Do You Want Information or Transformation?
Unknown: Hi, and welcome to the
wealthy woman lawyer podcast.
I'm your host, Davina Frederick.
And I'm here today with Alan
McBride. Al is a coach,
consultant and entrepreneur. And
he particularly specializes in
strategic intervention coaching,
which is a an approach that
really uses different schools of
psychology. And in helping him
coach his clients and helping
them excel. I'm super excited to
have him here today, all the way
from Dublin, Ireland, I assume
that's where you are today. But
last time you and I spoke you
were in Germany, that are you in
Ireland today.
I'm actually back in Germany,
again, I'm back in Berlin, I
have been back in Dublin and
because at the moment, I'm
working between a few projects
in both places, so
corporations and other
professionals, particularly you
and I talked about, you're
coming on to the podcast,
because you work with litigation
attorneys, and you really help
people learn how to become
better negotiators.
Is that correct? That's correct.
As I say, I usually give people
the, the psychological edge in
negotiation, which is really
just how I put it in that sense
of, often a lot of negotiators
or people who have to negotiate
for a living. And as you say,
I've worked with litigators in
particular, but not exclusively.
And they're usually very
competent at negotiation,
Otherwise, they wouldn't really
get too far in litigation. But
I've also found that then
there's, they're very competent
at doing it. And usually, as I
say, they're very successful,
but they have several select
modes or ways of doing it, that
work a lot of the time until
they don't. And when they don't,
then they don't have maybe a
very good plan B nevermind, a
Plan C. So what I often give
them is that even though they're
highly competent in the
substance of what they're
saying, there can be these other
ways of being the the other ways
of looking at the situation and
dealing both with their own
client as well as with the other
side, their counterpart that
allows them to open up and get
on stock that allows them to see
more options and find more
options with the other side.
Because even when we you know,
with litigators, does that
situation, you know, are you
negotiating? Or are you in that
maybe that further end where
you're doing conflict resolution
of sorts and says litigation,
right. And, but even in those
situations, as a good as an old
colleague, and quite a good
friend of mine, one of my
earlier clients pointed out to
me is that even though you're
doing this conflict resolution
and things, and when there can
be a lot of aggression and
friction there, you're still
having to make a deal. And have
both sides happy enough with
that deal. Because otherwise,
you go too often you end up in
court, right? So that's always
the back of so that you're still
in that same area of, of having
Actually, both sides being happy
enough, or to a certain level of
contentment about the deal. But
it's particularly tricky and
challenging with litigators.
Because you're often starting
from from a position of high
emotions. Usually one side is at
the very least slighted if not
outright offended, but the
other. And so emotions can be
running high, because they're
tied into whatever it is, you're
litigating over. And so that you
find yourself in a situation
where it's often not always but
often at least one side, or are
what are aiming for if they
can't get what they want,
they're aiming for a lose, lose,
or at least a win, lose,
nevermind, win win. Because it's
like, as long as you're hurting,
I don't mind I'll hurt as long
as you're hurting, you know. And
that's, that's seriously
challenging for anyone trying to
try to reach an agreement. So,
so Yeah,
are you I got lots of questions
for you today. But before we
really would like to the
audience to get to know you a
little bit better in terms of
how, what led you to this, how
you got from where you were, to
really kind of specializing in
helping people get a
psychological edge in
negotiation and through having
more tools in their toolbox for
negotiation. What, Where did you
work? How did you begin your
career and what led you here?
Well, I mean, what to say is if
there's a few main avenues that
are probably relevant to this,
and that, you know, in
university, I did psychology
with art history. And then after
I came out of uni, I initially
went the art history route. I
was an art dealer, working
galleries and then my own as an
art consultant. And so through
both of those experience, I was
doing hundreds of deals, you
know, it was just niggles.
seating all the time. And it's
also in an area that's very
highly emotive. You know, even
when people are trying to make
rational decisions, it's all
about emotion. It's all about
how you're perceived, how the
artists perceived. And then
other aspects of investment and
all sorts of complications. So
very interesting area with a lot
of egos. A lot of, as I said,
emotion, and very, very
interesting, because a lot of
those deals were multi
dimensional. So it wasn't just a
transaction. There's a lot of
different parties going on,
because I particularly worked
with, with businesses, I wanted
to work with businesses buying
our supporting our hosts, that
kind of thing. And so I'd work
with architects or internal
interior designers,
architectural interior
designers, so I'd work with
larger scale projects, as well
as large businesses with the
businesses were trying to, to
build up an art collection for
various reasons, some partly for
investment, but a lot of them
were also for the purposes of
setting culture, within with the
staff and with the employees,
but also then, projecting that
outward almost had to be in
keeping with what they wanted
their image and of
differentiation to be for their
clients. So this is particularly
true. Also, again, law firms and
accountancy firms, professional
bodies were in many ways, your
scene is very similar to your
competitors, what I used to say,
what differentiates you, from
your competitor down the street?
Why should a client go with you?
And it's still a question I was
writing about this the other
day, because someone was asking
me about it. And this is why
it's relevant. And why should
someone go with you? What is it
that you do different? And
people can come up with the
usual corporate nonsense about
oh, serve the client better say,
Yeah, but what does that look
like? You know, how does that
what does that matter? So we
always remember that, you know,
there were law firms in London,
where one was founded in 1620.
