Negotiation

I was shadowing a coaching client in her leadership meeting when I watched this brilliant woman apologize six times in 30 minutes. 1. “Sorry, this might be off-topic, but..." 2. “I'm could be wrong, but what if we..." 3. “Sorry again, I know we're running short on time..." 4. “I don't want to step on anyone's toes, but..." 5. “This is just my opinion, but..." 6. “Sorry if I'm being too pushy..." Her ideas? They were game-changing. Every single one. Here's what I've learned after decades of coaching women leaders: Women are masterful at reading the room and keeping everyone comfortable. It's a superpower. But when we consistently prioritize others' comfort over our own voice, we rob ourselves, and our teams, of our full contribution. The alternative isn't to become aggressive or dismissive. It's to practice “gracious assertion": • Replace "Sorry to interrupt" with "I'd like to add to that" • Replace "This might be stupid, but..." with "Here's another perspective" • Replace "I hope this makes sense" with "Let me know what questions you have" • Replace "I don't want to step on toes" with "I have a different approach" • Replace "This is just my opinion" with "Based on my experience" • Replace "Sorry if I'm being pushy" with "I feel strongly about this because" But how do you know if you're hitting the right note? Ask yourself these three questions: • Am I stating my needs clearly while respecting others' perspectives? (Assertive) • Am I dismissing others' input or bulldozing through objections? (Aggressive) • Am I hinting at what I want instead of directly asking for it? (Passive-aggressive) You can be considerate AND confident. You can make space for others AND take up space yourself. Your comfort matters too. Your voice matters too. Your ideas matter too. And most importantly, YOU matter. @she.shines.inc #Womenleaders #Confidence #selfadvocacy

In the U.S., you can grab coffee with a CEO in two weeks. In Europe, it might take two years to get that meeting. I ’ve spent years building relationships across both U.S. and European markets, and if there’s one thing I’ve learned, it’s this: networking looks completely different depending on where you are. The way people connect, build trust, and create opportunities is shaped by culture-and if you don’t adapt your approach, you’ll hit walls fast. So, if you're an executive expanding globally, a leader hiring across regions, or a professional trying to break into a new market-this post is for you. The U.S.: Fast, Open, and High-Volume Americans love to network. Connections are made quickly, introductions flow freely, and saying "let's grab coffee" isn’t just polite—it’s expected. - Cold outreach is normal—you can message a top executive on LinkedIn, and they just might say yes. - Speed matters. Business moves fast, so meetings, interviews, and hiring decisions happen quickly. But here’s the catch: Just because you had a great chat doesn’t mean you’ve built a deep relationship. Trust takes follow-ups, consistency, and results. I’ve seen European executives struggle with this—mistaking initial enthusiasm for long-term commitment. In the U.S., networking is about momentum—you have to keep showing up, adding value, and staying top of mind. In Europe, networking is a long game. If you don’t have an introduction, it’s much harder to get in the door. - Warm introductions matter. Cold outreach? Much tougher. Senior leaders prefer to meet through trusted referrals—someone who can vouch for you. - Fewer, deeper relationships. Once trust is built, it’s strong and lasting—but it takes time to get there. - Decisions take longer. Whether it’s hiring, partnerships, or leadership moves, things don’t happen overnight—expect a longer courtship period. I’ve seen U.S. executives enter the European market and get frustrated fast—wondering why it’s taking months (or years!) to break into leadership circles. But that’s how the market works. The key to winning in Europe? Patience, credibility, and long-term thinking. So, What Does This Mean for Global Leaders? If you’re an American executive expanding into Europe… 📌 Be patient. One meeting won’t seal the deal—you have to earn trust over time. 📌 Get introductions. A warm referral is worth more than 100 cold emails. 📌 Don’t push too hard. European business culture favors depth over speed—respect the process. If you’re a European leader entering the U.S. market… 📌 Don’t wait for permission—reach out. People expect direct outreach and initiative. 📌 Follow up fast. If you’re slow to respond, the opportunity moves on without you. 📌 Be ready to show value quickly. Americans won’t wait months to see if you’re a fit. Networking isn’t just about who you know—it’s about how you build relationships. #Networking #Leadership #ExecutiveSearch #CareerGrowth #GlobalBusiness #US #Europe

