The Photographer's Guide to Negotiating

Richard Weisgrau

• Publisher: Allworth
• Year: 2005
• ISBN:
  9781621535942
• Topic: Media & Performing Arts
• Subtopic: Performing Arts & Business

Negotiating is a crucial skill for anyone running a business, but they don't teach this art in photography school.The Photographer's Guide to Negotiatinggives specific tips for negotiating assignment deals, digital and electronic rights, stock photography sales, contracts, purchases, and more. Interviews with an art buyer, a photographer, and a photographer's rep give photographers extra insight-and maybe even the upper hand in many negotiations. Everyone negotiates in everyday life. This book shows photographers how to take those skills and successfully apply them to business deals.Allworth Press, an imprint of Skyhorse Publishing, publishes a broad range of books on the visual and performing arts, with emphasis on the business of art. Our titles cover subjects such as graphic design, theater, branding, fine art, photography, interior design, writing, acting, film, how to start careers, business and legal forms, business practices, and more. While we don't aspire to publish a New York Times bestseller or a national bestseller, we are deeply committed to quality books that help creative professionals succeed and thrive. We often publish in areas overlooked by other publishers and welcome the author whose expertise can help our audience of readers.

Chapter One

THE NATURE OF NEGOTIATION

Developing your skill as a negotiator, like all skills development, requires that you understand the process. Unlike the photographic-exposure process, which has been crammed onto a memory chip in programmed cameras, the negotiating process is not scientific, so it can’t be reduced to formulas. A decade ago, a software company released a series of programs that were intended to guide a person through a negotiation. Those disks can’t be bought now. That software company went out of business because it was (and still is) impossible to create an artificial intelligence that is sophisticated enough to formulate strategies, adjust them as things change, and understand that things are changing as you speak. Negotiations happen in real-time and space, not cyber time and space. So far, the only computer that seems able to handle the negotiating process is the human brain.

Step one in preparing your most personal of computers, your brain, for the negotiating process is understanding the purpose for, and process of, negotiating.

DEFINING NEGOTIATION

In his book Power Negotiating (Addison-Wesley, 1980), John Ilich, a professional negotiator, said: “In its purest form it [a negotiation] is mind pitted against mind.” It is hard to argue against Ilich’s statement. While negotiating is a process of conferring with another to settle a matter, that process is very dependent upon the mental processes of the parties trying to settle.

The negotiating process is one of communication: two or more people seeking to resolve a matter with an outcome that is acceptable to all. An agreement is reached through an understanding of the positions of all the parties and by balancing points of view. “Understanding” is a key word, defined as “to grasp the meaning or reasonableness of.” It is the core of all mental processes. It is the core of negotiation. Whether the negotiation involves a labor dispute, the ending of a conflict, an insurance settlement, or a business deal, the process always involves working with another party, trying to grasp the reasonableness of each others’ positions, and modifying those positions to make them reasonable in each others’ minds. With those thoughts in mind, let’s write our own definition of negotiation. Negotiation is a process of reaching a mutual understanding achieved through a meeting of the minds based upon the acceptance of the reasonableness of each other’s position.

FAIR VALUE

No matter what walk of life you follow, one thing is certain. People you associate with will disagree. That does not imply that all disagreements are adversarial or hostile. Differences of opinion do not usually cause hostility unless they are rooted in some ideology that prevents the parties from accommodating each other’s point of view. Fortunately, business is most often a practical matter, and very few business impasses exist that cannot be resolved through negotiation.

It is important to understand the basis of most practical disputes. Unlike ideological arguments, which revolve around abstract values, practical disputes are based on concrete values. Disagreements in business are almost always centered on concrete values, such as money, timing, benefits, duration, etc. That is why most business disagreements can be resolved. The ability to assign an economic value to disputed elements of a business matter means that a corresponding value can usually be found to offset the disputed value. Wages are often described in dollars per hour. Wages are agreed by a process of negotiating the value of an hour or the amount of time a dollar will buy. Being able to assign a value to an item makes it much easier to negotiate over that item.

Understanding the relationship of value to negotiation, we see that business negotiations are usually aimed at equitably trading value for value. Done successfully, the process ends in each party receiving what they agree is fair value for fair value. This is sometimes called “Win–Win” negotiating. I don’t like to use the word “win” in relationship to negotiating. “Win–Win” implies that bothparties come out as winners. In my view, there are no winners or losers in a fair trade. So I like to think of a successful negotiation as fair trading. In business, there is nothing more honorable than making a fair deal, which means not taking advantage or being taken advantage of.