So all their artworks were
paintings or actions or
furniture was ancient. And the
whole message was, we've been
here for 400 years, we're gonna
be here for another 400. So
we're like, if you're into that
more conservative, absolutely
solid, you know, slow to change,
but absolutely dependable, they
were your people, right?
Equally, there was a law firm
founded in the 60s, all about
innovation all the time, always
on the cutting edge. And so they
had artwork from every era, of
which they were the cutting
edge. So their whole things were
always the cutting edge, long
scale, not like cutting edge
from last year. So it's like
we're not we don't just see the
trends, we lead them and all of
that sort of good stuff. So they
it was a way for the art to
speak to both hiring as in if
you okay, we're all the same,
and you're all brilliant. But if
you want to work with us, we're
about these values. And so for
me, it's an awful lot about
values. And I think letting your
values come through in the
negotiation. So we can talk
about later.
hadn't thought about artwork,
your how your artwork is, it can
can help you communicate your
core values? Because I get it,
you know, I'm work virtually.
And I certainly think about it
in terms of website design
logos, you know, a lot of people
think about in terms of website
design and logos and colors,
palettes and schemes, what are
the colors mean? And all that I
never really, it's nothing I've
ever really thought about about
how I do no to core like I've
worked here for a walk before I
became a lawyer, I worked for a
law firm that was the venerable,
you know, traditional law firm
that like to communicate, they,
you know, and they have their
traditional sort of look in
their law firm. But you know,
here, we're not 400 years old,
they're more like, you know, and
that's the, you know, old,
right. And so they're decor
communicated that sort of
traditional firm, and you're
seeing a lot of young people now
are starting their firms. And
they're doing it remotely.
They're doing distributed and if
and there but their photography
that they're using is very
modern, it's very, you know, it
looks brighter, lighter, and it
conveys sort of this modern
current age sort of look, you're
not seeing as many of the Blue,
Navy blue websites and muddy
green, what sites you're seeing
things that are sort of
different. So it's a
fascinating, it's very
fascinating. And of course, as
artists, myself, I, I'm, I'm you
and I'd love to have that
conversation with you. But I
want to move you along to tell
you move from this high level
negotiation around art with
corporations, to sort of the
work that you do today. You're
working with a lot of different
corporations and business with
regard to negotiation
consulting, basically. So how do
you actually that transition
The transition was sort of
forced upon me like some great
transitions are because,
particularly in Ireland at the
time, though, you know, there
was the recession, 2007, and
eight. And there was also a
massive housing crisis and
whatnot in Ireland. And so
property crash. And so people
just weren't buying if that
wasn't gonna happen, luxury
goods were all time low. So I
had to do something else. So I
moved in a different direction,
and back toward the more the
psychological side, where I did
various foundational trainings
and counseling and
psychotherapy, and more so than
into the coaching side, I always
knew that the coaching side was
more, more my more my beat. And
I suppose just by doing training
and facilitating, both in
organizations, often in and
around areas of resilience and
performing under pressure, then
into areas of communications,
how to communicate effectively,
and with impact. They were all
going in and around the
negotiation, because I learned
from when I was an art theater
that how to put it that, you
know, I read a lot of
negotiation, and I realized more
and more, this has a huge
overlap, the modern stuff has a
huge overlap with coaching
skills. Right? So and modern
communication, methodology, how
to communicate better how to
gain rapport, how to grow
rapport, with complete
strangers, often from an
adversarial position, all of
this sort of stuff. So that was
really where it all started to
come together, where a lot of
this previous strands that
seemed separate started to come
together, as did you know, a lot
of my experience with various
entrepreneurial projects over
the years where, you know,
you're having to get out there,
you haven't proposed a solution,
you have to propose essentially
a sale, and how uncomfortable
that is, and how vulnerable you
feel, and all of these sort of
things that, as I said it all
we're coming together with this
this side of negotiation,
because good colleagues of mine
used to give me training work,
work started to give me people
who were quite competent
negotiators that had many years
experience, sometimes decades,
but they still feel they were
lacking something they still
feel there was a whole area that
they weren't familiar with. So
the new the standard negotiation
models for preparing and for
executing their negotiations,
but they fail, sometimes I
played sometimes, like they got
stuck or couldn't get unstuck,
or just it wasn't a terribly
satisfactory outcome, that they
felt they were leaving some form
of money or opportunity or
something on the table that they
weren't grasping. And when I
started working with them, it
was that the a lot of those
coaching skills, and
communication and those sort of
insights, help them unlock lower
some of their own ego defenses
and being able to build that
rapport to actually open up the
other side. So it's the classic
thing that we say easier said
than done, of moving someone
from an adversarial position to
an ally, more of an ally,
positioner. And don't forget,
like an ally people, people
think you know, your best mates
or something. No, you're not at
all, you know, written in
America, in the Second World War
had huge disagreements over all
sorts of things. But you had
generally this idea that you
were solving this problem, you
are tackling this challenge
together. And the more you can
get into that mindset, the more
both of you are actually adding
value to this thing, rather than
adding to the problem. Rather
than just scoring points off one
another in that traditional
adversarial position. Now, as I
said that, that's easier said
than done. But one of the things
that a lot of people miss, and
this is the importance of trust,
and there was some research done
on this. Where generally when
there's high trust between the
two parties, they're going to
make in and around 30 to 35%
more value in that deal that
they come to where there's low
trust, then it's even less, it's
far less than zero, basically,
they won't come to an agreement
and things will go very, very
messy. And mid trust will be a
little bit of a game, but it
will be very transactional.