I used to dread negotiations early in my career... Then I realized: Being a strong negotiator isn’t about confrontation. It’s about developing the right frameworks. Here are five game-changing approaches to  negotiate every deal more effectively: 🤝 The 4 Phases Framework (h/t: Roy Lewicki) Great negotiators don’t jump straight to bargaining.  They follow a structured process: • Preparation (lay the groundwork) • Information Exchange (build mutual understanding) • Bargaining (explore potential solutions) • Commitment (secure the agreement) 💪 The BATNA Strategy (h/t: Roger Fisher & William Ury) Your power in any negotiation comes from knowing  your Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA). It’s your safety net, your source of confidence.  Always define it before you start. 🎯 The Negotiation Matrix (h/t: Lewicki & Hiam) Different situations call for different strategies: • High stakes? Compete. • Building a long-term relationship? Collaborate. • Minor issue? Avoidance might be best. • The relationship is too critical? Accommodate. • Both matter equally? Compromise. 🤔 The Harvard Principled Negotiation Method (h/t: Fisher, Ury & Patton) This is a game-changer: Focus on interests, not positions. Instead of asking what they want, ask why they want it. That’s where real value creation happens. 🎯 The ZOPA Framework (h/t: Fisher & Ury) The Zone of Possible Agreement (ZOPA) is where deals get made. Understanding both sides’ limits helps you identify common ground. Everything else? It's just noise. Key takeaway: The best deals happen when both sides feel heard. And the most successful negotiators aren’t the most aggressive. They’re simply the most prepared. ♻️ Find this valuable? Repost to your network. 💡 Follow Eric Partaker for more on business & leadership.

7 years ago, I hosted a TED Talk that got 5.8M views. Funnily enough, 5 years prior, we analyzed 1,000+ hours of them trying to answer 1 question: Why do some TED Talks go viral, while others don't? 1 thing CLEARLY stood out: Hand gestures. I'm not kidding. When we compared the most viewed TED Talks to the least viewed ones, the top performers used almost TWICE as many hand gestures (465 vs 272 in an 18-minute talk). Why? Because it's evolutionary. When cavemen encountered strangers, the first place they looked was the hands - friend or foe? Our brains are still wired this way. When we can't see someone's hands, our brain gets uncomfortable because we can't see intention. This is just one of the many ways that the best TEDTalkers stood out. And one of the many ways that humans are contagious. We're constantly sending and receiving signals: • Nonverbally: Our facial expressions trigger the same emotions in others (try making a genuine smile right now - feel better?). • Verbally: Asking "working on anything exciting?" instead of "been busy lately?" triggers dopamine in the brain, making you more memorable. • Emotionally: Saying "I'm excited" instead of "I'm nervous" before a task improved performance by 27% in research studies. The most viewed TED speakers are masters at infecting their audience with confidence through their nonverbal, verbal, and emotional signals. Next time you give a presentation or even have a coffee chat, think about how you're "infecting" others. • Are you smiling authentically?  • Are your hands visible and expressive?  • Are your questions triggering excitement?  • Are you reframing nervousness as excitement? Small shifts can completely change how people respond to you. The most powerful thing I've learned in 15+ years of human behavior research: Confidence isn't just something you feel - it's something you can intentionally spread. BTW I DID make sure to use over 400 hand gestures in my TEDx London Talk 🖐️ PS: Check out the link to my talk in the comments section.

