is very different from how you go about the process of working with your customer, and how you manage the time, place and behaviours of your team.

What's your pattern in these different roles? Mine = Three things. 

1/ Life is negotiation. Knowing who you are and what you want is important. Do your homework - on you...

2/ Start Early. Negotiations are won or lost way before the 

sit-down. Do your homework. Especially about the other party...

3/ Be creative. Keep playing with ideas and options. Avoid getting stuck in an arm-wrestle. Understand the difference between WHAT you're negotiation about, and how best to achieve that.

What were they thinking? The managers that use these anti-influencing phrases?

Odds are, they were not thinking - and that's where the trouble starts.

Positively influencing employee or stakeholder behaviour simply does not work with the negative.

So where do we get these lame phrases from? Chances are, like parents, we repeat what we were told by our parents, or in the workplace, our old managers or supervisors when we were younger.

They are often automatic, reflexive and unthinking. And they do untold damage.

If someone is behaving in a way you would like to positively influence, start by doing what happened at the beginning of this commentary - as some questions. (Withhold judgment and labelling - keep emotion out of  it).

Make sure your honest intent is received as genuinely trying to understand.It's hard - it took me until I was in my 40's before I was clearer with this.

And guess what, often the act of answering your questions will have the other party self-declare the better way...

Why is effective remote management so hard?

And especially in stakeholder management, and influence.

Valerie's suggestions are common-sense, and do-able. 

My only suggestion would be to reverse the order e.g. start with your own self-management first, then your upwards communication, and next get your team connections working effectively.

Within the ENS International framework, this means being clear about your own needs (and issues) first, then the others around you.

What's the topic I'm talking about? It's harder to do, but better in the end!   Exercise? - Sort of - it's DIVERSITY. 

A broader range of experiences, attitudes, viewpoints, even biases - helps thinking, creativity, and innovation according to this article and the research behind it.

That sounds challenging, but ultimately useful, if your company or team have creative or innovative brief. Product development, application development, engineering, marketing, sales etc etc

So what also springs to mind at an even broader level - an everyday activity that is found as well at the highest levels of complexity and risk where people interact?  Yes, influence and persuasion.

30+ years of research and practitioner experience have highlighted some key principles for effectively working together with stakeholders and other parties. Here's three that are dramatically strengthened by diversity.

Firstly, really, I mean really, understanding what all the stakeholders (yours, and the other parties) needs are.

Second, the brainstorming of options and alternatives.

Third - the ability to plan for and consciously adopt the most appropriate behavioural style and interactions.

Difficulties or sub-optimal strategy or execution on these three (let alone the many others to get right) can sabotage or lessen the likelihood of you maximising outcomes and minimising risk.

Team diversity, in planning, pre-meetings, strategy, and the later formal stages of negotiation, can pay big dividends - especially if you map somewhat to the other parties in doing so.

It can be harder, at first, but like exercise, it's worth it in the long run.

"You've got to find common ground, you simply have to," - a classic ENS International foundation concept.

Dr Davis also highlights the need to deeply, truly understand the wider circle of stakeholder and their needs.

He accused "members of Nigeria's political opposition of sponsoring the more extreme elements of the group in order to weaken the ruling party."  which is a powerful example of motivators that can exist un-noticed by the less expereinced.

Helping the Expert communicate is a challenge. In Proposals. Interviews. Testimony. And Negotiations.

In a commercial for two fine looking books the key message here by Nick Morgan is a timely reminder of a foundation idea for ENS International customers and practitioners -  'Find The Common Ground' !!!

Focussing on the differences rarely achieves much except in the expansionarystages of a negotiation or creative process.

But for a mixture of stakeholders to come together, and act in concert - they will most often do so around areas, topics, interests, beliefs and outcomes they have in common.

Public pay increases trust - by increasing insight, accurate measurement (instead of guesses) - and improves overall performance.

PLUS - takes gender off the table (and all the other biases)

Influencing understanding, culture (beliefs) and creating positive action benefits from 'truth' - based on facts not beliefs.

This is classic hi-value blogging - well researched, well linked, very helpful.

I suggest you dive down and read all the links - saving the items of most value to you...

An excellent summary of the background and techniques that will make a big difference for you 

All male boards? Poor performance, and higher tax evasion.

Diversity triggers a more efficient use of capital, and is actually less of a burden on society.

Want to influence behaviour at senior levels? - changing the gender mix of the stakeholders in most situations will improve outcomes.

This article highlight improved ethical and social responsibility outcomes - I've also seen it in mergers where excessive testosterone was holding up collaboration (destroying shareholder value)

Most influence is not about the facts - it's usually about emotional triggers, needs and drivers. And most power is taken rather than offered.

More females in a group seems to stop the more 'schoolboy - try and get away with it' behaviours of an majority male group by the higher risk shame by being called or challenged on dodgy behaviours.

As an investor, what are your biases on this topic?

I love my job - helping people and B2B companies who do good work, win more work. And working with the perceptions of their customers to do so.

But is saddens me to see the techniques of communication and influence used in the ways described in this article by Alex Frankel.

Deflecting, hiding and misdirecting are influential, so the intent behind the use of these techniques requires diligence to be aware of and see behind what's being manipulated.

Consumer advertising is almost cheerfully, openly manipulative.

B2B where I work we stress openness and transparency...

Politics seems to pretend to be honest while being the most manipulative of all. Dirty work - for someone else not me.

For over 40 years my fathers mantra was 'people buy from people' - not companies. Not just tender eval spreadsheets.

Good business, long term business, is built on relationships and trust.

No surprises there. But the rise and rise of procurement has gotten lost sometimes in using the threat of withdrawal of spend as a stick for better prices.

What this study confirms is that your actually get better prices by finding and agreeing on common ground than old-school 'zero-sum-game' negotiation.

Good news for common sense...

There is NO level playing field. For a while (boom times generally) liberal economies pushed the idea of an open, global trading world.

The ironically named 'Free Trade' agreements were touted as the next best thing for the world.

Unfortunately, there were biases in the setup and operation of many of these agreements - hooks, catches and caveats. And many illiberal economies just ignored them - a growing trend.

And as a timely reminder that soliciting is not the exclusive preserve of the transnational corporations, here are examples of foreign governments co-opted in the battles for influence that surge around the world.

So if you are in any way responsible for influencing stakeholders, impacting project or deal outcomes, just be very clear when you do your situational analysis, exactly who the entities are, that you are up against.

Sometimes the guise of being non-partisan is the perfect mask or shield to create more powerful influence than being overt.

The best negotiators take NOTHING for granted.

Ignore the hats!  A distraction from the real story here, which is a reinforcement of the desired outcome (not the tactics along the way).

If you intend and desire a longer term relationship - e.g. industry participant Vs one off sale - then your approach should support that perspective.

eg don't wear the wrong psychological 'hat' at the wrong time in the wrong way if it diminishes your desired outcome. 

It feels like it's about time some real negotiators posted or blogged on slighter deeper issues, topics and examples than this.

Where would I find such people....?