WANTS AND NEEDS

In order to make a fair trade, the negotiating parties must achieve a balance between their positions. To do that, we have to understand the parameters within which any negotiating position rests. Business interests are best described as a continuum, with wants at one end and needs at the other. Wants represent a higher value and needs represent a lower value.

A colleague of mine once described his “wants” as his “whoopee” price, meaning if he received it, he screamed “whoopee” under his breath. He described his “needs” as his “whew” price, meaning he went “whew” with relief if he could close a hard-to-get deal at that level. By that analogy, we can see that wants are a desire and needs are a necessity.

Another way to visualize the difference between wants and needs is by considering your personal relationship to an automobile. You might want a Mercedes Benz, but you need a car that runs reliably. The distance between the ends of that continuum are far and the options are wide. There are literally hundreds of options that meet almost every purchaser’s ability to pay. What kind of automobile you end up with will depend on your financial worth and, yes, your ability to negotiate a good deal for yourself.

Negotiating is a process of moving back and forth between wants and needs until each negotiator agrees that an acceptable balance between all the parties’ wants and needs has been achieved. Compromise is the linchpin of negotiating. Compromise is not a sign of weakness in a negotiation. It is a sign of intelligent bargaining.

TYPES OF NEGOTIATION

In business, we generally experience three types of negotiation: terms-and-conditions bargaining, price bargaining, and dispute resolution. I listed the three types of negotiation in the order they usually come up in a business scenario. The terms and conditions of any deal are likely to affect its price. Therefore, we ought to resolve those details before we try to resolve the price. If we reach an agreement of terms and conditions and price, we are unlikely to have to resolve a dispute resulting from the original agreement. (Dispute resolution, unlike the bargaining over terms, conditions, and prices, is often adversarial in nature. In the worst-case scenario, disputes must be resolved in courts, if they cannot be resolved by negotiation.)

The three types of negotiations are similar in most regards. Wants and needs cap each end of the value equation. Bargaining over terms, conditions, and prices is really part of the selling process. In the salesman’s language, it is called “closing” the deal. It is the process of listening to your client’s objections and providing good reasons for your position or alternatives to them. Because you are trying to sell something, it is usually a friendly exchange. “Friendly” does not mean it is not businesslike. In business, amiability produces better results than indifference or hostility.

Dispute resolution is rarely friendly. It is adversarial by its nature, and that means it can become hostile. While hostility serves no one’s purposes in settling a dispute, when a party feels wronged it is often difficult for him to control or mask his hostility. One reason for this is because a dispute is usually seen as a win-or-lose situation. No one wants to be the loser. Where there are winners and losers, there is a contest. A contest usually gets adrenaline flowing. The heart rate goes up, and the emotions peak with the increasing beat. It is instinctive behavior, dating back to our prehistoric ancestors. Losing for them was likely to mean that they were going to be a beast’s dinner, or maimed at best. Human defensive reactions haven’t changed over the millennia. The reasons we get defensive have multiplied, but in the end none of us want to be the symbolic “dinner” of another, so we dig in for the fight, and we usually get one. The important thing to remember is that by conducting complete and proper negotiations in the early stages of making business arrangements, we can usually avoid subsequent disputes.

CONDITIONS FOR NEGOTIATING

Negotiating is dependent upon two conditions, both of which must be met before the process can begin. First, there has to be some level of disagreement between the parties’ positions. If there isn’t, then there is nothing to negotiate. I have actually met some people who like the challenge of negotiating so much that they will work hard to find something to disagree about, just so they can negotiate. Personally, I think one should try to control neurotic behavior in business, so I’d suggest that you resist the temptation to bargain unless you have a better reason than just because you feel like it.

Once there is some level of disagreement, the second condition is that the parties on both sides of the disagreement must be willing to negotiate. Sometimes, one party may not be willing to negotiate, preferring simply to move on if the other party does not accept his or her position. In that case, a negotiation is impossible, because you can’t have a “meeting if the minds” unless there are at least two minds engaged in the process. Sometimes, a person will appear to be unwilling to negotiate. That is not always a sign that a negotiation is impossible. It is often a feint aimed at getting you to accept their terms without discussion. It works, if you let it. There are ways to deal with such a feint, and we will explore them in the chapter on negotiating tactics. However, when you encounter a person who is truly unwilling to negotiate, you have little to gain in dealing with him. If the substance of his non-negotiable offer does not meet your needs, you simply walk away from the deal, not the person. There might be a next time, and it might be a negotiable offer next time. Don’t alienate a person who refuses to negotiate. Business dealings are always in flux. What characterizes one situation with one individual does not necessarily characterize all other situations with that same individual. Always be open to an offer.