Right? They don't get beyond
just the IP you one side pays
money and the other side gives a
service type of idea, you know,
or, or a settlement in this way
of the barely acceptable level.
But when there's an element of
rapport building into trust,
then all of a sudden, there's
all sorts of interesting and
unique situational additions of
value that create huge Well,
let's be honest, huge wealth.
Right? So
you because I want to, I really
want to give me so much to
unpack and questions been
popping in my mind as you're
talking. One is I really want to
bring this to our audience. Our
audience are women, law firm
owners, and they own small law
firm, small to mid sized law
firms. And I want to just share
a couple of things. with you
from. So I was when I was in law
school, I took one class on
alternate dispute resolution.
And the textbook for that was
Who Moved My Cheese? Like, if
that tells me an indication of
how unhelpful that was in
negotiation? You know, it was it
was very simple sort of concept.
And then a very popular book a
lot of attorneys read is never
split the difference, which was
written by a guy who was like a
hostage negotiator, negotiator.
So that's a whole different
level, and that he's coming from
the standpoint of a hostage
negotiator. Like, how awful is
that to think people were being
held hostage, and you have to
negotiate it. So my clients,
our, our negotiation is such a
huge part of what they do all
day, every day, whether they're
litigator or not. They're having
to negotiate with their clients,
they're having to negotiate with
their opposing counsel. And
oftentimes, and of course,
obviously, you know, with other
parties and opposing counsel,
and in court situations,
oftentimes, one of the most
challenging aspects are, is
negotiating with opposing
counsel, especially if you're
dealing with people, men and
women have very different sort
of styles and generally
speaking, right. And if you're
dealing with men, men might come
in with a big ego, and a much
more driven sort of approach,
women might come with something
that's a little bit more, you
know, can we work through this
and get along? Again, these are
sort of general statements, I
know, there are women who are
really aggressive, and there are
men who are much more, you know,
softer in their approach. But
what kinds of what you're really
talking about here, we just have
about psychological edge is
really about sort of
understanding human behavior,
human behavior and human
thought. Somebody else thinks
and really getting connected
with what other people where
other people in the room are
coming from and what they're
thinking, right. So isn't that
sort of increasing your
perception of what is going on
with other people in the room
and dialing yourself back?
enough to be able to understand
that, is that kind of what
you're talking about? That's,
that's
very much what I'm talking
about. Yeah, absolutely. I mean,
I know, never split the
difference. And Chris Voss
negotiate the FBI negotiator.
And he writes great stories.
It's why it was such a
successful book, because it's so
evocative with the storytelling,
but again, you look at that, and
it's all about how to talk to
people, it's all about not
rushing to conclusions, and
actually having empathy, right
of what he calls tactical
empathy, I disagree with him on
that point, it's, it's actually
more strategic empathy, because
it's from your very, as I say,
values, again, what you stand
for, and it's from your very
approach, rather than just a
little tactical thing that you
can do. But it is exactly that
it's having that level of
empathy. And this is, we don't
want to Let's Get clear on what
empathy is, at no point, are you
agreeing with the other side, or
condoning any actions or from
the other side? All you're doing
is trying to understand the
other side. Right? So this is a
principle that I call things
like a shrink. So you know, how
does it shrink or a coach or a
therapist, whatever you want to
call them? Think? Well, they're
fully present. But emotionally,
emotionally non manipulative.
That's the point that can't be
manipulated. Right? So but
they're fully present or fully
there, they can be sued, the
other side can be trying to
sweet talk them and being
charming, and all of this sort
of stuff, which is often harder
to spot, by the way, because
everybody spots the super
aggressive ego person who's on
the attack. And usually, you
know, you can It's unpleasant,
but you can easily just deflect
it right. But it's the charming
person who's often you know, Oh,
yeah. When, when and all of this
sort of stuff. And yeah, we're
going to create a great outcome
and all this is like, Yeah,
maybe. But you need as you said,
it's fully present. So they feel
you're there. They feel you're
fully hearing them, you're fully
taken on board what they're
saying and reading all of the
lines underneath. That you're
you're getting a sense of
context, you're getting a sense
of, okay, this person needs to
be this super aggressive attack
dog for their clients. This is
something that came across to me
it was very interesting, as you
said that a lawyer isn't just,
it's me versus the other side.
It's like, no, no, you're
negotiating with your client who
you need to be in each
engagement. You're negotiating
with the other side's client,
you're negotiating with the
other side's lawyer, right? And
then potentially, if there's a
judge or mediator or someone
else involved, there's a whole
other element as well, that the
other person you're negotiating
with that's often most
overlooked? Is you? Which
version of you, are you going to
turn up? Are you going to be
that attack dog? Are you going
to be highly conciliatory? Are
you going to be charming and
gentle and playful and warm? Are
you going to be ferocious, quite
cold? How are you going to turn
up and that's a choice. And
again, it's a choice. But most
people just act on habit. And
again, it goes back to what we
talked about the start where
people act on the few habits,
the strategies that work for
them back in the day, and often
work for them until they don't.