AI just told women to accept 20% less pay A new study from the Technical University of Würzburg-Schweinfurt (linked in comments) just confirmed what many of us suspected: ChatGPT and other AI models systematically recommend lower salaries for women than men with identical qualifications. Up to 20% lower. In some cases, that's a $120,000 difference just by changing "he" to "she" in the prompt. 😵💫 Let that sink in for a moment. As someone who's spent years helping women negotiate their worth, this doesn't shock me. These AI models are trained on data that reflects decades of systemic bias - the same bias that created the gender pay gap in the first place. But here's what concerns me most: women are increasingly turning to AI for career advice, including salary negotiation guidance. And now we know these tools are literally programming women to undervalue themselves. So let me be crystal clear about this: ⚡ Stop outsourcing your worth to machines that don't understand your value! ⚡ Your salary negotiation shouldn't be guided by an algorithm trained on historical inequality. It should be based on your actual market value, the specific problems you solve & the measurable impact you create and linking that to what companies truly need. The real issue isn't just biased AI - it's that many women lack the confidence and skills to negotiate effectively in the first place. And now AI is reinforcing those insecurities with "data-driven" advice that's actually discrimination-driven. Here's what you should do instead: 💪 Learn to negotiate as a core professional skill, focusing on advocating for yourself rather than others (which women tend to struggle more with than men) 💪 Research salary data from multiple sources, including human ones 💪 Build confidence through practice and preparation 💪 Focus on the value you bring, not what others "think" you deserve Because here's the truth: if we don't learn to advocate for ourselves effectively, we'll always be at the mercy of systems - human or artificial - that undervalue us.

The music industry is in an ongoing debate to determine the best way to payout streaming revenue to the music rights holders. The argument has several layers to it. Let’s break them down: 1. How should each user’s revenue be distributed? Currently, Spotify, Apple Music and Amazon pool their respective revenues into one big pot, then split it with all rights holders based on how many streams each song they own gets. This is called the ‘pro rata’ model. It’s easy, predictable, and often benefits superstar artists. But the user-centric model, used by SoundCloud, Tidal, Deezer, and others, distributes revenue on a per-user basis. So if you pay $10 / mo and only listen to Mariah Carey, then Mariah (and her various rights holders) get the full distribution of your payment net fees. The user-centric model is more volatile (e.g. what happens if you don’t listen to any artists for a month?), and may cost more to maintain but studies say it boosts revenue for middle-class artists who have smaller but passionate fanbases. 2. Should longer songs get more revenue than shorter songs? The current payout models count 1 full stream once a song has been played for a minimum of 30 seconds. This is quick and efficient, but too democratized for some critics. It means a 31-second meditation track can generate the same amount of money as hip-hop’s first big single, the 14-minute medley, “Rapper’s Delight.” A solution could be what Will Page proposed on our podcast episode: a multiplier. For each additional minute of a song listened to over 4 or 5 minutes, the song would receive a ~1.2x boost in streaming revenue. 3. Should the artist you start a listening session with be rewarded more? If you start your Apple Music session by searching a Justin Bieber song, then the algorithm plays a Selena Gomez song, should Bieber be paid more than Selena? Today that’s not the case, but people are pushing for this. Think about a supermarket. The grocery store stocks shelves and negotiates with suppliers based on their brands’ influence on consumers. If a particular brand is more likely to lure customers in, then those brands want to be compensated more for that. Music streaming is the digital version of that. These are three of several debates on streaming. Others including price raises, advances, and revenue splits between labels, publishers, and streaming services. But the underlying tension stems from music streaming growth slowdown, which puts more pressure on the competing incentives between streaming services and rightsholders. If the industry can find ways to grow the overall pie, then everyone’s happy. But it’s easier said than done. If you enjoyed this breakdown, we did a whole episode on Trapital about this topic with Bloomberg’s Lucas Shaw, check it out here: https://lnkd.in/gckpbiBd What do you think is the best payout model for streaming?

How to stop authoritarian takeovers, 6 simple lessons from history: 1. Build a broad pro-democracy coalition. No purity politics. Learn to work with people who annoy you. You can go back to dunking on them after democracy is safe. 2. Draft a positive, optimistic agenda. So not just: ‘our institutions must hold!’ Successful movements framed democracy as freedom, dignity, equality. 3. Target blatant corruption and cronyism as rallying issues. This is the soft underbelly of autocrats. Citizens across the political spectrum appreciate a vigorous anti-corruption agenda. 4. Get things done: when governments fail to deliver, people become more open to authoritarian alternatives. Good governance is democratic defense. 5. Never, ever normalize extremists. Never legitimize actors who reject the basis rules of democracy — not for votes, not for “balance.” Build a firewall around the enemies of democracy. 6. Take your protests to the streets, under two conditions: (a) Keep it peaceful. Violence is a gift to authoritarians.* (b) Unite around specific, democracy-related demands. * For example, in 1968, a wave of violent protests swayed public opinion toward "law and order" and helped tip the election in Nixon's favor. One study found that in counties with violent protests, the Republican vote share increased by 1.5–7.9%, see: https://lnkd.in/envKYfcZ