BARGAINING ISSUES

The issues involved in a negotiation are usually divided into two types: principle and position. Principle bargaining involves abstract issues, such as your business policies. Position bargaining involves concrete issues, such as money and time. While principle and position are connected, they are dealt with separately in a negotiation.

By “principle,” I mean any policy that usually guides your business dealings. Compromising over your policies is acceptable, as long as you do not compromise your ethical values or legal obligations. Your business policies might include things like requiring an advance on expenses, or requiring that clients pay modeling agencies directly, so you do not have to finance their work to a greater extent than necessary. Compromising on such a principle amounts to breaking your own rule. Is that OK? Some rules were meant to be broken sometimes. Whether you break a rule will usually depend upon how important the deal is to you and which rule you are asked to break.

By “position,” I am referring to value level. You have one idea of value in dollars and the client has a different view. Your positions are different. The difference in positions has to be worked out, and there are ways to do that. Unlike principle bargaining, in which you have to decide whether a job is worth breaking your rule(s), in positioning bargaining you are usually deciding whether you can accept a price, or terms and conditions, while still meeting your needs.

STAGES OF A NEGOTIATION

There are four stages in the negotiating process: investigation, evaluation, alternative development, and reaching agreement. For the most part, these stages occur in order, with two of them, investigation and evaluation, usually happening concurrently. Through investigation, you will already have gained some information about the client, the assignment, etc. As you speak with your negotiating counterpart, you will be receiving new information that complements the information you already have. You will have to incorporate that new information into your prior evaluation, if it is likely to cause a shift in your position. New information often requires that you re-evaluate.

All too often, photographers impede their chance of a successful negotiation by not knowing that the four negotiating stages require thoughtful planning, with thorough attention to details and follow-through. Understanding the importance of each stage is critical to being a good negotiator, so we will consider each separately below.

The investigative stage of a negotiation is nothing more than information gathering. The investigation is done by trying to obtain the answers to a series of questions related to the object of the negotiation. The circumstantial questions—who, where, what, why, when, and how—define the framework of the investigative stage. (In chapter 3, Planning for a Negotiation, you will find a series of checklists and notes that will help you in gathering the facts that you will need to negotiate in different situations.) Obviously, it is not always possible to know every answer with certainty. Some answers are going to be your best guess. But certainty is luxury in a negotiation, so you must become used to the fact that you never have all the facts. Business is a calculated risk. Fact-finding is a way to reduce risk to a prudent level, not eliminate it. Fact-finding means evaluating (stage two of the process) the information that you have gathered to determine which useful facts you have acquired.

The investigative stage, the first stage we should undertake, in a negotiation is the most often neglected. It takes some careful and considerate work. But, properly done, it will increase your power in a negotiation. Information leads to knowledge, and knowledge leads to power. Negotiating power is something that you should never neglect. (That will become clearer in chapter 3.)

Evaluating all the information you have acquired for useful facts is the second stage of the negotiating process. You must determine how the facts might influence your negotiation. Facts are evidence of something. The question is what is the evidence telling you. Logically, if you don’t intend to evaluate the facts you have acquired, you ought not waste time gathering those facts. It will save you some work, but it will also probably assure that you will not develop a negotiating strategy. Strategy is the product of your evaluation and its influence on the tactics you will decide to use while negotiating. As you assess information and determine useful facts, you can anticipate probable disagreements that will require negotiation. That allows you to formulate approaches to resolving those problems if and when they occur.

The third stage involves developing alternatives to what your evaluation tells you might be stumbling blocks. If you anticipate that a specific problem might arise during the course of negotiating, then you should take some time to consider how you might deal with the problem—that is, what alternatives can you suggest that might solve the problem within the parameters of the wants and needs of the parties.

The fourth and final stage of a negotiation is the agreement process. This is the period of time during which you will discuss the discussion with the other involved party. This is the time during which you are expected to communicate clearly to explain your position, understand your opponent’s position, and work toward balancing those positions.

PROCESS INTEGRITY

Negotiation is a process of reaching an understanding through a meeting of the minds. The process is one of fair trading to find the points between each party’s wants and needs that allow each side to accept a deal without feeling taken advantage of. The process is the same, whether you are closing a business deal or settling a business di...