And this is the point that it's
the until they don't that we
have other ways of emotionally
being. So for example, I had one
of the old litigator, friends of
mine, colleagues of mine, a
client of mine, you know,
saying, oh, this person just
hates me. And I don't know why.
I mean, we I don't know what I
said. And it's just one of these
things that we looked at, we
analyze that was one of these
for they jumped straight into
business, like, okay, here we
go, this is how I see it, how do
you see it? And this person was
just like, Nope, you need to
treat me like a human being
first. And he came back. And
then he sort of said, okay,
look, I think we got off on the
wrong foot, I have to apologize,
since I'm far from perfect at
this, you know, and just that
human element of a pilot, a
simple apology and genuine,
everything was fine, then it's
like, oh, that's perfectly fine.
Thank you so much. They're able
to talk in a human way, and then
get into the business.
There's a woman that I spoke
with who studies a nonverbal
communication, I've studied non
verbal communication from the
same teacher. And she's She
helps trial lawyers do jury
selection. And she talks about
how she can come across to
people. And so with her, it's
all about your nonverbals and
messenger, Cindy. And she says,
if you're having somebody who
comes into view with you, who's
all business, you need to meet
them where they are, if you
started, you have to find
parking. Did you? Was everything
okay? Yeah, they're not they're
gonna get, there's going to be
an irritation there. You need to
come in and find a law and then
you can shift things, but it's
and then the opposite. If you're
coming in with somebody who
needs the who needs to, to make
sure to say good morning, and
how should you know, how's the
parking, weather's beautiful.
And you, and they're giving you
those clues by their what
they're saying and by their
nonverbals, then you need to
leave the why what you're
talking about sounds like is
really assessing where people
are, and being able to pick and
choose from your own arsenal, of
how to, to meet with them, so
that you can begin to kind of
align where the two of you are
working at problem.
Exactly. And that's precisely it
is that, you know, people, like
people work with people that
they like, you know, people will
do deals with people that they
like, if they win, the hardest
thing to do is do a deal with
someone who doesn't like you.
You know, it's this idea of the
substance versus the process
versus the people, particularly
people who are in expertise
based professions, like as you
say, like to whether it's it or
law, that are all about the
substance, it's all about the
skill in my arguing, you know,
in my all of us. In fact, when
unless, you know, a negotiated
deals, the most important thing
by far 55% of success on
negotiated deals is the people
side. Now that doesn't mean that
you need to be best mates, as I
said, or they need to like like
you like want to go for a beer
type of thing. It's that they
like slash respect you so that
again, that you don't have to be
friendly, friendly. No, some
people do want that. But others.
Yeah, they're this person is
competent, they're on the ball.
We're straight in where you
know, if that's what they want,
that you're able to maneuver is
notice the cue and maneuver
because as you say, it's a lot
easier to move people to where
you want to go when you meet
them where they are, not where
you are. And it's knowing that
you were virtually never at the
same place, particularly when
you're on other sides of the
table. So but as you said, to
listen for those cues to meet
them where they are, and then
it's easier to maneuver them.
Because either you're in that
kind of yet we're down to
business to talking about some
of the issues, even though you
can still turn it to them, make
them feel heard. Okay, what's
your position on this? What's
your position on that? Okay,
well, we have to completely
disagree on that. But, but you
know, you're going straight into
hearing them out. You can play
them at their game. What we call
it is is directing not dictating
is one of The most underused
forms of communication were,
again, like a shrink, who's
doing the talking in that room,
the shrink or the coach, the
shrink the code, or the client,
it's always the shrink, right?
They they're doing so little
talking, but they are completely
directing the flow of that
conversation, but making the
other first person feel listened
to heard, understood, respected,
regarded, etc. And that's what
builds a rapport with the client
with the coach. Whereas it can
be very similar in, in any form
of conversation. One side is
doing the talking, the other
side is learning. Right, right.
Because then when you're putting
your either your counter points,
or indeed your counter
suggestions to them, you can fit
them much more accurately in
with the worldview of the other
side. And it's also, as I said,
knowing what one of the great
things you can do. And it's some
ways it's quite easy, in some
ways is a bit more tricky. But
is what are the other side's
KPIs? What are the key
performance indicators? How are
they judged? How do they judge a
success or a win? Now some parts
of that will be quite easy, some
more, maybe more tricky. But
you, you start with a hypothesis
and you're taking that into that
room into that conversation.
Where you're then testing the
hypothesis like a scientist,
you're getting that new
information and updating it to
make it more accurate. So you're
wanting to move from right, to
accurate. This is a key
differentiator, the ego wants us
to be right, and is looking for
information when the biggest
most you know, comprehensive
bias and human thinking error
that we have is the confirmation
bias. Basically, we look for
information that confirms what
we already think or believe or
know to be true, right? Whereas
when you are doing the opposite,
when you're trying to be
accurate. You're looking for
information that makes you more
accurate. Not that makes you
right and what that what that
means is one of the ways to
think of, okay, if I was to bet
on this, would I bet $100,000
that I'm right, whatever that
might be that you know, whoever
will win, you know, the NFL the
Super Bowl next year? Yeah, you
can say it, but someone says,
would you bet $100,000 on that?
