Archive for January, 2010

By Karen S. Walch, Ph.D.

Balthazar Gracian, a 17th century thinker about power, once said, “The sole advantage of power is ability to do more good.” Like Machiavelli, his classic laws of power are most often associated with tactics of deception and duplicity. For his time, it was considered rational and moral to manipulate and lead others because it is for the good of the community or the state. The end goal of protecting the interests of the collective justified whatever tactical means were necessary to do so. Because humans were considered weak and needed to be manipulated for the common good, deception and trickery was required. However, today’s world where people are given more credit for understanding their own interests, the “ends justify the means” tactics often destroy trust and relationships in complex negotiations.
Read more »

By Karen S. Walch, Ph.D.

A successful negotiator, as defined by the classic laws of power, is the one who can get others to agree to something they normally would not do. Since the control of others’ behavior is a difficult task, Machiavelli strategists, for example, make the most of manipulation tactics to ensnare others into agreement. However, as we have addressed throughout the 48 Laws series, the manipulative treatment of others does not often guarantee sustainable or satisfying outcomes.
Read more »

By Karen S. Walch, Ph.D.

Classical thinkers such as Machiavelli, Sun Tzu and von Clausewitz recommend stealth, deception and “total absence of mercy” in negotiation. That’s what historian Robert Greene concludes in The 48 Laws of Power (Viking Press, 1998). But as a professor of cross-cultural negotiation at Thunderbird, I have observed a different set of laws for 21st century negotiators who live and work in a global economy.
Read more »

By Karen S. Walch, Ph.D.

In many of the previous laws in this series, I have addressed how negotiators have long been aware that the protection and advancement of our their self-interests is a primary goal of any negotiation. The pursuit of self-interest in classic laws of power is seen as a core human motivation (sometimes the only) requirement in the acquisition of power in a negotiation. There are many examples of those who continue to assert that pure self-interest is paramount.  Classic laws of power draw on extensive historical anecdotes, concerning mostly military and political campaigns of the past.  However, we also currently can observe not only many political, but also economic and business negotiations that also have been founded on pure self-interest in order to maximize gains.
Read more »

By Karen S. Walch, Ph.D.

Many years ago as a graduate student, I learned about the role of self-interest in the pursuit of power. In my studies about classic power, research consistently concluded that we are all surrounded by people who have absolutely no reason to cooperate with us unless it is in their self-interest to do so — unless you are an altruist, which we will discuss later in the series. In short, if you as a negotiator have little to offer a counterpart, you will simply be seen as a competitor to defend against or an annoyance to be disposed of in a world of limited resources and time.
Read more »