Don’t Forget the Laws of Human Nature

It strikes me that both lawyers and clients get so wrapped up in the business, legal and technical issues of a deal or situation that they often forget what I will refer to as “the laws of human nature.” True, these are not the laws I studied in law school, but I can tell you this – failure to understand these laws can often result in the failure of a deal. And what’s so sad about that is it’s completely avoidable in most circumstances.

So what do I mean when I talk about the laws of human nature? Obviously, I’m not talking about statutes or regulations. Simply put, I mean those aspects of the deal-making process that have more to do with human behavior, values, interaction and communication than with the specific parameters of the deal. Failure to understand these “laws” and acknowledge the fact that they fundamentally affect business transactions is just as often the cause of a failed deal as the laws on the books.

So, here are 10 lessons I’ve learned as to these laws:

1. It’s important to know what you AND the other party to the negotiations need, what you want, and what you’ll accept – and how these may change during the course of negotiations.
2. Nobody needs to “win” a negotiation – the best deals are win-win.
3. It’s ok (and in fact, it’s often productive) for the other side to like you.
4. It is imperative that the other side respect and trust you.
5. Emotion is rarely productive in a business discussion.
6. Professionalism enhances the likelihood of success.
7. There’s no value in frustrating or embarrassing the other party or wasting their time.
8. It’s important to know when you’ve pushed far enough.
9. Miscommunication leads to failure just as often as disagreement.
10. The deal is never final until it’s signed.

Consider the laws of human nature the next time you negotiate a business deal, and I’m confident you will enhance your prospects for success.

Subtlety Has Its Place

As the title to this post indicates, subtlety has its place – just not in business negotiations or contracts.  This is not to say that people shouldn’t be tactful, courteous and professional in these contexts – of course, they should be.  I’m not talking about manners; I’m talking about clarity, precision, directness and transparency – i.e., the things that avoid uncertainty and minimize the risk of disagreement (and litigation).

Occasionally, clients will ask me to word a provision in a contract so that it isn’t as clear or explicit as it might be, so that it’s “less conspicuous,” or in a way so that “later, we can take the position that it meant X. . . .”  This is almost always a bad idea.  After all, a contract is meant to be a clear and complete expression of the parties’ mutual intent and agreement – trying to “finalize” the deal while simultaneously avoiding clarity and completeness in order to avoid points of disagreement is NOT a recipe for success; to the contrary, it is a recipe for future disputes.

So, what does this mean for your negotiations and contracts?  Quite simply, items of potential disagreement should be identified and discussed (and hopefully resolved) early on, just as items on which the parties agree should be discussed.  Dispute resolution at the point of negotiation/deal-making and as part of the contractual process is healthy and productive.  It generally leads to one of 2 outcomes – either the parties ultimately reach agreement through compromise, concessions, etc., and they move ahead with the deal; or they don’t, and the deal doesn’t get done.  Either result is far better than signing a contract or entering into a relationship only to end up in the other kind of dispute resolution – the kind that comes after the contract is signed and involves 2 teams of lawyers, a judge, jury or arbitrator, and words like injunction, breach of contract, damages, and legal fees.  Don’t be subtle . . .