Well, well, why? Because
suddenly, if you're asked to put
skin in the game, whatever that
might be that this company,
you're literally putting you
know someone else's skin in the
game. So this is what you're
doing. Maybe the payout is say
$250,000, or half a million
dollars very major client,
right. That's what you're doing.
That's what's at stake. So think
of it in those terms. So what is
likely that you think it's this?
That's fine? What, how
confident? Are you put a
percentage on it? I'm 90%
Confident, that's how that's the
answer. Oh, you're 90 Great.
This is how we get away from the
confirmation bias. So you're 90%
confident, that means you're 10%
not confident, confident. So
what's the 10%? Let's explore
that. So you go in there, and
you see the issues, and then you
can mitigate or D risks. And you
can also talk to colleagues, you
can talk or whatever. Once
again, I talked about this when
we're talking about leadership
development, which was another
area I do as well, because the
leadership is a part of that
internal negotiation is saying,
well, first we lead ourselves,
right? So is that same thing is
the difference between imagine,
you know, you're speaking to a
colleague, and they say, I owe
80%? Certain this is the right
way to go. But I have a few
reservations, what are your
thoughts? Should? Do you think I
should be more certain or
lesser? It leaves this versus
this is where I think we should
go? What do you think? Right? So
one opens the space. It opens
the space for that collaboration
of ideas of adding value new
perspectives. So I think this
element you're missing out on
all I think this is actually not
as high risk as we thought,
blah, blah, blah, and so on. But
this is where we get away from
that dominant idea of my
interests, I don't really care
about your interests, or being
overly appeasing, where I'm
concerned more about your
interests and less about mine.
Compromise being that 5050 We're
both barely getting enough of
what we need to be content.
Whereas collaboration,
collaboration starts with the
question, how do we both get as
close to 100% of what we want?
How do we both get as close to
100% of what we want? What an
amazing question
within negotiations thinking,
How do I get 100% of what I
want? Exactly. We both come out
of this and we have a say in
basically in family law or in
the law here that like if you if
you come out and both parties
are unhappy, then you're
successful. Because you because
nobody's gonna get 100% of what
they want right at first. I want
to so I don't I don't want to
take sides on politics. Although
anybody who knows me knows, I
have real strong opinions about
politics, but it is a huge issue
here in the United States. And
we're seeing it, you know, all
around the world and other
countries as well in our, in our
national elections and our local
elections, where there's this
kind of conservative
progressive, you know, push and
pull and the United States is
become a really challenging
issue, because you have such
extreme beliefs on either side.
And people are having a hard
time. Even having discussions
with people with different
viewpoints anymore, because it's
good, because it feels so much
like everything is a deal
breaker, like you seem to people
are so far apart in their
beliefs in their political
beliefs, that it's getting to a
point where people are cutting
people out of their family, you
know, they're like, I'm blocking
all these people that are my
friends in real life on my
social media, because I'm
finding out who they are and
what they really believe what
they really stand for. And so
that is a huge thing that sort
of going on culturally, as well.
How can we? How can we no matter
where we are on the spectrum,
start to make changes and use
the use of these negotiation
strategies to be more open to
conversation, and maybe be able
to have conversations that might
bring people more to the middle
in talking with how, yeah, I
want to say without the
expectation that we are going
to, you know, I don't know like
change people's mind. I think
it's it's difficult.
That's the first point. Yeah.
Well, but that's what most
people are trying to do. They're
trying to call the other side an
idiot. And you're wrong. So
again, it goes back to this
wrong versus accurate. So Park
being right or wrong for the
moment. Not not forever, but
just for the moment, and
actually try and look under
what's going on. So one of the
one of the key attributes, is
ascribe positive intent. So even
if someone says, I hate you, and
I want you to die, and Avella
and all these horrible things
that people say, what's going on
underneath that? So again, do
you think like a shrink? Let the
actual statement wash over you,
you know, off a duck's back?
What's the, what's the request
beneath that? You know, is it
something like, I'm fearful that
things are changing? And I don't
like it is often, you know,
yeah, for example, one of the
things that might be being
communicated under this tirade
of abuse, right? But it's, it's,
as I said, getting to this idea
of actually having someone on
the left and letting them speak,
how often do we let someone that
we don't agree with speak, we
tend to cut them off, we tend to
interrupt them with arguments of
how they're wrong. And they're
probably trying to do the same
to us. And this is why there's,
there's a breakdown of dialogue.
So it's very difficult,
particularly when there are
emotions at stake, to get
beneatha. But it is this idea
of, as I said, managing our own
mental and emotional states I
how what we think and how we
feel our emotions, to be able to
be in fully present, but an
emotionally non manipulative
space. So we're not trying to
manipulate them, per se. And
when they're certainly not going
to be manipulating us, they're
not going to rise to the fight,
so to speak, and just hear them
out. What's their argue? What is
their position? But what's
beneath their position? What's
the need? Is it security? Is it
is it ideas of some concept of
freedom, some concept of, of, I
don't know of? What are the
values that are trying to
express here? Now, we don't need
to agree with that, again,
there's no agreement that you're
going to come to, but for
example, I had a conversation
with a guy in a bar in London
several years ago, when I lived
in London. And he was a little
bit of a controversial figure,
and he was annoying some people
around us, but, you know, I
wanted to talk to this guy. And
he was a Brexit supporter. So a
few people were like, oh, you
know, I don't want to hear I
don't know, wow, you know,
hideous, you know, fascists, you
know, whatever. Racist. And all
of these things may or may not
have been true. But it's like,
okay, well, I wanted to talk to
this guy. So I just talked with
him. And long story short,
again, whether you agree with
him or not. He talks about how
he feels like he didn't fit in
anymore. He felt unwelcome in
the town that he grew up in. He
felt afraid. In a lot of places
where I used to feel very safe,
and that was the underlying
need, there was an old man who
was now afraid. And things that
were familiar were now scary.