Procurement’s biggest negotiation power is NOT during Contract Negotiation phase. (It is BEFORE vendors are invited for tender) You miss this window, your leverage bleeds out daily. Negotiation | 16 SEP 2025 - Procurement's ability to negotiate, shape vendor terms, price and deliver fit-for-purpose contracts "Decays Like an Hourglass" once sourcing process begins. Here’s why timing is everything: #1. Peak Leverage (Supplier Registration & PQQ) →Vendors compete blindly for a spot. → Push for acceptance of non-negotiable terms early. → Include standard T&Cs with key terms. #2. Leverage Leak (RFP/Bid Clarification & Submission) →Vendors now see competition. →Use competitive tension; let vendors know no. of bids. →Clarify specs but do not negotiate scope. #3. Critical Decline (Best and Final Offer) →Shortlisted vendors smell victory; alternative shrink. →Keep ≥ 3 vendors until BAFO; Never reveal rankings. →Use scoring gaps to extract concessions. #4. Near-Zero Leverage (Contract Award) →Winner knows you’re committed. →Switching costs soar; too late for heavy lifts. → Focus on SLA fine-tuning not pricing or terms. Use prequalification to: ✅Force adherence to standard Ts&Cs ✅Eliminate non-compliant bidders early ✅Create FOMO in Vendors (Will we make the cut?) Negotiation is a race against your OWN process. The Early Bird Catches the Worm Front-load pressure or backpedal through concessions." Always include your non-negotiables into vendor registration gateways. What procurement stage have you seen early leverage make or break a deal? #Procurement #NegotiationTips #RFPTips #StrategicSourcing

"Disinformation campaigns aimed at undermining electoral integrity are expected to play an ever larger role in elections due to the increased availability of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools that can produce high-quality synthetic text, audio, images and videos and their potential for targeted personalization. As these campaigns become more sophisticated and manipulative, the foreseeable consequence is further erosion of trust in institutions and heightened disintegration of civic integrity, jeopardizing a host of human rights, including electoral rights and the right to freedom of thought. → These developments are occurring at a time when the companies that create the fabric of digital society should be investing heavily in, but instead are dismantling, the “integrity” or “trust and safety” teams that counter these threats. Policy makers must hold AI companies liable for the harms caused or facilitated by their products that could have been reasonably foreseen. They should act quickly to ban using AI to impersonate real people or organizations, and require the use of watermarking or other provenance tools to allow people to differentiate between AI-generated and authentic content." By David Evan Harris and Aaron Shull of the Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI).

We lie. A lot. College students lie in 1 of every 3 conversations Adults in 1 of 5 81% of online dating profiles? They contain lies. So how do you whether someone is telling the truth? First: Don’t rely on stress signals. Sweating, fidgeting, nervousness? Not reliable. That’s the myth behind lie detectors. Real liars can stay calm. Truth-tellers can still get anxious. The better strategy? Use what researchers call the Cognitive Load Model. Lying is mentally exhausting. It takes more brainpower than telling the truth. Your job? Make it even harder. The trick is to increase their cognitive load. Make them think more. Force them to improvise. And the easiest way to do that? Unanticipated questions. When people expect the question, they can prepare a lie. But when you surprise them, liars stumble. They pause. They stall. They try to calculate on the fly. Truth-tellers? They answer quickly—because they don’t have to think twice. Example: Bad question: “How old are you?” Better question: “What year were you born?” Liars have to do math. Truth-tellers don’t even blink. In airport screenings, detection rates jump from 5% to 66% using this method. That’s the power of a good question. Don’t just look for nervousness. Make them think—and watch how they respond.