And again, was it the way to
handle it? No, of course not.
Was that a you know, but could I
empathize with an old man who
suddenly felt fear? Yes, you
can. So this was the point but,
and he actually he was kind of
very grateful. At the end, they
said, I think you're the first
one who actually ever asked me
why I voted the way either
people agreed with us like,
yeah, you know, and slogan
stuff, or people disagree with
them. And when, yeah, instant
judgment and slogan stuff. And
it's getting beneath the slogans
getting beneath that. Because
sometimes, you know, people
haven't thought this thing
through. And it's just basically
a slogan that they fit in within
their tribal leanings, where
they feel accepted. But other
times, there's, you know, often
there's a real value is caused
there that we don't like this
because it threatens this other
thing that we care about very
much. And again, you don't need
to agree with that you can
fundamentally disagree with
that. But you can at least
understand the human need that's
at work here, you know,
which might have some sort of
advancement, if you can think of
a way for that help. Right.
Exactly. I mean, it's called
just so it's called the movable
middle finding that that area
where you kind of both just
about agree on, and then being
able to just move, cause people
are able to move slightly
further, you know, sort of,
again, the NFL, if you're near
the goal line, you know, moving
up to the halfway line is a big
leap. But if you're, if you're
near that halfway line, moving
them over the halfway line is a
good bit easier. So because you
can find this move a middle. The
other thing is presuming that
you're fully right. Have a bit
of humility, maybe there's a few
things that you're inaccurate on
Oh, my God, you're actually off
on and willing to update your
schema, your worldview, that may
or may need updating here,
right. So again, it's it's we
presume, when we're going into
these conversations that we are
clearly right, to a moral level.
And they're clearly wrong for
all sorts of factual and then to
a moral level. And I'm
suggesting that maybe if we're
willing to move and update or
idea, maybe they are, too,
which leads me to my next
question, which is about, and I
probably could have sparked some
people off on both sides in that
comment. But which leads me to
my next question, which is about
facts. I think a lot of people
come into negotiations,
thinking, Well, here's the
facts. Here's the law, you know,
like attorneys facts loss is
very clear. Right? Here's the
facts that I have. And yet, we
know from plenty of research has
been out there is that facts
aren't the most persuasive. Same
thing sometimes, like,
Absolutely. what the facts are.
So going to negotiation? How can
you give like percentage, like,
how important is what you know,
like what you think, you know,
right?
This kind of thing? Yeah. Yeah,
yeah. Again, it goes back to
that idea of substance. That's
where the facts and your legal
arguments and all the rest of it
come into it. But the, you know,
that only describes what 7% or
something of the outcomes,
whereas 38%, you know, are the
process 55% of the people. So
the process being, you know,
what we're focusing on that's,
again, like the framing, it's
like, we're going to focus on
this and not that we're going to
talk about it. In these terms,
we're going to look at it
through this lens. So when you
have more influence on the
process, is that I was already
framing how we're going to view
the thing. But then, but first
and foremost is the people
because if they don't have some
regard and respect for you,
they're not going to hear you.
They're not going to actually
hear your argument to wait us.
They've already judged your
argument if they don't like you,
and don't respect you. And this
was the problem, for example,
with the Brexit thing was that
people were giving all these
facts. Oh, well, look at all
this money that we make from the
EU. And yes, we put money in
where we get our money out and
blah, blah, blah. And people
were like, Yeah, but you're
telling me this, and I don't
like you. That was the problem.
The people didn't like the
people telling them this fact.
So they disregarded or they saw
the facts, even if they heard
them through this lens. Have you
ever I don't like you? And I
they either didn't trust them or
they're like I actually am
diametrically opposed to how you
do things, you know, so, so
again, it's that sort of thing
that they won't even hear the
arguments. If they don't have
some level of respect for you or
feel that you're in some way I
have an under a potential for
understanding.
You've mentioned that several
times. So let's talk about that.
How do we, if people are coming
in and they, they don't respect
us fundamentally to begin with?
How do we shift that? Because we
certainly have, we have that
going on in our city. So let's
say we put it in that, let's put
it in a negotiation room where
you have somebody who looks like
somebody that you automatically
make assumptions about. You
know, I remember when I started
in my career, you know, people
would say I was a feminazis,
because I had, I was various, my
first husband, I had a
hyphenated last name. And so I
would have older white men who
saw me younger woman, married to
somebody from different
ethnicity had a hyphenated name.
And they would say, You're a
feminazis. So they immediately I
mean, could there be anything
more offensive than calling
somebody and honestly, I mean,
except for two people who
identify as Nazis, but like,
they immediately come in with a
lack of respect because of who
they thought I was. Right. And I
do think that a lot of because
we have, you know, in the United
States, we have such a
culturally diverse, and there's
a lot of tension between people
in different groups. There are
those things where you walk into
a room and you feel like you're
immediately not respected by
other person that and that may
be an age thing. I know, a lot
of young women attorneys have
reported that they, you know,
get treated a certain way by
older attorneys. I know when I
first started out in my career,
I had people play, try to play
mind games and fall sanctions
against me for no reason. And
there was no nothing
sanctionable just to mess with
me because I was a young, a
trans new attorney, right? So
what do you do when you know
somebody because of your because
of who they think you are,
automatically doesn't respect
you. And maybe there are several
people in the room. Look at you
that way. I know that there have
been a lot of young women,
attorneys of color, or women
attorneys of color who've gone
in to a courtroom. And people,
other people in the courtroom
think that they are not an
attorney, that there are a court
reporter or even a defendant in
some cases. What do you do when
you go into a situation like
that? And you immediately know
that there are people looking at
you thinking that they know who
you are, and they don't respect
you. So how do you? How do you
get that respect? And in a
moment, very quickly, like how
do you let them know like, what
are some techniques or something
you can do that gets you it gets
people to really go wait a
minute, I need to back up a
little bit here? Well,
there's obviously there's a few
different approaches you can
take. So and this depends on
your personality as well. In
that, the first thing is to know
your stuff, obviously, when you
come in, be ready to do the
business. Now you can be playful
as in, you can actually cut some
of that tension. If you're that
sort of person who can actually
either be playful with yourself,
or about yourself or the
situation. Some people that
works very well, you know, I've
known quite a few people who've
been able to, they literally use
it as a tactic to break the ice
to break nervousness, you know,
they can be quite playful. And
as I said, that just lightens
the mood. It's like, oh, a few
kind of moment, you know, when
there's a lot of tension with
this situation, playfulness,
maybe less appropriate, you
know, particularly depending on
the room that you're walking
into it right? So it's, you
know, it's very different. If
it's, you know, with the other
lawyer of both clients or their
versus in a courtroom, whatever,
it's radically different
situation. But one of the ones
is to just act in a totally
professional, competent manner.
You know, because then you're
playing with the schema. So
they're thinking, Oh, I thought
you'd be shrill feminist lawyer.
Simpson says, you know, shrill
feminism, as a service is used
to you know, play with that
stereotype. And instead you're
not, you're highly competent,
you do want to turn to them and
this based on this, this person,
and so everything is nice and
orderly and in a row just as
professional as anyone else
would we expect to be? It's
harder for them to keep this
schema than idea, the original
idea. Another is, you know, to
kill them with kindness. Be
extremely pleasant and polite.
It's very hard for them to then
again go oh, you're a terrible
person. You're this than the
other because you're not sure if
they will see what you're they
will see your behavior still
through a different lens. But
it's harder and harder when the
experience doesn't match the
initial assumption to keep that
assumption. Whereas when you
burst into this is the
unfortunate thing when you burst
into this isn't fair, or how
dare you are this than the
other. That can work sometimes.
And it can backfire. And others
in the sense of they think
they're having their view
confirmed. Whereas an actual
fact is not so much just to say
sometimes you need to stand up
to the bully. So if someone
says, How dare you even think to
ask, How dare you blah, blah,
blah, and then you're back on
facts, but you're pushing back,
as in, I will give as good as I
get. And you can even say, you
know, you push me I'll push back
in a nice way and kind of a
look, if we want to play it that
way. We can play it that way.
I'm highly flexible and
adaptable as to how this whole
negotiation goes, if you want to
be shouty. Maybe I'll share it
back, maybe I'll just not, you
know. So it's that choice of
being able to think, what is
this person trying to be? What
is their usual way of being. And
you can either go with us with
that pattern for as long as it
suits you, or pattern interrupts
you know, you can do the
pattern, shatter their pattern
by the pattern, interrupt. Yeah.
But just to say, there's no one
way of doing this, and it has to
be authentically you. But what I
would say is that, you have the
freedom to run experiments, you
have the freedom to try ways of
being that maybe you do already
very well, or maybe that you
haven't tried out as much.
So that's a lot of what you're
talking about when you're
talking about sort of a
psychological edge is really,
the more you understand
yourself, the more you
understand how other people
behave, and that there are
underlying things underneath it.
One of the first one of the
great books is The Four
Agreements, a lot of people
reference that book, I've
recommended that book and one of
the things that I go back to
over and over again, in that
book is not to take things
personally. And when you realize
that somebody else's behavior is
not about you as a person,
because they don't know you as a
person. Exactly. them it is
about them, and their whatever
they've got going on in their
head, right? Past experiences
don't have anything to do with
you, then it it shifts the power
a little bit.
Absolutely. And that's the shift
and the power that you need,
that you don't need their
respect. That's the first
awareness that you have, because
they don't know you. They and
it's sad, to the point of the
Senate, but it's also
frustrating because you're the
one having to deal with it, is
that they don't know you.
They're dealing with a concept
they have in their head, which
is outdated, outmoded,
inaccurate, you name it. And
it's not fair. Fairness is a
human construct. You know, it's
not fair, you know, that one
animal eats another. But on the
flip side of one animal eating
another is another animal gets,
you know, the kids get to eat
not die out, right. So, you
know, it's where you put the
lens on that fairness. And
that's not quite the right
analogy. But it's the point that
fairness is a human construct
that we bring the fairness, you
don't need to be respected
outside of the gates, because
you respect yourself. And you
know, better than they do, as,
just as you said that they're
dealing with a concept of you,
not you, but you have to be you
whether that's being hyper
competent, whether as I said,
being playful, or highly
aggressive back, or a mix, this
is the thing that often my
clients say is that it opens up
the full spectrum of
possibility. So that you can be
a GRE highly aggressive back
down into being assertive, you
can be compromising on this
point that you know, it's
important to them, even then
being kind over here. And then
up to being collaborate
collaborative of, of trying to
bring them further on side, and
to solve this problem that
you're working on together. So
that you can do all this in a
sentence, essentially, right?
And maybe it's a long sentence,
but the point is the same that
you can change your emotional
resonance, to see what they're
responding to. How do they
respond to being pushed back?
How do they respond to being
considered how do they respond
to being treated like a human
being? So it again, it goes back
to this thing? It's a more
serious version that goes back
to the earlier point. But what
is this where is this person
when you meet them? And then
decide where to take them from
there. So if they're being
highly aggressive, you can go
multiple directions with that.
Do you need to push back or do
you try? Do you actually be more
collaborative with that or do
you just be playful? You know,
call out the tact Uh oh, wow,
bully boy tactic interesting
does that normally work for you?
Now that's a very brave thing to
say. But it does highlight the
the strategy that they're using.
Let's say, you're really
rampaging bulldozing through the
room there, you know, does that
usually get results for you? And
I mean, you don't want to sound
like a smartass. But you know
what I mean, you can even
highlight that the tactic you're
saying you are you can even just
say very calmly, you know,
you're being very aggressive,
you know, is that so it usually
the successful, can you be
slightly more conversational,
perhaps. Because I'd prefer
that, if that would work for
you, or something like that,
where you're you can you can
spotlight what's going on and
bring them down and make a
suggestion, you know, there are
multiple ways, again, it has to
fit you to a certain degree, but
you get to experiment. But the
point is, you control your
emotional, if they they're not
making you angry, they're being
prejudiced, or daft or stupid in
their attitude toward you. And
you're angry, you get to decide
what makes you angry, or it can
make you empowered, because
they're underrating. You they're
underestimating you. Right. So
are they suddenly? Are they yes,
they're under evaluating you.
But what's the advantage of
that? How do you turn all of
these things to your advantage?
That's the question. And always
the question of where do you
have choice and how you view the
thing, how you have choice and
how you wish to turn up and how
you wish to respond and be in
that situation, how you choose
to act, how you choose to
behave. You can't, you can
control their behavior, you can
influence it, you can control
you can control how you behave.
And so it's always that flipping
of the power, they only have
taken the power away if you let
them if you allow them too, but
you can choose to take it back.
No. And it starts with a
question
here. Now, but I want to I just
want to want to throw out a
sorry to interrupt you. But we
do need to end or just want to
also say too, I think a lot of
times people are they you can in
your personal life, if somebody
offends you, you can block them
and shut them out and choose to
be around other people and all
those things. But when you're
representing clients, in
matters, and you are there to
get the resolution of some kind,
whether that's in a negotiation,
a settlement, or whether that's
going to court and getting a
resolution, you can't abdicate,
you can't, you can't say well, I
don't have the power, you're
there to do a job and to get the
job. So that's why I think it's
so important. Because in your
personal life, you may be able
to avoid and that may be your
strategy. And I would submit
that that is going to leave you
with a less rich life, then if
you choose to, you know not do
that. Because it's difficult to
find, you know, five people that
are on the same page with you on
everything, right? Doesn't
happen. everything right? So to
get through life, you do need to
have negotiation skills,
personal or not. But when it
comes to being a lawyer, it's
not really an option. If you're
whatever you're doing anything,
whether you're doing
transactional work, and you're
negotiating in that forum, or
with or you're just negotiating
with clients, or whatever. I do
think this is incredibly
necessary skill in life in
general, but certainly in our
business. So I want people to be
able to reach out to you if they
want to get to know more about
you what you teach. Where can
they connect with you?
Well, they can go to Alan
mcbride.com Quite simply. And I
also have a podcast, the Goliath
dealing with Goliath podcast,
helping all the all the David's
in the Goliath struggles out
there. And I also have a
resource, which is a
psychological edge negotiation
mini courses, an email mini
course. And you can get that at
Allen MC rider comm slash mini
course. So there's on that page,
you'll see there's a cheat sheet
preparation, cheat sheet and
email mini course there. So
there's a few different options
where you can reach out to me on
LinkedIn, hopefully, you'll have
a health of my LinkedIn somehow
linked to this podcast so you
can reach out and say hello from
there.
Yeah, we'll definitely include
all those links in the show
notes of this podcast so you
guys don't have to search for
them. They'll be there for you.
Thanks so much out. I really
enjoyed this conversation a lot.
As you can tell I'm very, I find
it very fascinating. And so I
appreciate you bringing some
insight and expertise to help
us. Thank you.
You're very welcome. Thank you.
Cheers Davina.
